Talk:Unity Temple/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 m
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.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 03:35, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 00:37, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
I'll get to this shortly--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:37, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- Sturmvogel started this but I accidentally hijacked their review. They indicated elsewhere that they are happy for me to continue as if I started it. @Epicgenius IAWW (talk) 13:00, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
Just finished reviewing – wow, what a fantastic article! This is the best GA I have reviewed in a long time, and I found very few issues relevant to the GA criteria. It's all the more impressive given the length and depth of sources you incorporated. I wish you could do more reviewing, given the backlog, but at the same time the articles you create are just so good I can see the argument that your time is much better spent creating them. I guess also you probably enjoy writing more. IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, I appreciate it. As for doing more reviewing, you hit the nail right on the head - I do enjoy writing a bit more, though I might review more articles. It's just that my reviews tend to be very detailed, which I need to work on. Epicgenius (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for explaining. I see no issues preventing this from reaching GA, so I am passing now. IAWW (talk) 17:33, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
Prose (Criteria 1a, 1b, 4) 
Lead
Great summary of the body
Early history
No issues :)
Temple development
No issues :)
Selection of site and architect
At the time, two-thirds of the congregation lived south of Lake Street, but congregants favored a site near that street: The "but" here is WP:EDITORIAL because no such contrast is present in the source. IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- Fixed. Epicgenius (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
Two of these sites were located at Lake Street and Kenilworth Avenue: a private house on the southwestern corner...: The southwestern corner of Lake Street or Kenilworth Avenue? It's a bit unclear. IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- It was the southwestern corner of Lake Street and Kenilworth Avenue - I've fixed. this. Epicgenius (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
Original plans
No issues :)
Design changes
No issues :)
Early construction
No issues :)
Delays and completion
though it would take several years before the construction cost was fully repaid: The cited page does not say how long it took to fully repay the construction costs, it only says that they fundraised for several years after. IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
Early and mid-20th century
established a weekly "social clinics class" at the temple in late 1910: Is there any information about what this was beyond the name? I think either explain what this was or cut as unnecessary detail. IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- Removed, yeah it was unnecessary detail. Epicgenius (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
and a congregant, E. O. Gale: Gale has already been introduced IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- Removed the repeated detail. Epicgenius (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
merged his congregation: Is it possible to find a bit more information on what this congregation was? E.g. what denomination and where were they previously located? IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, I cannot readily find that information. I was only able to find its name, but that led me to a dead end. Epicgenius (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
Oak Leaves reported...: The publication seems to be called "Forest Leaves", at least at this point. IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
1960s
No issues :)
1970s
No issues :)
1980s and 1990s
No issues :)
2000s
No issues :)
2010s to present
No issues :)
Building
No issues :)
Exterior
No issues :)
Facade
No issues :)
Roofs
No issues :)
Interior
No issues :)
Entrance pavilion
No issues :)
Layout
No issues :)
Decorations
No issues :)
Unity House
No issues :)
Mechanical features
No issues :)
Clergy
As of 2024, Roger Bertschausen is the senior minister: Can be updated IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- This is still true as of 2025. Epicgenius (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
Events and tours
No issues :)
Impact
it was reportedly the first major reinforced-concrete: "reportedly" is a bit weasely here, either attribute properly or cut that word IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- The Ingalls Building is technically the first major reinforced-concrete building in the U.S., so I've rephrased it. Epicgenius (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
Reception
No issues :)
Media
No issues :)
Landmark designations
No issues :)
Sources
Source numbers are based on this version.
Health/formatting (Criterion 2a)
[396] and [397] are down IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- I fixed 396 and removed 397. Epicgenius (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
Reliability (Criterion 2b) 
This seems to have pretty much the perfect mix of sources. It is mostly based on academic books, and that is supplemented with news sources. All seems reliable.
Spot check (Criteria 2b, 2c, 2d)
[169a]: 
[7b]:
[51a]:
[75b]:
[75c]:
[325b]:
[13h]: though it links to page 102, not 101 IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- The SFN covers a source that covers pages 100 to 102. Since the same source is used multiple times for different page ranges, I decided to link to just one of these pages. Epicgenius (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
[386]:
Copyvio (Criterion 2d)
Earwig finds nothing, I thought your paraphrasing was generally very good on the spot check.
Scope (Criteria 3a, 3b)
Extremely detailed, and I don't think any of it is unnecessary given the great depth of sources. I can't see anything major omitted.
Stable (Criterion 5)
Media
Tags (Criterion 6a)
All Flickr transfers, own works, or government employee images. I see no issues.
Captions (Criterion 6b)
Suggestions (not needed for GA promotion)
Suggest archiving non-dead links to prevent link rot IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- I can do that in a little bit. However, the archive bot is not working for me right now. Epicgenius (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
I can't tell if you accidentally missed some modern monetary conversions or chose to omit them. I'm curious of your reasoning behind omitting some. IAWW (talk) 12:04, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
- I accidentally missed some. I've added inflation conversions to the rest of the pre-1999 figures. Thanks for the review IAWW. Epicgenius (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
Content Disclaimer
Informasi ini disarikan dari Wikipedia dan disajikan kembali untuk tujuan edukasi. Konten tersedia di bawah lisensi CC BY-SA 3.0. Kami tidak bertanggung jawab atas ketidakakuratan data yang bersumber dari kontribusi publik tersebut.
- The information displayed on this website is sourced in part or in whole from Wikipedia and has been adapted for the purpose of restating it. We strive to provide accurate and relevant information, however:
- There is no guarantee of absolute accuracy. Wikipedia is an open, collaborative project that can be edited by anyone, so information is subject to change.
- It is not intended to constitute professional advice. The content displayed is for informational and educational purposes only. For important decisions (e.g., medical, legal, or financial), please consult a professional.
- Content copyright. Wikipedia is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA). This means that content may be reused with appropriate attribution and shared under a similar license.
- Responsible use. Any risk arising from the use of information from this website is entirely the responsibility of the user.