Talk:Our Lady of Pompeii Church (Manhattan)/GA1

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.

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Vami IV (talk · contribs) 01:02, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Opening statement

In every review I conduct, make small copyedits. These will only be limited to spelling and punctuation (removal of double spaces and such). I will only make substantive edits that change the flow and structure of the prose if I previously suggested and it is necessary. For replying to Reviewer comment, please use Done, Fixed, Added, Not done, Doing..., or Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. I will be crossing out my comments as they are redressed, and only mine. A detailed, section-by-section review will follow. –♠Vami _IV†♠ 01:02, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

History

~~Move the link for the Italian disapora from "them" to "Italian Immigrants."~~
~~its first-floor storefront[3] [...] Greek Revival building[4] MOS:REFPUNCT~~
- Done Ergo Sum 14:58, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The existing buildings on the land were cleared, and ground was broken for the new church in 1926. On New Year's Day 1928, during construction, a 3-year-old girl named Zita Triglia was killed when a 10-foot-long beam fell from the belfry scaffolding, knocking her from her father's arms. Irrelevant and not supported by the given source (citation 13). I looked this up on google and the first result was a blog.
- It is supported by citation 14. While I agree it could be pared down, I think it's relevant that someone was killed in the construction of the church. Would you agree? Ergo Sum 04:35, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - I looked at both sources; there is no mention of death or a girl named Zita Triglia in either references 13 or 14. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 02:23, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - My mistake, it is citation 9 that mentions this. Ergo Sum 20:18, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      - Citation 9 is that blog I mentioned. Does it pass WP:RS? –♠Vami _IV†♠ 22:27, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        Since that blog is specifically about local history, I would imagine it's pretty accurate. However, I will try to track down its source. Ergo Sum 05:34, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

* I looked into the blog author, and he wrote a book on this topic in 2015. Is it possible that Our Lady of Pompeii is covered in it? –♠Vami _IV†♠ 07:06, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

- @Vami IV: Do you have the name of the book so I can check? Ergo Sum 00:01, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Vami IV: I found the book you're talking about. I'm going to peruse it when I get my hands on it from the library this weekend. Ergo Sum 01:50, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Vami IV: Sorry about the delay. Getting the book took longer than anticipated. I have it now and will go through it in the coming few days. Ergo Sum 15:04, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cool beans. –♠Vami _IV†♠ 15:45, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Vami IV: I've finally read through the book. It doesn't talk about Our Lady of Pompeii. However, I've done some more research on the author and he seems to be an established authority on the history of New York City's architecture; see here, here, and here for just a few examples. Given this fact, since the blog was published by an expert on this subject who has been previously published on the same subject by reputable, independent publishers, I think this might be one of the exceptions listed at WP:SELFPUBLISH that would qualify the blog as a usable source. Ergo Sum 02:43, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm convinced, approved. –♠Vami _IV†♠ 03:07, 3 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Remove the "Orgins" header? Its place before "Present church" would imply that it is the origins/historical context.~~
- I'm not clear on what you mean here. Could you please explain? Ergo Sum 04:35, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - Delete the "Origins" heading so there is not a section by that name. Seems odd to have no text between "History" and "Origins." –♠Vami_IV†♠ 02:23, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - Done Ergo Sum 20:17, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - (Drive by comment) @Vami IV and Ergo Sum: It might just be me but I don't see a problem here. "Origins" is a subsections of "History". Doesn't that section talk about the historical context? Here is what I'm talking about. epicgenius (talk) 03:49, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      - I did stage that suggestion with a question mark, as it was personal taste. Not mandated in the MOS, as far as I've read. –♠Vami _IV†♠ 05:50, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        @Vami IV: Thanks for your answer. Yes, I know it's just a preference. I was just asking because "Origins" and "Present church" are both subsections of "History". Personally, I don't see a problem dividing all the text under a main section into subsections. But as you said, that's a preference. epicgenius (talk) 15:48, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        If nobody here has a particularly strong preference, I'm going to restore the Origins sub-header. Ergo Sum 17:16, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        @Ergo Sum: Since you're the main editor of this page, I'm fine with whatever option you choose. epicgenius (talk) 20:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture

~~which will be the decisive weapon in the battle. Does not sound neutral.~~
- Done Ergo Sum 04:41, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
~~Above the battle, images of the Pompei, Italy parish, including the campanile of the Shrine of Our Lady of the Rosary of Pompei, are visible. Simplify.~~
- Done Ergo Sum 04:41, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
~~Blessed Giovanni Battista Scalabrini as a bishop in white, their founder. Move "their founder" to just after the Blessed's name.~~
- Done Ergo Sum 04:41, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Beneath the mural in the apse is another frieze that bears the Latin inscription:[13] Move to form the last sentence of the previous paragraph. It uses the one of two citations before it (13), still pertains to the mural, and is just a single paragraph.
- Done Ergo Sum 04:41, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
~~It was expanded over the years, ~~including~~ at one point by incorporating pipes from a 1928 organ in the Immaculate Conception Church in Trenton, New Jersey. Remove "including" and "by", as shown.~~
- Done Ergo Sum 04:41, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA progress

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

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.