Talk:Holy Rosary Cathedral (Vancouver)

Holy Rosary Cathedral (Vancouver) has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 2, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on October 7, 2012.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the bells in Vancouver's Holy Rosary Cathedral (pictured) were originally cast in Savoy, France?

Catholicism Low‑importance

Holy Rosary Cathedral (Vancouver) is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see Draft articles
Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page)
Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates
Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall
Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring
NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment
Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism
Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs
Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire
Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

Vancouver Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Vancouver, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada and the surrounding metropolitan area 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.VancouverWikipedia:WikiProject VancouverTemplate:WikiProject VancouverVancouver articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Canada: British Columbia Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject British Columbia.

Architecture Mid‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives: 1

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Holy Rosary Cathedral (Vancouver)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: CaroleHenson (talk · contribs) 00:55, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will complete the review today or tomorrow.--CaroleHenson (talk) 00:55, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overview

The article is very well-written and has a natural flow. It provides a good broad coverage of the subject, without going into unnecessary detail. There's great use of illustrative stories, images and quotes. It follows Manual of Style guidelines. The article is well-sourced with inline citations, there's just one added citation needed tag. There's no evidence of original research. The article is neutral.

It is now stable, but there was some edit waring and talk-page dialogue in 2012-early 2013 regarding the "Modern day" section. I understand both sides and it seems to have settled into keeping that section, so I have no reason to question that.

There is good use of public domain images - all with proper licensing in commons. I'm not seeing copyright violations in the text, either.

Edits

There were just a couple of minor copy edits and resolution of two cs1 date errors (you only see it if you've configured to see them). See this version comparison.
Since there were only two short citations for Thirkell - and several other books cited - I just changed Thirkell's short citations into long ones and removed the bibliography section for consistency. See this version comparison

Are you ok with the edits and changes to the Thirkell citations?--CaroleHenson (talk) 11:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I'm OK with them. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:58, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

There's one citation needed tag that has been added.

I can't find any sources on "nothing serious [arising] from the incident". I was just basing that sentence off the fact that the cathedral is still standing fine and hadn't collapsed. I could just shift the ref to the end of the sentence, or remove it altogether. What would be better? —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:41, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lol. Good point! The thing is, though, the article doesn't say that there weren't major repercussions. How about rewording the sentence to something like:

In April 1959, drilling and blasting commenced in a nearby tunnel, which is believed to be the cause of a minor tilt in the bell tower of the cathedral.

And, then folks can infer that since the bell tower and cathedral are still standing that there wasn't likely further damage. Although, how would we know? There could have been damage to the foundation, etc. that required work that never made it into the paper. (And, in our world, if it didn't make it to print, we cannot write about it - thinking ahead that you might be a member of the church.)--CaroleHenson (talk) 11:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed the sentence altogether without rewording, since the source didn't say when the drilling and blasting started (only reports on when the tilting began). —Bloom6132 (talk) 17:19, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, sounds like the best option!--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:34, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice to have a further reading section if you know of any books that have the history or background information about the cathedral, like
- Marianthi P. Constantinu (1968). Holy Rosary Cathedral: Vancouver, B.C.

Added that book, and one other book – it was the only other relevant book I could fine. —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:41, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful! You don't need the access/retrieved dates, though, that's only required for citations with urls.--CaroleHenson (talk) 11:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. —Bloom6132 (talk) 16:58, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You've done a really great job on the article. This is all that I'm finding.--CaroleHenson (talk) 03:28, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aw, thanks for kind words! I've been slowly developing this article for the past two years now. This Wednesday (October 8th) is the 2nd anniversary of this article's DYK (also coinciding with the feast day of the cathedral's namesake). —Bloom6132 (talk) 10:41, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it nice how everything comes together?--CaroleHenson (talk) 11:42, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, looks great! I'll pass the article. Thanks.--CaroleHenson (talk) 17:34, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]