Talk:Federal Hall

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Geetram Hitnarine.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 21:14, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Second Capital of US?

The article states "It was renamed Federal Hall when it became the first Capitol of the United States under the Constitution in 1789, and was the second Capitol of the United States (after the Maryland State House) since independence and union under the Articles of Confederation."

Is this right? I thought the list was as follows:

Chronological Table of the Capitals

First Continental Congress

September 5, 1774 to October 24, 1774:

   Philadelphia, Carpenter’s Hall 

Second Continental Congress

May 10, 1775 to December 12, 1776:

  Philadelphia, State House 

December 20, 1776 to February 27, 1777:

   Baltimore, Henry Fite’s House 

March 4, 1777 to September 18, 1777:

   Philadelphia, State House 

September 27, 1777 (one day):

  Lancaster, Pennsylvania, Court House 

September 30, 1777 to June 27, 1778:

  York, Pennsylvania, Court House 

July 2, 1778 to March 1, 1781:

   Philadelphia, College Hall, then State House 

Congress under the Articles of Confederation

March 1, 1781 to June 21, 1783:

  Philadelphia, State House 

June 30, 1783 to November 4, 1783:

  Princeton, New Jersey, “Prospect,” then Nassau Hall 

November 26, 1783 to August 19, 1784:

  Annapolis, Maryland, State House 

November 1, 1784 to December 24, 1784:

   Trenton, New Jersey, French Arms Tavern 

January 11, 1785 to Autumn 1788:

   New York, City Hall, then Fraunce's Tavern 

Congress under the Constitution

March 4, 1789 to August 12, 1790:

   New York, Federal Hall 

December 6, 1790 to May 14, 1800:

   Philadelphia, Philadelphia County Building–Congress Hall 

November 17, 1800:

   Washington, U.S. Capitol 

Source: Robert Fortenbaugh, The Nine Capitals of the United States, page 9.

See http://www.senate.gov/reference/reference_item/Nine_Capitals_of_the_United_States.htm

Cbmccarthy 21:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 15:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Section: Customs House and Treasury Building

Current building was not the country's first custom house. See United States Custom House (New York City). Vzeebjtf (talk) 01:55, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

I believe it may have been the first purpose-built specifically as a Custom House, but I agree it should be clarified. 72.251.70.158 (talk) 18:34, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Changes to the lead section, image size, etc.

Lead

There seems to be a disagreement over revisions of the lead between me and an IP editor. My proposed lead is:

The first Federal Hall was built in 1700 on Wall Street in what is now the Financial District of Manhattan, New York City. It was the predecessor to the current New York City Hall, but later served as the first capitol building of the United States of America under the Constitution, and was the site of George Washington's inauguration as the first President of the United States. It was also where the United States Bill of Rights was introduced in the First Congress. The building was demolished in 1812.

The currently extant Federal Hall National Memorial was built in 1842 as the United States Custom House, on the site of the old Federal Hall, and later served as a sub-Treasury building. It is now operated by the National Park Service as a national memorial commemorating the historic events that occurred there.

The other editor's proposed lead is:

Federal Hall, built in 1700 as New York's City Hall, later served as the first capitol building of the United States of America under the Constitution, and was the site of George Washington's inauguration as the first President of the United States. It was also where the United States Bill of Rights was introduced in the First Congress. The building was demolished in 1812.

Federal Hall National Memorial was built in 1842 as the United States Custom House, on the site of the old Federal Hall on Wall Street, and later served as a sub-Treasury building. It is now operated by the National Park Service as a national memorial commemorating the historic events that occurred there.

The lead before yesterday was:

Federal Hall, built in 1700 on Wall Street in New York City's Financial District as the predecessor to New York City Hall, later served as the first capitol building of the United States of America under the Constitution, and was the site of George Washington's inauguration as the first President of the United States. It was also where the United States Bill of Rights was introduced in the First Congress. The building was demolished in 1812.

Later, in 1842, the Federal Hall National Memorial was built as the United States Custom House, on the site of the old Federal Hall, and later served as a sub-Treasury building. It is now operated by the National Park Service as a national memorial commemorating the historic events that occurred there.

