Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/First Roumanian-American congregation/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by SandyGeorgia 22:06, 11 April 2009.

First Roumanian-American congregation

 * Nominator(s): Jayjg (talk)

I am nominating this for Featured Article status because it is a well-cited social history of a significant New York City congregation and synagogue. Jayjg (talk) 00:58, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment The convention is for quotes to be directly attached to a cite. Some paragraphs have multiple quotes and only the end of the paragraph is cited. Also in the footnotes for the number ranges of the periodical dates, they need an ndash for Feb - Mar like in the final extended booklists.  YellowMonkey  ( click here to vote for world cycling's #1 model! ) 02:39, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments. Regarding the quotes, I think I've fixed them all. Regarding the ndashes, I think I've gotten all of them too. Please let me know if I've missed anything or made any errors. Jayjg (talk) 03:03, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

'''Tech. Review'''
 * Fix the Dabs (based on the toolbox checker tool) are up to speed.
 * External links are up to speed (based on the toolbox checker tool)
 * Ref formatting (based on the WP:REFTOOLS script) is up to speed
 * The following ref name is used more than once to name different refs when it should only name 1 ref
 * Dolkart1997s7p3 --Best,  ₮ RU  C Ө   03:10, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking that. I believe the dab was already fixed - I think the checker tool is just taking time to catch up. Regarding the refs, it's fixed now. Jayjg (talk) 03:16, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments -
 * What makes the following reliable sources?
 * http://www.panmodern.com/synagoguespace.html#Roumanian
 * http://remember.org/
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:46, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking into that. The first source was part of a synagogue project, but the material in it really only duplicated what other sources said, so I've removed it. The second source is listed as a "Comprehensive website" in the Columbia Guide to the Holocaust:, listed as a good resource on the Holocaust by quite a few sites/books/institutions, e.g., referenced 128 times on Google books, etc. I've only used it for one sentence; the sister of one of the rabbis wrote her memoirs, and in them she gives the country he was born in, the institution he graduated from, and when he emigrated to the United States. I figured it was good enough for that fairly uncontentious material. Jayjg (talk) 00:31, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I think I can deal with this. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:58, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I edit a lot of synagogue articles; this one is outstandingHistoricist (talk) 20:08, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for saying so. Jayjg (talk) 00:42, 20 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Got a redirect from "Rumanian"? I think that's the standard spelling, isn't it? "Rou" is pre-war? Then there's "Romanian" in the text. I'm confused.
 * "The building had been extensively remodeled in 1889, and was remodeled again after the purchase in 1902." Easy to avoid rep.
 * "but as Jews moved out of the Lower East Side, the membership declined to around 40 in the early 2000s". Uncomfortable time clash. Don't know how to fix. "but in the early 2000s, as Jews ...., the membership ..."? Or was it "by the early 2000s"—another point.
 * "Though listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1998,[12] the synagogue's building deteriorated, and the congregation was reluctant to accept outside assistance and the conditions that would come with it." A few problems: remove "synagogue's" (redundant and ungainly 's); the causality doesn't work (buildings listed on the register don't normally deteriorate, because of their listing?); the "the conditions" is a little cryptic, and of course in the lead you're trying to avoid the level of detail required to explain it. Can you avoid the issue here, dealing with it only below? Why not just state that they were reluctant to accept outside assistance?
 * "two months later" might be neater.
 * MoS problem: "continued to" ... wouldn't you say "As of 2009, the congregation has held services ....". Think of avoiding unnecessary article maintenance.
 * Why on earth is "United States" linked? This is classic overlinking, and dilutes the high-value links in the vicinity. Why is "History of the Jews in Romania" linked twice in 30 seconds' reading? And "Lower East Side"? Please go through and weed out the low-value links. It's hard enough to get readers to click on any links. Would it be possible to stub the red link articles, so they're not large blotches of red?

It needs detailed work to bring the writing up to a high standard. Just casting my eyes down: " The portico arch itself was stone, and carved into it were the words "FIRST ROUMANIAN-AMERICAN CONGREGATION", all in capitals.". Yup, OK, we see it's in caps.

This is worth an FA, but not unless the prose is better. Surely there are unfamiliar copy-editors around who'd be interested in this topic? Tony  (talk)  13:33, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your review. Responding to your points, in order:
 * The re-direct didn't exist, but it does now. Regarding "Romanian", that is the standard spelling, at least as far as Wikipedia goes.
 * Re: "remodeled" - fixed.
 * Re: early 2000s - re-worded.
 * Re: NRHP listing, deteriorated - re-worded.
 * Re: "two months later" - done.
 * Re: "continued to" - re-worded to avoid issues.
 * Re: over-linking - fixed. I had generally re-linked any items linked in the lede, which I saw as a standalone piece, but I've removed those links repeated in the first couple of sections. Regarding red-links, only two remain, and I plan to create articles on them.
 * Re: portico: I think the article should be explicit about these things, just as the NRHP nomination by Andrew Dolkart was. Perhaps other can weigh in with their views.
 * Thanks again for the feedback. Jayjg (talk) 02:08, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Update: I've also created the two stubs, so no more red-links. Jayjg (talk) 00:20, 1 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Ah, thanks for those stubs and other corrections, Jay. "Romanian" is fine as a WP spelling, but am I being thick about the title? "Rou"? But no big deal. I would be happy for the rest of the article to be reviewed by a copy-editor who is distant from the text (makes it easier to see things). Tony   (talk)  08:40, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The organization was founded in the 19th century, when "Roumanian" was the norm, so that's the official name of the congregation. Thanks again, and I'd be happy if another copy-editor reviewed it too. Jayjg (talk) 21:49, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Question It's an interesting and poignant article, although a little bittersweet given the outcome of the building. Can you add dates for - "Cantor's Carnegie Hall" - when did Jan Peerce and Richard Tucker sing there. When was Eddie Canter and Red Buttons choirboys there? When was Edward G. Robinson Bar Mitzvahed? The NY Times reference also just mentions those very interesting vignettes. Are there any other clarifications? Modernist (talk) 19:07, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.