Talk:Kings County Savings Bank

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

New York City Low‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

This page has quite a few repetitions, especially "by the wealth for the wealth." It can be pared down. Hypeer 20:27, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We have discussion of the bank and of its building. Shouldn't these be seperate? Alba 22:58, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, especially if the building is still known as the old bank building. Unless there's a lot more content for either just the bank or just the building, might as well leave them in one article. --Kerowyn 09:18, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree that the article is fine the way it is. There's no evidence in the article that the (no longer functioning) bank is independent-article-worthy, while the building, as a landmark, most probably is. It would probably make sense, though, to make the timeline more building-specific, instead of merely bank name changes. I removed the split tag. Cpastern 09:04, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

question[edit]

arent the dates in the wrogn order?--Applegigs (talk) 07:23, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Better before?[edit]

So, I removed some of the WP:Puffery about the not-very-notable Williamsburg Art & Historical Center, introduced here by a small group of COI editors including Immunonuclear, Terrance Lindall and Williamsburg Resident (see WP:COIN#Suite of COI articles for the discussion of the COI history going back to 2004), and including a lengthy and quite unnecessary quote from "the official Brooklyn Historian, John Manbeck" (sez who, exactly? that certainly isn't in the source cited). Beyond My Ken reverted because it was "better before". I don't think it was. Any thoughts? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:40, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"COI editors" you say - have you evidence for that? "Not very notable" you say, but it was the subject of an article in the Brooklyn Eagle, and pulls 205,000 Ghits. John B, Manbeck was Brooklyn Borough Historian, appointed by Borough President Howard Golden, from 1993-2002 [1], [2]. The reason given for removal was WP:WEIGHT, but the section is less than a sixth of the article, and contains information about the ownership of the building. I see no legitimate justification for removing it. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:17, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Separate issues are being conflated here:

Do some of the contributors to the WAH section have a COI? - It seems probable
Has the section been skewed by their editing - No
Is the organization notable? - Yes
Are there copyvios in the section - I haven't found any yet
Does the inclusion of the section violate WP:WEIGHT? - No.
Should the section be removed - No
Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:49, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]