Talk:Scottish Rite Cathedral (Pasadena, California)
This article was nominated for deletion on 27 August 2010. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
notability
[edit]I suggest discussion of this topic's notability should take place here. This article's topic has mentioned in passing in a wp:ANI discussion and elsewhere.
About sources available to develop this article, i expect that the Pasadena Historical Society would be one good source of materials. Also some Los Angeles area editors have shown expertise in getting LATimes archive articles; there is also the Pasadena Weekly which might be checked. The building itself, which i have seen, is quite imposing and is interesting architecturally. It is certainly unusual. --doncram (talk) 17:04, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- If NRHP listing is the notability requirement, then by admission of the article itself, this building does not meet that criterion. Therefore it is not notable. MSJapan (talk) 17:13, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- And, rather than discuss here, within moments you opened the AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scottish Rite Cathedral (Pasadena, California). Okay, discussion of this article topic's notability should continue there, instead. --doncram (talk) 17:46, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- What's so hard about "not on NHRP = not notable, and not notable = no article"? You're making vague statements about significance in social history and architectural significance, yet you state nothing to prove either point. So how are you showing any sort of compliance with the GNG in this article? MSJapan (talk) 18:13, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- And, rather than discuss here, within moments you opened the AFD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scottish Rite Cathedral (Pasadena, California). Okay, discussion of this article topic's notability should continue there, instead. --doncram (talk) 17:46, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- MSJ. I think it's worth being clear that NRHP listing is not the same as the GNG, and the fact that this building isn't NRHP listed doesn't automatically mean that there aren't sufficient sources to meet the GNG. Notwithstanding that the burden of evidence does sit with Doncram on this.
- ALR (talk) 18:24, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- Notability being considered in the AFD. --doncram (talk) 12:49, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
photos of building under construction, plus
[edit]
Photos of the building under construction and other materials are available in an Online Archives California archive, per reference i added to the William C. Crowell article, referenced again here.[1] Crowell was a builder and/or architect.
- ^ "Guide to the William C. Crowell Collection, 1901-1981" (PDF). (includes short bio and index of works). Online Archive of California.
I wonder if these materials are scanned and available online somehow, or whether it is just the archive summary/index information that is online. Probably the materials are not scanned. It appears the boxes of materials would be available for review by appointment at the Pasadena Historical Museum, on Walnut Street in Pasadena. --doncram (talk) 12:49, 31 August 2010 (UTC)
- Start-Class National Register of Historic Places articles
- Low-importance National Register of Historic Places articles
- Start-Class National Register of Historic Places articles of Low-importance
- Start-Class California articles
- Low-importance California articles
- Start-Class Southern California articles
- Low-importance Southern California articles
- Southern California task force articles
- WikiProject California articles
- Start-Class Freemasonry articles
- Low-importance Freemasonry articles
- WikiProject Freemasonry articles