Talk:Louis Abramson

Note for future work

Buildings:

• 1175 Findlay Avenue (Findlay House, Weinstein-Ratner House)
• Long Island Jewish Hospital
• 41 Maiden Lane (Home Insurance Company Building).
• 139 E 79th St.
• 145 East 32nd Street.
• Dazian Pavilion at Beth Israel Hospital.
• 335 West 35th Street.
• 131 West 86th Street.
• 169th Street, Bronx Hospital
• Louis Allen Abramson at the Museum of the City of New York
• Cadillac Cafeteria in Instagram with some interesting (but unsubstantiated) information about the fire which destroyed the building and supposedly includes Abramson posing in front of the building.

References

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 18:18, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Daughters of Jacob Home

• ... that Louis Abramson worked on the renovation of a building (pictured) he had designed 57 years earlier?

• Source: "It was also, perhaps, a recognition of Louis Allen Abramson, the architect who designed the main building more than five decades ago and was called back recently to begin work on the new senior‐citizen apartment house that is the first phase of the center's modernization program." https://www.nytimes.com/1973/01/07/archives/home-for-the-aging-reaffirms-its-roots-home-for-the-aging-reaffirms.html

• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/ZIZ

Moved to mainspace by RoySmith (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 43 past nominations.

RoySmith (talk) 02:32, 12 November 2024 (UTC).

• Hi RoySmith, review follows: a QPQ has been carried out (in progress); article was moved to mainspace on 12 November and exceeds minimum length; article is well written and cited inline throughout to reliable sources except for one paragraph which I have tagged; I didn't pick up on any overly close paraphrasing from the sources in a spotcheck on some of the online ones; Earwig comes back generally OK, though I wonder if "on 167th Street between Findlay and Teller Avenues in the Bronx" could be rephrased to avoid being identical to the source? hook fact is interesting enough, mentioned in the article and checks out to sources cited; image is OK, could be cropped a little to remove the margin. Do you have confirmation it was published prior to 1929? Noting the statement that the NY public library couldn't determine copyright of the image - Dumelow (talk) 19:21, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Dumelow Thank you for the review. I've supplied the missing citation. As for the paraphrasing, I think WP:LIMITED applies here. I tried a few rewordings, but they're all rather awkward and forced, so I'm inclined to leave it as is. I think cropping the image would be an aesthetic negative.

The more interesting question is the provenance of the image vis-a-vis whether it is PD or not. https://www.vera.org/news/vera-schweitzer-the-vera-institutes-worthy-namesake says the image appeared in a 1931 annual report, so that's at least an upper bound for the date, admittedly 2 years shy of the 1929 magic line in the sand. Wurts Brothers was a well-known photography firm specializing in architectural work. I think it's reasonable to assume they took the photo soon after the building was completed, but I have been unable to find any hard evidence that it predates 1929. RoySmith (talk) 20:16, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Works for me. Not an expert on images so happy to leave decision whether to use up to promoter/posting admin - Dumelow (talk) 20:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm possibly putting my head in the lion's mouth, but Nikkimaria is my usual go-to on image licensing questions. RoySmith (talk) 21:14, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

The current tagging is likely incorrect (unless there's an earlier publication that hasn't been identified), but I'd suggest checking for copyright renewal on the 1931 report - it likely wouldn't have been renewed which means this is likely out of copyright. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:27, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Dumelow OK, let's run this without the image:

ALT1 ... that Louis Abramson worked on the renovation of a building he had designed 57 years earlier?

which is a bit of a shame, but I'd rather be right than guess. In the meantime, I've located an archive here in NYC that looks like it has all the annual reports from the years in question. I'll get over there at some point and hopefully be able to nail this down. RoySmith (talk) 22:51, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Just to confirm ALT1 is approved. An interesting building, surprised it doesn't have its own article yet - Dumelow (talk) 08:35, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

That may yet happen. I had started work on User:RoySmith/drafts/1201 Findlay Ave and while researching the building, learned about Abramson and ended up going down that rathole first. RoySmith (talk) 14:54, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Art Moderne?

