Talk:St. Paul's Chapel

Fair use rationale for Image:StPaulsChapel1.jpg
Image:StPaulsChapel1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I note that Image:StPaulsChapel1.jpg is first and foremost a HABS photo, which was used by the NYU site that someone took it from for uploading. So we can upload the original high-quality HABS photo properly, and it is fine for this low-quality image copy to be deleted. The HABS photo is here. Anyone know how to communicate that the image can be deleted, to the bot? doncram (talk) 03:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Been a long time since I've done any editing on here other than reverting vandalism occassionally but I think all you need to do is edit the description on the image page and just type delete and their bot should remove the image in a day or two. Dennis (talk) 14:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Oh, didn't see your reply before i just went and deleted the bot-added tag. I amended the Image description to assert it is licensed as public domain.  Hopefully this works, and don't need to delete this one only to add the same thing elsewhere. doncram (talk) 09:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:StPaulsChapel3.jpg
Image:StPaulsChapel3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 05:24, 21 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I responded with fair use rationale in the image page and provided further comment on its talk page. Hopefully this will resolve it. doncram (talk) 09:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I put in a new, free photo instead dm (talk) 03:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Better pic for box?
The commonscat has new pictures of the facade. Some are mine, and I wonder whether someone else would like to decide whether any of them should replace what we've got now. Jim.henderson (talk) 04:41, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

September 11, 2001
This section should be made into a separate article, it's taking too much space in an article dedicated to a Church building of 250 years of history. We should not be driven with emotions, as was clearly the case here. Pertaining information can be mentioned in 1-2 sentences. --Гатерас (talk) 02:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on St. Paul's Chapel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061202231256/http://www.saintpaulschapel.org:80/in_depth/news/article_775.shtml to http://www.saintpaulschapel.org/in_depth/news/article_775.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 23:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC)