Talk:Bank Street Unitarian Chapel

Recent edits and revert
There may well be some useful info in this series of recent edits but the contributor was misguided in their approach. I've left a note on their talk page and will try to work through it all. - Sitush (talk) 15:37, 29 January 2019 (UTC)


 * As an example, the first bit that really matters is The foundation of Bolton's Unitarian congregation has its origins in a period of strong anti-Puritanism, during which Bolton was singled out as the Geneva of the North. Obviously, the external link would need to be changed to a citation but, as far as I can see, it doesn't work anyway. And even if it did, I don't see how a map is likely to support the claim that (a) it was a period of "strong anti-Puritanism"; (b) that "Bolton was singled out"; and (c) it also gained the sobriquet "Geneva of the North". And that assumes the website is even reliable, which ain't necessarily so as it appears to be a self-published source and I have no idea who its creator (David Plant) may be. - Sitush (talk) 15:40, 29 January 2019 (UTC)


 * There is a chapter in the Malcolm Hardman book (which we already use as a source) titled "Athens of the North". Starts around p. 179 and I suspect this may contain whatever it is that the website is actually saying, even though it is Athens and not Geneva. - Sitush (talk) 16:28, 29 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Ah, found it. Around p. 166 of Hardman there is a discussion of the Geneva point. I'll try to find some time to read it properly. - Sitush (talk) 17:31, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Two official websites?
I see has just changed the official website link to this. I don't understand why there are two official websites, nor do I like the idea of announcing that they are updating the article, as is said on the first of those.

Please read WP:COI and WP:MEAT, just in case, and please explain here what is going on with having two sites. - Sitush (talk) 15:54, 29 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Ah, apparently they cannot access the original website, so have started another. The original one still shows up way above the new one in Google searches, so presumably this is a fairly recent event but, hey, Google does some weird stuff. I think the explanation is plausible and will reinstate the edit.


 * It would be better if proposed changes were made on this page in future because there is an obvious conflict of interest and an understandable confusion regarding how Wikipedia works. - Sitush (talk) 18:02, 29 January 2019 (UTC)