@Beyond My Ken I just added your photo of the Countee Cullen Branch to the article. In the commons description you mention that it is in the "Art Moderne" style; do you have a WP:RS for that? RoySmith (talk) 15:02, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Never mind, I found https://www.nyc.gov/assets/planning/download/pdf/plans/malcolm-x-boulevard/mxb.pdf RoySmith (talk) 15:58, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Louis Abramson/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: RoySmith (talk · contribs) 16:13, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: MSincccc (talk · contribs) 05:31, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments

Plagiarism

• The EARWIG score is currently 47.6%. MSincccc (talk) 05:35, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

  All of which is attributed quotes. RoySmith (talk) 12:19, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Images

• I would suggest adding alt text to the captions of the images used in the article. MSincccc (talk) 05:38, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

  Done. RoySmith (talk) 14:42, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

  PS, I left out the alt text for those images where the caption already says everything I would have said in the alt. RoySmith (talk) 17:37, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Lead

• You might de-link New York City as per MOS:OL.
• The lead section is currently fewer than 150 words. Could it be expanded? MSincccc (talk) 05:44, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

  Done RoySmith (talk) 12:40, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Early life and education

• His introduction to architecture came when he took a job as an office boy and later a draftsman for John H. Duncan, a well-known New York City architect. Could "well-known" be dropped from this sentence?

  The source described Duncan as "one of New York's preeminent late 19th century Beaux-Arts practitioners", so I think calling him "well-known" is justified.

World's Fair Competition

• In 1936, Abramson submitted a sketch to a design competition for the 1939 New York World's Fair. Could "design competition" be more specifically linked to the article Architectural design competition? MSincccc (talk) 17:31, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

  Yup, good idea. Done.

Buildings

• Could the article East Broadway (Manhattan) be linked in this sentence-The eight wings were residences for more than 1,000 elderly men and women, replacing the existing home run by the Daughters of Jacob at 301 East Broadway in Manhattan, which could only house 200 people.
• Could the article 86th Street (Manhattan) be linked in this sentence -Abramson designed the Jewish Center at 131 West 86th Street in Manhattan.
• At that time, the structure was estimated to cost $350,000 (equivalent to $8,600,000 in 2024) after purchase of the land. Could "(equivalent to $8,600,000 in 2024)" be dropped here and in other similar instances since the value varies from time to time?
• You could link to the Architectural historian in this sentence-The architectural historian Francis Morrone describes it as being a long building... -as it is not a common occupation. MSincccc (talk) 18:39, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

  I did all the links; those were all good suggestions that I didn't know existed. The "equivalent to ..." wording comes from {{Inflation}} which does the calculation on the fly based on the most recent data available which nominally gets updated every year. RoySmith (talk) 23:14, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

  116 John Street

  • Could the article Wall Street crash of 1929 be linked in this sentence-Despite the stock market crash a year earlier, real estate development was ongoing in this area,...

• 116 John Street is an Art Deco 35 story office Could Art deco be linked here as it has not been linked in the body?

  • Could cubism and futurism be linked in the same passage?

  Restaurants

  • American Architect and Architecture magazine wrote of the collaboration... The plural form, i.e, magazines should be used in this sentence.
  • Could the article Architecture (magazine, 1900–1936) be linked in the above case?

  MSincccc (talk) 17:39, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

  I did the first few links. As for the restaurants, American Architect and Architecture is the title of the (singular) magazine. It's not two different magazines. RoySmith (talk) 18:41, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Source-to-text spot check

• Comments to follow. MSincccc (talk) 03:44, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

• 3- Done
• 12- Done
• 19- Done
• 27- Done
• 36- Done

MSincccc (talk) 07:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Redundant refs

Hi @Alansohn I'm curious why you restored the two references in Special:Diff/1279265559 which I had just removed? The one I left (the NYTimes article) adequately covered the claim in the preceding sentence, so I intentionally deleted one and moved the other to the Further reading section. RoySmith (talk) 14:27, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

My bad. Please confirm that I fixed my own mistake. My apologies for the error. Alansohn (talk) 18:25, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Not a problem, all looks good now. I had pretty much assumed it was something innocent, but wanted to check before just reverting you. RoySmith (talk) 23:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Peer review

Louis Abramson

I've listed this article for peer review because I want to bring it to WP:FAC. This passed GA recently. Since then, I've gone through and done a bunch of rearranging/consolidating of sections for style, and was able to flesh out the material about the Rivera nightclub when an inter-library loan finally came in. There's a list of additional buildings Abramson worked on at Talk:Louis Abramson#Note for future work; I gave those all another look but I'm still unable to find any RS that talk about them, so I'm going to leave them all on the back burner. To anticipate one likely objection, there's not much in the article about Abramson's personal life, but what I've got is what I was able to find.

