Talk:First Roumanian-American Congregation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article First Roumanian-American Congregation is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 20, 2011.

Miscellaneous comments[edit]

  • "[a]n estimated three-quarters": Maybe it's just me, but I can't imagine what circumstances would justify that particular use of square brackets. Oh, I get it! It just means it was a capital letter. I was confused because I thought it had something to do with "a" versus "an". Never mind.
  • Origins section, first paragraph, first and last sentence: One has the period inside the closing quotation mark, one outside. This is OK if it's because one had a period in the original quotation and the other didn't. Otherwise, be consistent for this type of sentence, probably putting the period outside per my muddy interpretation of MOS.
  • emdashes: I believe MOS specifies using either emdashes with no spaces around them, or as an alternative endashes with spaces around them. I'm removing the spaces.
  • "Though this congregation had the same name as the building's later owners, First Roumanian-American congregation (Congregation Shaarey Shamoyim), the two congregations were unrelated." I'm confused. Are you saying that "Congregation Shaarey Shamoyim" is the "same name" as "First Roumanian-American congregation" (perhaps a translation of the name)? If you explain it to me I may be able to suggest wording that would make it clearer.
  • "reddish-orange": this time I'm changing an endash to a hyphen (a first for me). Not 100% sure that's correct.
  • "Though the church was intended to attract Jewish converts": I got confused here, having forgotten that it was back to Christian ownership. Perhaps "Jewish converts" is ambiguous: converts to or from Judaism? Maybe it would be clearer as "converts from Judaism", or maybe I'm the only one who would get confused there.
  • "two–weeks pay": I think you overdid the endashes again here. I've changed it to "two weeks' pay".
  • "theatre–style seats": is that another endash? I'm changing it to a hyphen.
  • "light–yellow": ditto.
  • "north–facing orange–red" Gaaah! Two more! You've been going through too many FA reviews. :-) Changed to hyphens.
  • "eight–paned", "six–paned"changing endash to hyphen. "north–east" removing endash; not sure but I don't think an endash is right here. could be perhaps a hyphen but I'll make it "northeast". Similarly for "northwest".
  • In the lead: I changed a hyphen to an endash in "Roumanian–American" and think the page needs to be renamed to use an endash (leaving a redirect from the hyphenated form), though I'm not 100% sure.
  • "two–story", "sub–basement", "re–marriage", "make–up", "over–arching", "wagon–loads", "ten–year", "then–cantor" "co–named" "re–built": changing endash to hyphen
  • However, when I see "Roumanian–American" spelled with either a hyphen or an endash, I'm not changing it. I'll revert the one I did change. You'll have to decide and go through and make them consistent.
  • Last paragraph of "Purchase by First Roumanian-American congregation" section: repeats some info from earlier in the section, i.e. kitchen in basement and bimah. Or acknowledge the repetition, e.g. "Besides the basement kitchen, the building held ..."
  • Herzl: Why was he not eulogized? Is this information included in the article on him?
  • "Ostensibly to combat this proselytization" Not sure what the source says, but consider replacing "combat" with "counter" and possibly deleting "ostensibly".
  • "First Roumanian-American was also a preferred venue for airing issues relevant specifically to Romanian–American Jews." This sentence apparently used both a hyphen and and endash. Possibly correct if the name of the congregation demands specifically a hyphen??
  • "two hundred delegate representing..." Is this a typo, does the original have an "s" at the end of "delegates"? Similar question for the "u" in "Rumanian" in "American League of Rumanian Jews".
  • "then–Mayor of New York City": leaving this one as an endash per my reading of MOS. I'm taking the word "city" out of the double square brackets so that the reader can see that there are two separate wikilinks; I think "Mayor of New York" is still reasonably unambiguous as the thing wikilinked from.
  • "Choir members included Red Buttons and Eddie Cantor," I'm changing the comma to a semicolon but am unsure about it.
  • "In 1981, Rabbi Mordecai Mayer, who had led the congregation for 20 years, died at the age of 65." I lose the story-line here. This sentence sounds as if it's building up to a climax, but the following sentences are then disappointing. Did it stop having its own Talmud Torah when he died? Did his death contribute to the decline in some way?
  • Ref 66 (The Villager) link doesn't work.Fixed.(20:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)) All the other links from the Notes section work.(20:51, 17 March 2009 (UTC))

Coppertwig (talk) 20:42, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that's a thorough read. Let's see, I'll respond to the ones you have not yet fixed.
Re: periods inside quotes, fixed, thanks.
Re:Shaarey Shamoyim: I've clarified, let me know if that helps. First Roumanian-American was also called "Shaarey Shomayim", it was its Hebrew name.
Re:Conversion, I've tried to clarify the text.
Re:kitchen, bathroom: thanks, fixed
Re:Herzl, undoubtedly because he was the leader of the Zionists, which the Orthodox opposed at that time. I don't think the source states this, though, so I'll check it again.
Re:ostensibly, the source is skeptical of the reasoning. I like "combat", I must be more "combative" than you. :-)
Re:"delegate", typo, fixed, thanks.
Re:Mayer, I wish I had more about him, but unfortunately could find out little else, other than he wrote at least two English books, and possibly other Hebrew ones.
Re:endashes and hyphens, I'm trying to standardize in line with MOS, keeping in mind that it is a guideline. :-)
Jayjg (talk) 01:27, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Re periods (or commas) inside quotes: not sure what convention you're using exactly, but based on the change I think you made, you may also want to change

