Talk:North Christian Church
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the assessment scale. |
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Indiana, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Indiana. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale. | ||
| Low | This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
 |
This article has been improved by the Cleanup Taskforce to conform with a higher standard of quality. Please see its Cleanup Taskforce page for more details on this process, and possible ideas on how you can further improve this article! |
From VfD:
Non-notable local parish-sized church (Dartmouth contribution). Dunc_Harris|☺ 22:07, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Except of course that it is notable as the building is one designed by an important architect. keep.--Samuel J. Howard 00:21, Aug 25, 2004 (UTC)
- Clean up for POV and keep. Also note that "North Christian Church" is a place. The sect is not "north"-, so a little distinguishing of content would help as well. This particular church began as a part of a denomination (Church of Christ), and this particular congregation is notable because its building is a marvel, etc. Geogre 00:47, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Building by Eero Saarinen. Clearly keep. Isomorphic 20:16, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Condensed version is now at Columbus, Indiana where it belonged in the first place. A fine example of the folly of mini-entries broken into meaningless shards. Delete. Wetman 21:53, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- I'm changing my vote to keep; I have rewritten the article removing POV and writing about the architecture rather than the church, whose doctrines can be covered in its article about the national organisation. I'm also trying to get a photo. Dunc_Harris|☺ 22:04, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. -- Pjacobi 20:39, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
end moved discussion
See also Talk:Mabel McDowell School. Lupo 13:04, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Reason for entire removal of section
The entire "in detail" section was by far unencyclopedic. If I wanted a semi-advertisement for the article, I would just go to the PDF file that wasn't cited but I found anyway. Second, that article "said lots yet said little". Lots of words, but hardly anything that really expanded my understanding of the church that was in any way significant.
Perhaps the thing that would make more sense would be a section that deals with the church's beliefs, or perhaps a section on the architect that designed the church. If there's so much emphasis on the design, then let's talk about the designer, not where individual trees are planted.
I will consult with the other cleanup crew and possibly close the cleanup tag. Linuxbeak 20:24, May 8, 2005 (UTC)