I would like feedback on which wording (or combination thereof) is optimal. Epic Genius (talk) 19:34, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

No, that is incorrect. I hope that's just a innocent mistake. I propose no change at all to the lead as it was for a very, very long time. It is you who changed the lead and when reverted started an edit war. Please correct your post. 72.251.70.158 (talk) 19:42, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

What is incorrect? You removed "Financial District" in your version. I added a borough qualifier. My version explicitly states what is now the Financial District of Manhattan, New York City. As such, I will not correct it, as we were both reverting each other. Epic Genius (talk) 19:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I did NOT remove Financial District or anything else. You added it. I reverted your change to a long standing lead. I'm removing absolutely nothing. You are attempting to add stuff that frankly doesn't make sense. The financial district did not exist in 1700. The building was City Hall. Much later it was used by the new federal govt under the Articles and the Constitution and became known as Federal Hall. The first sentence should succinctly and very clearly state only the most important facts, what the article is about. 72.251.70.158 (talk) 19:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

The financial district did not exist in 1700. The building was City Hall. Much later it was used by the new federal govt under the Articles and the Constitution and became known as Federal Hall. I know, that's why I said "the predecessor to the current New York City Hall" and "what is now the Financial District of Manhattan, New York City", with which we can succinctly state the point in two sentences (or one, if we can do that). Epic Genius (talk) 20:02, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

But why? It's totally unnecessary wordiness, not important to a clear and succinct statement about the importance of the topic. That its site is now in what we call the Financial District is irrelevant to its importance. What was wrong with the long-standing wording? It's of national historical importance. It's neighborhood can come later and/or in the infobox. And why say one City Hall was "predecessor" to another City Hall? The importance to the article is that it was built in 1700 as City Hall. 72.251.70.158 (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Which I addressed in the edit that I made 15 minutes ago as of this revision. Then you reverted it, twice, with a misleading edit summary to "status quo". May I note that the edits I made in December 2014 are irrelevant to the status quo as of today, which would be this edit.

Going back to that content issue, the location is important. I should note that "New York's city hall" is much less precise than "...in what is now the Financial District of Manhattan, New York City. It was the predecessor to the current New York City Hall...". In some cases, wordiness is better. Epic Genius (talk) 20:33, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I prefer the longstanding version of the lead as it existed before your changes of 9 December 2014. Sorry if that was unclear. It just occurred to me that you may have forgotten you made your changes then, but they certainly are completely relevant. It is those changes that are the issue. As to substance, "New York's City Hall" is obviously in New York. It is indeed less precise than your wording, but the precise location is not necessary to the first sentence of the lead. It is important elsewhere in the article. And it was the City Hall before the current City Hall but that is not important in the lead about the topic Federal Hall. It too can come later if you feel it's relevant. The lead as written before your changes was better than after in my opinion. 72.251.70.142 (talk) 20:45, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, but where in New York? It may be obvious to you, but less so to others. If it's New York City, you should add a link, which I have. Epic Genius (talk) 20:48, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I agree that's an improvement. 72.251.70.142 (talk) 20:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Image sizes

The images do not need to be that small. They can be invoked using the |upright= parameter in the images, so I have set up the upright parameters to be 1.0, 1.15, etc. to correlate with desired image sizes on mobile devices. For an IP user, these sizes are 220px and 253px for the upright values 1.0 and 1.15, respectively. Registered users can make the size smaller or bigger, but using just |upright| sets the default image size for an IP user to 165px, which is too small for the average reader's comfort. Epic Genius (talk) 19:34, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

I'm not too concerned with image size. The policy at WP:IMGSIZE is to use standard thumbs in most cases. For exceptions, "upright" is preferred to the forced "px" values you were using. 72.251.70.158 (talk) 19:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

OK, then we can set upright ratios. Epic Genius (talk) 19:51, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

For exceptions, yes. 72.251.70.158 (talk) 19:57, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Well, these are exceptions. The upright ratios and the details of the images indicate somewhat exceptional circumstances. Epic Genius (talk) 20:02, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Federal Hall. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120927183607/http://articles.cnn.com/2002-09-05/politics/federal.hall_1_congress-federal-hall-building?_s=PM:ALLPOLITICS to http://articles.cnn.com/2002-09-05/politics/federal.hall_1_congress-federal-hall-building?_s=PM:ALLPOLITICS

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:06, 11 December 2017 (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:Federal Hall/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 00:30, 7 May 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: Vigilantcosmicpenguin (talk · contribs) 03:39, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

• I'll take this one. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 03:39, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose is good.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead section adequately summarizes the building's history. Layout makes sense. No WTW issues.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Sources are cited using SFNs.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Sources are reliable (including some small local publications that should be reliable about the topic of New York City).
	2c. it contains no original research.	Statements reflect what is in sources.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Earwig says 18.0%, but only direct quotes.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Article details the history of the building, including the most noted events that occurred, as well as the architecture and its impact.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Article provides just enough background information to be clear to readers.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Opinions of RSes are quoted without bias.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Article is stable.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Images are freely licensed or out of copyright.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images are clear to readers as depictions of Federal Hall.
	7. Overall assessment.