Thanks, RoySmith (talk) 15:09, 27 March 2025 (UTC)

Review request

@Rollinginhisgrave @Gog the Mild I would appreciate your comments on Louis Abramson. This will probably be my next FAC. It's not ready for that yet, but it's moving in that direction and unfortunately failed to attract any attention at PR. Like SoHo Weekly News, it makes use of block quotes, something that you both objected to in the SWN FAC, so I'd be particularly appreciative of your thoughts here. RoySmith (talk) 15:36, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

I've stuck it on my to do list Roy. If I am not back to you within 5-7 days feel free to give me a ping. (And now it's not at PR I can't claim WikiCup points. Drat!} Gog the Mild (talk) 19:58, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping, I'll be back within the next two days. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 02:54, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Suggestions

• When interviewed in 1980, Abramson said:

When they started to destroy the Penn Station I used to go over there and cry. To me it was perfection, perfection. And then I'd walk, at times I'd commute to Grand Central. I had admiration for it, but in a totally different sense. Penn Station was ... I don't know how I can really say it. I felt meek in the presence of that building. → Abramson expressed deep sorrow over the demolition of Penn Station, which he considered a perfect architectural work that inspired deep reverence.

• Louis Allen Abramson was given a mention but his plan has the obvious fault of forcing visitor to retrace steps against traffic to see entire show or else go through whole group and return – a foot-weary scheme. Elevations are simple but apparently resulted from desire to be modern. → Pencil Points editor Kenneth Reid noted that Abramson’s plan caused circulation issues and prioritised modernity over practicality.

• A new, and particularly American, synagogue innovation ... which served not only as a place of worship, but also as a center of community life. Besides a sanctuary, a Jewish center would include classrooms and social halls and, in larger synagogues, even gymnasiums and swimming pools. → Historian Anthony Robbins described Jewish centers as American-style synagogues that combined religious and community functions, often including classrooms, social halls, and recreational facilities.

• ... combining Moorish ornament with Judaic motifs, a phenomenon that can be traced back to mid-19th century Europe and a belief that the Moorish represented a more “Eastern,” and therefore more culturally appropriate style for Jewish buildings, as opposed to styles based on church architecture → Robbins noted that the use of Moorish elements in Jewish architecture reflected a 19th-century European view that such styles were more culturally fitting than church-based designs.

• For the past two years the happily collaborative talents of an architect and a painter have resulted in better appearance and better business for a well established chain of New York restaurants. Fairly standard in basic elements of form, each restaurant is decorated around a different theme. The most recent in this group uses as its central motif the historical contrasts of New York City. The facade, mainly of plate glass and satin finished chromium, has its structural parts decorated with glass mosaics in blue, silver and off white. → American Architect and Architecture reported that Abramson’s collaboration with a painter led to visually distinctive restaurant interiors, with one location thematically based on New York City's history and decorated with glass mosaics.

These quotes could be summarised for conciseness. The rest seem fine to retain. You can summarise them as you wish to suit the tone and flow of the article. MSincccc (talk) 17:10, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions. RoySmith (talk) 17:22, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

Background

• Could this section be renamed? It covers biographical details, education, and career highlights, rather than only his early life.
• Louis Allen Abramson (also known as Louis Abrahamson) was born in New York City in 1887. → Louis Allen Abramson (also known as Louis Abrahamson) was born in New York City on 1 August 1887.

86th Street Jewish Center

• ...a swimming pool on the sixth floor, and space for a possible Turkish bath to be installed later. Was the Turkish bath ever installed?

Young Israel of Flatbush

• Featuring moorish influences,... "Moorish" should be capitalised.
• "Fasçade" is a typo — correct spelling is "façade".

Astoria Center of Israel

• Abramson designed the Astoria Center of Israel, a synagogue... "Synagogue" has not been linked on eight previous mentions in the article, so why link it here?

A few more suggestions which I hope are of help. MSincccc (talk) 16:29, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I've done some of these. I need to think on what to do with the Background section name. As for the turkish bath, I don't have anything that says whether it was or not. RoySmith (talk) 16:48, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

116 John Street

• “financial district” → “Financial District”

→ Proper noun; capitalised when referring to Manhattan’s district.

Restaurants

• “automats” → “Automats”

→ Capitalised as it's a defined, branded concept (like a diner chain).

