Template:Did you know nominations/Third Cathedral of Saint Paul (Minnesota)
- 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 Gatoclass talk 23:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Third Cathedral of Saint Paul (Minnesota), Hamm Building
( Back to T:TDYK )
( Article history links: )
The cathedral (top) and the Hamm Building
- ... that the third Cathedral of Saint Paul, Minnesota, was demolished and replaced by first movie palace in the city?
- Source: Jossi, Frank (18 August 2011). "Building Blocks – Hamm Building". Finance & Commerce. Retrieved 27 November 2024.
- ALT1: ... that the third Cathedral of Saint Paul, Minnesota, was demolished to make way for the offices of Hamm's Brewery? Source: Jossi, Frank (18 August 2011). "Building Blocks – Hamm Building". Finance & Commerce. Retrieved 27 November 2024.
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Kwan Man-ching, Template:Did you know nominations/Tiny Glade
- Comment: Third Cathedral of Saint Paul (Minnesota) created, Hamm Building expanded 5x
Created by Darth Stabro (talk).
Number of QPQs required: 2. Nominator has 12 past nominations.
~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 23:11, 27 November 2024 (UTC).
The ALT1 is more interesting to me, since the contrast between a brewery and a cathedral is fun. Both articles, while short, appear to be fully cited and in decent enough shape. The source checks out, and both QpQs look good. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 19:06, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
Hook pulled from p4 per this diff. Thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 16:41, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Gatoclass! Sure, I can add a few more sentences to get 5x. As for the second issue, the third cathedral is sometimes in secular sources referred to as the second cathedral seemingly because the first cathedral was a simple log cabin and was only technically the cathedral for about five months in 1851. The second cathedral was on the same block but a different corner and was demolished in the late 1800s. This article, source #1 in the third cathedral article, shows the same location as the Hamm Building, and states that it is to be replaced by the Mannheimer Brothers department store, which eventually became the Hamm building. This is more clearly documented in source #6 which is offline, but I do have a PDF of I can send email. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 16:53, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- That sounds fine, but you will need to add a footnote to that end to the Hamm building article or you will risk getting the nom pulled again when it reaches the main page - thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 17:07, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'll expand the Hamm article a little bit later, but I really am baffled by the NRHP statement. The dissertation that it cites mentions nothing of the Hamm building, and the very last page says that the second cathedral was demolished in August of 1889; the year 1911 was mentioned nowhere in the entirety of the dissertation.~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 18:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Gatoclass, the Hamm building article is now at 6x and a explanatory footnote has been placed in the Third Cathedral article. If you'd like to look at the dissertation referenced in the NRHP document—to see that it doesn't support, and in fact contradicts, the NRHP statement—it's available here: File:The Second Cathedral of Saint Paul.pdf. Thanks, ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 21:56, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, having looked through some of the sources, I am satisfied that the NRHP has screwed up not only which Cathedral was demolished, but also the demolition date (it says 1911 when it was actually 1914). And it seems the Forgotten Minnesota piece has just used the NRHP document to make the same mistakes. The only issue then, is with your footnote, which says the NRHP source "seems to be inaccurate". Hooks cannot be based on something which "seems" to be the case, but in this case the source clearly is inaccurate so I have tweaked the footnote accordingly. I might perhaps give it another tweak to clarify the issue further, otherwise it looks like this nom is ready to be restored to prep. Gatoclass (talk) 11:00, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, Gatoclass! I wanted to be sure that the wording didn't violate WP:SYNTH, so that's why I had the more couched phrasing. Will you move it back into a prep or will someone else? The nom is currently in a limbo as it doesn't appear in nominations or approved. ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 15:52, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, having looked through some of the sources, I am satisfied that the NRHP has screwed up not only which Cathedral was demolished, but also the demolition date (it says 1911 when it was actually 1914). And it seems the Forgotten Minnesota piece has just used the NRHP document to make the same mistakes. The only issue then, is with your footnote, which says the NRHP source "seems to be inaccurate". Hooks cannot be based on something which "seems" to be the case, but in this case the source clearly is inaccurate so I have tweaked the footnote accordingly. I might perhaps give it another tweak to clarify the issue further, otherwise it looks like this nom is ready to be restored to prep. Gatoclass (talk) 11:00, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Gatoclass, the Hamm building article is now at 6x and a explanatory footnote has been placed in the Third Cathedral article. If you'd like to look at the dissertation referenced in the NRHP document—to see that it doesn't support, and in fact contradicts, the NRHP statement—it's available here: File:The Second Cathedral of Saint Paul.pdf. Thanks, ~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 21:56, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- I'll expand the Hamm article a little bit later, but I really am baffled by the NRHP statement. The dissertation that it cites mentions nothing of the Hamm building, and the very last page says that the second cathedral was demolished in August of 1889; the year 1911 was mentioned nowhere in the entirety of the dissertation.~Darth StabroTalk • Contribs 18:43, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
- That sounds fine, but you will need to add a footnote to that end to the Hamm building article or you will risk getting the nom pulled again when it reaches the main page - thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 17:07, 11 December 2024 (UTC)