Initial comments

• I think the gallery section could be removed as it does not add much to the article. The copy of the Bible and the plaque are both mentioned in the article, so the images could be moved to the relevant paragraphs, but they could also be removed. Having a separate gallery section doesn't help readers.
  • Done. - EG
• The image caption that mentions "Old City Hall" should specify that it's the one from before 1703.
  • Done. - EG
• I'll be making some edits myself for clarity, conciseness, etc.

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 04:05, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

Lead section

• A few figures in the infobox are not verified: the area, the visitation in 2004, and the specific date it was designated a CP.
  • Fixed - EG
• Perhaps mention that there was an older city hall on the same site, though it's fine either way.
  • Done. - EG
    • I think the current phrasing is imprecise as it describes it as a Federal-style structure, but that only describes the building after the renovation, right? — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 01:28, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

      Actually, the body doesn't really mention the original building as being a Federal-style structure. I've removed it. – Epicgenius (talk) 03:43, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

• Perhaps the statue of George Washington could be mentioned alongside other architectural features in the lead; it's a prominent feature of the building.
  • Done. Thanks for the initial comments. - EG Epicgenius (talk) 14:35, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 04:05, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

First structure

• Could there be more detail about how the Sons of Liberty took over the building? As in, did the city hall continue to operate as usual, or did they pivot to using it for the Continental Congress?
  • City Hall continued to operate as usual; the Continental Congress wasn't established until after the war. I've reworded this. - EG
• The "Design and construction" subsection should specify when the events occurred, if possible.
  • Unfortunately I could not find a specific date for these events, only the year range, 1788–1789. There was much less newspaper coverage back then, and the coverage that did exist wouldn't be considered reliable today, so I can only use secondary sources published centuries after the fact, which don't really give this information. - EG
• Maybe say "walkway" instead of "promenade", to be more understandable to readers.
  • Done. - EG
• The phrase "American eagle with thirteen arrows" could probably link to Great Seal of the United States. That's the symbol being described, right?
  • Done. - EG
• Many of the most important legislative actions seems a bit like editorializing. Just "important" would be fine, but "most important" is a bit biased.
  • Removed. - EG
• The statement about the Judiciary Act is only sourced to the Congressional records, which quote a speech. I don't think this is the best source for this, so the statement should be removed unless it is mentioned in sources about the building itself.
  • I have added a second source for this. Epicgenius (talk) 21:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 01:28, 17 June 2025 (UTC)

Second structure

• There's a sentence mentioning Town's estimates for the cost of materials. Should probably mention that the final building was made of marble; this statement is made in the "Architecture" section but would be useful to also include here.
  • Done. - EG
• At its peak, the Subtreasury building... When?
  • Added. - EG
• I don't see why "mark[ed] the exact height Washington stood when taking the oath of office on the balcony" has to be included as a direct quote instead of being paraphrased.
  • I've rephrased this. - EG
• I'm not sure if Thirty-eight people were killed and 400 injured is a relevant statement, as this is about a different building, but it's fine either way since it's only a brief detail.
  • I trimmed the info about the casualties. Many of the people who died were outside, but a few were inside 23 Wall Street. - EG
• The building celebrated its 100th anniversary on Washington's Birthday in 1942. Should specify the date, as "Washington's Birthday" could mean either February 22nd or the adjacent Monday.
  • Clarified. - EG
• The building was also added to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) on October 15, 1966, the day the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 was signed. This phrasing is fine, but I would suggest rephrasing it to specify that the act was what created the register.
  • Done. - EG
• Perhaps the sentence about the "New York City Bicentennial Corporation" could specify that this was ahead of the United States Bicentennial, to add context for readers.
  • Done. - EG
• metal detectors similar to those at airports were placed at the entrances I think the phrase "metal detectors" is clear on its own.
  • Removed. - EG

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 22:56, 18 June 2025 (UTC)

