Talk:Felton Presbyterian Church
Latest comment: 12 years ago by Doncram in topic Confusion of churches
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | It is requested that a photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
Wikipedians in California may be able to help! The external tool WordPress Openverse may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Confusion of churches
edit- The historic church is at 6299 Gushie; it is the one in the (current) photo, the one on the NRHP list, and is currently a library. Library's history page
- The current, active church is at 6090 Highway 9, three-tenths of a mile away. It is the one covered in the text of this article. Active church's map
Some splitting is needed here, although I have no idea on titles for the new/old articles. Thundersnow (talk) 09:17, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Hi. Thanks for noting the confusion and linking to sources. Another source about the historic, NRHP-listed church should be available in its NRHP nomination, which I'll try to link to here:
- ^ Edith E. Fikes (August 17, 1977). "National Register of Historic Places Inventory/Nomination: Felton Presbyterian Church / Faye G. Belardi Memorial Library" (PDF). National Park Service. and accompanying two photos from 1976
- Thanks for calling attention to this. About a way forward, I guess I agree the two should be covered in different articles if they each are wikipedia-notable, rather than having one combined article. There are other churches where there's a current congregation in a new building and a historic NRHP-listed building that are covered in one article, but here you have different locations and no continuing association between them, as far as I know. The NRHP-listed building, now a library, is clearly wikipedia-notable, as is practically any NRHP-listed place (due to documentation available, and their having passed several levels of review in the listing process). But is the current church a wikipedia-notable topic? I am not sure. --doncram 14:21, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- I would put the building in an article about the library, renaming this article if the congregation lacks notability; an article of this name should probably be about the congregation. The congregation may be notable, however: its history indicates it was the first occupant of the building. This notability may only be satisfied by local history books and newspapers. Magic♪piano 14:54, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- This could be handled in many ways (see above), but I don't think that there is a major problem leaving the 2 entities in the same article, as long as a distinction is made in the article between the two. What we really need is more info about the historic building (in whatever article you think it fits best in). Smallbones(smalltalk) 17:38, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Looking at the current page, I would go with Felton Public Library for the historic building, and leave this article to the current congregation/building. It would be a lot less confusing, especially if each article hatnoted the other. Thundersnow (talk) 17:57, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
- Per Thundersnow's preference, and I think not against anyone else's wishes, i have now split out a separate Felton Public Library article to hold info about the NRHP-listed building; each article links to the other. Further discussion of development of the library/historic building article should take place at Talk:Felton Public Library. --doncram 09:09, 13 September 2012 (UTC)