Talk:Shrine of the Immaculate Conception

Shrine of the Immaculate Conception has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: January 17, 2023. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism Low‑importance

Shrine of the Immaculate Conception is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Catholicism task list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : see Draft articles
Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles
Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page)
Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates
Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall
Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring
NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment
Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism
Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs
Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire
Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral
Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

Georgia (U.S. state): Atlanta Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Georgia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Georgia (U.S. state)Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Template:WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)Georgia (U.S. state) articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Atlanta task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Atlanta task force To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : Rate Atlanta related articles from Unassessed Atlanta articles and Category:Unknown-importance Atlanta articles.
Citing sources : Unreferenced Atlanta articles
Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category, the tool's wiki page and the index of WikiProjects.
Infobox : Atlanta articles without infoboxes
Map : Wikipedia requested maps in Atlanta
Photo : Wikipedia requested photographs in Atlanta
Stubs : Work on stubs in Category:Atlanta stubs.
Other : * Help out with articles placed in Category:Atlanta articles needing attention
- Add {{WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)|class=|importance=|atlanta=|atlanta-importance=}} project banner to Atlanta-related articles to talk pages and assess.
- Maintain and further improve articles already of high-quality.
- Get Atlanta into Featured article status.
- Improve groups of articles to meet the standards for a Good or Featured Topic.

WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state) To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Crooked Creek (Georgia), Ed Defore Sports Complex, Audery Mill Creek, More (Georgia)... More (U.S.)...
Assess : Rate articles from Unassessed Georgia (U.S. state) articles and Unknown-importance Georgia (U.S. state) articles.
Citing sources : Unreferenced Georgia (U.S. state) articles
Cleanup : Cleanup listing for this project is available. See also the list by category.
Geographical coordinates : more Georgia (U.S. state) articles missing geocoordinate data
Infobox : Georgia (U.S. state) articles without infoboxes
Map : Wikipedia requested maps in Georgia (U.S. state)
Photo : Wikipedia requested photographs in Georgia (U.S. state)
Stubs : Work on stubs in articles in Georgia (U.S. state) stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) radio station stubs, Georgia (U.S. state) road stubs and Georgia (U.S. state) geography stubs.
Other : *Deletion sorting: Please see the collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Georgia (U.S. state) - compiled by WikiProject Deletion sorting
- Help out with articles placed in Category:Georgia (U.S. state) articles needing attention
- Notability: Articles with notability concerns, listed at WikiProject Notability
- Tag the talk pages of Georgia (U.S. state)-related articles with the {{WikiProject Georgia (U.S. state)}} banner.
- Get Georgia (U.S. state) to a featured article quality standard

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Shrine of the Immaculate Conception appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 October 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Church of the Immaculate Conception was rededicated as a shrine in 1954, 100 years after the dogma of the Immaculate Conception was defined?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2022/October. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Shrine of the Immaculate Conception.

Wikipedia

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by RoySmith (talk) 21:42, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the Church of the Immaculate Conception in Atlanta was rededicated as a shrine in 1954, 100 years after Catholic Church defined the dogma of the Immaculate Conception? Source: Scharen 2004 p. 82
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Wish You Were Gay

5x expanded by JJonahJackalope (talk). Self-nominated at 20:11, 30 September 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Not a review, just a suggestion: If the goal is to direct eyes/hit to the article on the Atlanta church, consider delinking "the dogma of Immaculate Conception". The dogma link is likely to get more of the hits if it remains.Cbl62 (talk) 16:13, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall:

@JJonahJackalope: Great Expansion!

I'm going to have to assume good faith on the books and approve. Onegreatjoke (talk) 16:36, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Shrine of the Immaculate Conception/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs) 19:29, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I will review this article. It's an interesting and beautiful building, and since I love church architecture, I'm honored to do so. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 19:29, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This is a nice article about a beautiful building that's full of history and significance to the city of Atlanta.

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
I did a spot-check on a few of the sources; from what I looked at, it looks like this article is meticuloously sourced. Nice job.

C. It contains no original research:

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
I'm AGF about this, since I don't know enough about the topic to review if it's broad enough. It looks likely that the editors followed the research; nice job.

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Vwey stable.
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
Images are fine for GA, although I have one question/suggestion. There are only four images and a map; are there more images available of the building (inside and out), its surroundings, and of the people mentioned? With such a historic building, I wonder if there are free images or images in the common domain? The one article about a historic church that I successfully brought through FAC (Stanford Memorial Church), has bunches of images and it's only 120 years old. Like I said, just a suggestion, perhaps to make this article pop more.

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Such an easy pass and a pleasure to read. If you could expand it a bit more, it'd be good for FAC, I think. Best of luck as you work on more sacred spaces in Atlanta.