• “modern style” → “Modern style”

→ Capitalise "Modern" when referring to an architectural style.

• “faqade” → “façade”

→ Correct spelling (accented 'ç'); likely a transcription error in the quote.

• “Idelwild Airport” → “Idlewild Airport”

→ Typo; correct spelling is “Idlewild”.

• “John F. Kennedy Airport” → “John F. Kennedy International Airport”

→ Use full name on first mention.

Block quotes

• The block quotes mentioned above may be summarised; the rest may remain as is.

MSincccc (talk) 17:52, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

OK, I've done most of those. I'm not sure I agree about Automat, however. RoySmith (talk) 18:30, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Since both were designed specifically for Horn & Hardart, “Automat” with a capital “A” seems warranted, as the term clearly refers to their branded establishments. MSincccc (talk) 18:46, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Riviera nightclub

• “Art-deco” → “Art Deco”

→ Standard capitalisation for the style.

• The building itself was of masonry construction... → Consider dropping “itself” for tighter prose.
• ...Gorky's abstract impressionist style → ...Gorky's abstract expressionist style

→ Arshile Gorky is linked with Abstract Expressionism, not Abstract Impressionism, which is a different and less common term.

210 West 78th Street

• “Tudor style” → “Tudor-style”

→ Hyphenate compound modifiers before nouns.

Personal residence

• ...and porches which provided better views of the surrounding area → ...and porches, providing better views of the surrounding area

→ “Providing” improves flow and avoids the awkward restrictive “which”. MSincccc (talk) 06:03, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

OK, I've done some of those. I disagree on Tudor style. Just out of curiosity, are you using some tool to find these? RoySmith (talk) 12:42, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

No. (Redacted)

I hope my suggestions have been useful. The quotes are nice but some of the blockquotes (mentioned above) could be paraphrased. Looking forward to your response. MSincccc (talk) 12:54, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

They have indeed been useful. Keep them coming. RoySmith (talk) 15:26, 9 June 2025 (UTC)

I just saw that you’ve paraphrased the NYT quote. I’ve no further suggestions for the prose at the moment, but the quotes mentioned above could be trimmed. I’ve no issues with retaining the others for now. I’ll return after another read-through. MSincccc (talk) 17:21, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll probably be doing more on those as time goes by, but I'm taking it slow at this point. RoySmith (talk) 17:31, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

A quick look over

I am going to concentrate on the block quotes, of which there are too many unnecessary ones, and only mention other things if I stumble over them.