Architecture

• Two prominent American ideals are reflected in the current building's Greek Revival architecture. Town and Davis's Doric columns on the facade resemble those of the Parthenon and serve as a tribute to the democracy of the Greeks. Frazee's domed rotunda echoes the Pantheon and is evocative of the republican ideals of the ancient Romans. → The building's Greek Revival architecture reflects American ideals of democracy: the Doric columns on the facade resemble those of the Parthenon and serves as a tribute to the democracy of the Greeks, while the rotunda echoes the Pantheon and honors the republican ideals of the Romans. I think this tweak would be more concise and flow more clearly, and it's not necessary to repeat who the architects were.
  • Done. - EG

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 04:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Activities

• This section looks good. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 04:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Access

• I think this section should be removed as unencyclopedic. Opening hours only useful inasmuch as someone is checking if it's open when they visit, and information like wheelchair accessibility is likewise only useful for visitors.
• The last two sentences (about visitation statistics) are relevant, and could be moved to the end of the history section.
  • I've removed most of this section and moved the visitor numbers to the "Activities" section, which I've renamed. - EG

— Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 04:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

On U.S. postage

• This section looks good. Just to be thorough, I'll ask, are postage stamps the only relevant "legacy"/"depictions" information that are covered in RSes? — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 04:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
  • I've added some info on critical commentary. Epicgenius (talk) 18:25, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Source spotcheck

• Doing a spotcheck of 15 randomly selected sources. Citation numbers as of this revision. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 04:23, 20 June 2025 (UTC)

35. Y Y Except it lists the specific year of 1862 Y Y

    Done. - EG

49. Y Y Y Y N Does not verify Tuckahoe marble Y

    Added another source to verify. - EG

53. Y
55. Y
64. Y
65. Y
94. Y
96. Y
143. Y Except it doesn't verify which was headquartered nearby

     Removed. - EG

147. Y
169. Y Y
176. Y
190. Y
192. N I assume this source was included erroneously. However, source #193 does verify the statement, so it's not a problem.

     Oops. I've fixed it. - EG

194. Y

• @Epicgenius: Okay, so there are just a few tiny things to address. The article is good enough to be a GA, but I'll give you some time to fix the minor errors before I promote it. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 04:23, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
  • @Vigilantcosmicpenguin: Thanks for the review. I think I've addressed all the issues you've raised now. Epicgenius (talk) 13:48, 20 June 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.

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 Theleekycauldron talk 00:13, 24 July 2025 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

The present Federal Hall

• ... that the United States' first capitol building was later sold for $425 and then demolished? Source: (1) Wolfe, Gerard R. (1994). New York, a Guide to the Metropolis: Walking Tours of Architecture and History. p. 49. "Unfortunately, the building later fell into disuse and was sold in 1812 for scrap for the sum of $425." (2) "Inside Politics: Symbolic Site for Congress to Meet". cnn.com. September 5, 2002. "It stands on the site where the first Congress under the Constitution convened in 1789 ... The original Federal Hall building was demolished in 1812 and the land sold."
  • ALT1: ... that a former U.S. capitol building was later sold for $425 and then demolished? Source: (1) Wolfe, Gerard R. (1994). New York, a Guide to the Metropolis: Walking Tours of Architecture and History. p. 49. "Unfortunately, the building later fell into disuse and was sold in 1812 for scrap for the sum of $425." (2) "Inside Politics: Symbolic Site for Congress to Meet". cnn.com. September 5, 2002. "The original Federal Hall building was demolished in 1812 and the land sold."
  • ALT2: ... that Federal Hall National Memorial (pictured) once held 70% of the U.S. federal government's money? Source: Carmody, Deirdre (October 21, 1972). "Federal Hall Memorial Is Reopened as Museum". The New York Times.
  • ALT3: ... that the U.S. Congress once passed a bill to allow a subway tunnel under Federal Hall National Memorial (pictured)? Source: "House Passes N.Y. Subway Bill". Wall Street Journal. January 23, 1929. p. 21.
  • ALT4: ... that when the U.S. Congress met at Federal Hall National Memorial (pictured) in 2002, it was the first time since 1790 that they had met in New York City? Source: "Inside Politics: Symbolic Site for Congress to Meet". cnn.com. September 5, 2002.
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Ed Stone (baseball)
  • Comment: For ALT0 and ALT1, I suggest File:Federal Hall, N.Y. 1789 ppmsca.15703.jpg as an image.

Improved to Good Article status by Epicgenius (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 731 past nominations.

Epicgenius (talk) 22:58, 21 June 2025 (UTC).

• Article was newly made into GA, hooks seem nice. Article seems to fit all criteria. All good. Arconning (talk) 10:43, 27 June 2025 (UTC)