• I saw at least two instances of false title.
• "When they started to destroy the Penn Station I used to go over there and cry. To me it was perfection, perfection. ... I don't know how I can really say it. I felt meek in the presence of that building." Suggestions: 1. Remove "And then I'd walk, at times I'd commute to Grand Central. I had admiration for it, but in a totally different sense. Penn Station was" which I don't think adds anything. 2. Consider a quote box.
• "Louis Allen Abramson was given a mention but his plan has the obvious fault of forcing visitor to retrace steps against traffic to see entire show or else go through whole group and return – a foot-weary scheme. Elevations are simple but apparently resulted from desire to be modern." IMO the poor grammar and sentence structure would be improved by being paraphrased.
• "At the time it was designed, it was philosophically right in that institutions felt they fulfilled their obligations to the elderly by providing them with bed and board. It was a question of providing wards with no recognition of individual dignity or privacy." I really don't see why you have chosen to quote this rather than explain it in your own words. I know that you can do a better job and I don't see that the quote brings anything special to the party - unlike, say, the Penn Station quote.
• "A new, and particularly American, synagogue innovation ... which served not only as a place of worship, but also as a center of community life. Besides a sanctuary, a Jewish center would include classrooms and social halls and, in larger synagogues, even gymnasiums and swimming pools." Same again. What is so special about this dry, even boring, piece of description that makes you want to use Robbins' words?
• "From being only a house of worship to encompassing the physical and social dimensions of the human experience as well; from solely a place of prayer to also a place of recreation: from a congregation to a Jewish center ... a place for Bible and basketball, Gemara and games, learning and luncheons, prayer and ping-pong." Well, maybe. Recommend trimming to 'from solely a place of prayer to also a place of recreation ... a place for Bible and basketball, Gemara and games, learning and luncheons, prayer and ping-pong.'
• "The lower portion is fully rusticated, as are the end bays of the upper portion, creating exactly the kind of rhythm that is so necessary along a wide, long boulevard [...] As a building tailored to its location, it could hardly be improved." Defensible.
• "combining Moorish ornament with Judaic motifs, a phenomenon that can be traced back to mid-19th century Europe and a belief that the Moorish represented a more “Eastern,” and therefore more culturally appropriate style for Jewish buildings, as opposed to styles based on church architecture." Just the sort of thing that should be paraphrased.
• "The first had "a terra-cotta faced, modernistic, two-story facade with the blocky modern reliefs, abstract grillework, stylized floral patterns, and dramatic indirect lighting so typical of the period." In a 1980 interview, Abramson said he had not understood what the client was asking for, so he "simply designed what he liked". The second restaurant was described as "one of the most extravagant of all New York's Automats". The interior featured "extravagant colored glass ceilings" in which "the Chrysler and Empire State Buildings [...] rose towards each other, their spires meeting electrically over a central schematic diagram of the Manhattan street grid". More quote than text, the only bit of which seems defensible to me is "the Chrysler and Empire State Buildings [...] rose towards each other, their spires meeting electrically over a central schematic diagram of the Manhattan street grid".
• "For the past two years the happily collaborative talents of an architect and a painter have resulted in better appearance and better business for a well established chain of New York restaurants. Fairly standard in basic elements of form, each restaurant is decorated around a different theme. The most recent in this group uses as its central motif the historical contrasts of New York City. The faqade, mainly of plate glass and satin finished chromium, has its structural parts decorated with glass mosaics in blue, silver and off white." Again, I don't understand why you are using a quote for a straight forward and boring description. You could write it better, more succinctly and more interestingly. *"located in the "temporary terminal building" ". Why?
• "variously reported as 800 or "over 900" people". And again, why?
• "was said to "resemble the bridge of an ocean liner" ". And again.
• The MoS on quotations: "[t]he source must be named in article text if the quotation is an opinion". Emphasis in original. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:38, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm curious though, why would putting something in a quote box as opposed to a {{blockquote}} make any difference? RoySmith (talk) 16:50, 8 June 2025 (UTC)

In principle it doesn't. But in practise getting the quote out of the running text is usually considered good enough. So long as you don't overdo it and the prose in question is either decorative or pithy enough to serve as a slightly standing to one side commentary. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:34, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

And another

Hi Roy, sorry for the delay, I may not have the time I thought I would to give you feedback on this. I'll leave the brief notes I collected below, but I will be upfront that this is the kind of page that will usually intimidate me into not giving it a review, and would not be willing to support or oppose it at GA or FAC. The scope seems less a biography of Abramson and more a description of his output, with his biography literally as background. I'm not necessarily saying this is against best practice, I'm just saying my preferences go quite strongly against this. I would expect the buildings to be discussed as they pertain to Abramson; I would not expect God to be primarily a discussion of plants and birds etc. I may suggest presenting the info as a list, this may also not be the best idea.

• I've done a copyedit of the lead which you can revert where you see fit
• Introduce what the Home of the Daughters of Jacob is before you introduce it's design
• Gloss Gouverneur Morris for an international audience
• The background section feels a bit unstructured, or perhaps inadequately signposted. It's unclear what the purpose of the design competition anecdote is intended to convey; are the defects implied to exist across his work?
• Check the inflation template, I believe as it's using the consumer price index you have to use a different template.
• I found the NYT quote a bit confusing as to what he was saying. Could you reword?

I hope, putting aside the rambling intro, that these points help. I was really happy with how you made what may be a plain subject interesting with your prose overall. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 09:09, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

@Rollinginhisgrave thank you for your comments. What do you mean by "inadequately signposted"? I also don't understand the issue with the inflation template. RoySmith (talk) 10:27, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

I just mean that generally it's clear why things are in the background section. signposting is wording things so the reader can tell why things are not just random pieces of information.

The inflation template has a big note saying "This template defaults to calculating the inflation of Consumer Price Index values: staples, workers' rent, small service bills (doctor's costs, train tickets). For inflating capital expenses, government expenses, or the personal wealth and expenditure of the rich, the US-GDP or UK-GDP indexes should be used, which calculate inflation based on the gross domestic product (GDP) for the United States and United Kingdom, respectively" So I believe you want to use Template:Inflation/US-GDP Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 10:46, 13 June 2025 (UTC)