  • "each with a Byzantine-style capital"." and possibly
  • ""a heavy frieze and corbelled brick cornice"," and
  • ""a band of small red terra cotta blocks"," and
  • ""to discuss the subjects of vital concern to Judaism and Jews"," and
  • ""open to all children of the neighbourhood"." and
  • "for their "equal rights and their emancipation from thralldom"." and
  • ""north Manhattan, Brooklyn, and the Bronx"." and
  • ""closed for 10 years because of maintenance problems"." and
  • ""the insurance company [was] playing hardball"." and
  • ""because of its hesitancy"." and
  • ""didn't want outside interference"," and
  • ""buried in the rubble"." and
  • "...unused area into a museum of past glory"."

Note that possibly according to MOS some of these but not others might have the punctuation inside the quotation marks. WP:MOS#Quotation marks

I'll probably reply to some of the other replies later.

Are you contending that I'm less combative than you?! Them's fightin' words! Coppertwig (talk) 01:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

It was easier to switch them all the other way, which is what I ended up doing. I believe they all now have the period before the quotation mark. I'm sure there's some part of MOS that frowns on that. :-) Jayjg (talk) 02:06, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
I inserted "essentially" for "essentially the same name", since a name starting with "H" doesn't seem to me to be quite the same as one starting with "S".
Re conversion: yes, that's clearer, thanks.
Re kitchen: good. Bathrooms? I didn't say anything about bathrooms. Would I talk about that sort of thing? :-) But it's fine now.
Re the rest of the items, I'm satisfied except maybe the periods inside/outside quotation marks, which may not all have been fixed yet. I think maybe you meant you changed them to be inside the quotation marks. I'm not sure which way you're trying to do them. It may depend on things like whether the quote is sentence-like or noun-clause-like. Coppertwig (talk) 18:04, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
OK, fixed to my satisfaction. I put the period inside the quotation marks if the quotation is an entire sentence or at least includes the main verb of the sentence. Infinitives and subordinate clauses don't count for that, so some rather long fragments still have the period outside the quotation mark. This is according to my understanding of the MOS. Coppertwig (talk) 19:52, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Great changes, thanks for making them! Jayjg (talk) 00:42, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

I just checked and all the points raised in the FAR have been addressed except perhaps this comment by Modernist asking for dates, and possibly checking for too many wikilinks in general (though the specific ones mentioned, at least, have been fixed). There's also the punctuation issue raised by SandyGeorgia here. Coppertwig (talk) 23:52, 17 May 2009 (UTC) ... or, oops, not the "all in capitals" bit; but I think it's better as it is. I don't see a better way to express it. Coppertwig (talk) 00:03, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Problematic link, or is it my computer?[edit]

A few minutes ago I clicked on one of the links in the references section. Sorry, I forget which one: I think it was a New York Times article that didn't have a page number given. (I.e. maybe the link from ""Rabbi Mordecai Mayer", The New York Times, January 31, 1981.".) I got something telling me that I needed to download virus scanning software, that my computer had a virus, and that it was downloading software (in spite of my clicking "cancel"). I shut down my computer because I didn't want to download anything. Of course, it could be coincidental; and if so I'm very sorry this came up at this time, as the article has recently been submitted for Featured Article Review. Does anybody know how to check whether there is a problem with that link? I think I'll ask at the help desk. Coppertwig (talk) 14:57, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I suppose it's probably OK. All the links for New York Times articles are to As someone at the Help desk says, I doubt the New York Times is trying to infect my computer. It's possible that I had accidentally clicked on some link I wasn't aware of. See also the help desk discussion. Coppertwig (talk) 16:11, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not the only one who had that problem! See the discussion on an internet forum here. I guess it's up to the New York Times to fix it. Coppertwig (talk) 16:24, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I've tried out the link, and then run 3 different scanners on my computer. I didn't experience any of the problems you did, nor did any of the scans turn up any viruses. Perhaps The New York Times has already fixed the problem? If it persists, please let me know. The link is just a courtesy link anyway, and can be removed. Jayjg (talk) 00:07, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Reorganization of article[edit]

Well done, Karanacs and Jayjg! (Karanacs for making the suggestion at the Featured Articles page; Jayjg for implementing it.) The reorganized article flows more smoothly and logically. Coppertwig (talk) 16:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Jayjg (talk) 17:57, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


Well done!..Modernist (talk) 00:56, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Jayjg (talk) 02:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Pop cultural reference[edit]

Parts of the building, particularly the 95 Rivington entrance with the salvaged original stonecarving over the door, are visible on the cover of the Beastie Boy's album Paul's Boutique. - (talk) 19:53, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

It's actually a picture of the Rivington street entrance when the synagogue was still standing; the picture was taken before the synagogue collapsed and was demolished. Thanks, I'll add it to the popular culture section. Jayjg (talk) 18:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)


Interesting, well-written article!

I notice that the main list of famous people associated with the music of the synagogue are in the intro. My feeling is that a couple of the most famous names should be in the intro and the rest within the body of the article.

A problem is that the long sentence that names them contains lots of references, with as many as three for one individual, of which two are surely superfluous! Multitudinous refs clutter the intro and make it hard to read.

Could most of these people be given honorable mention further down the page? Amandajm (talk) 05:29, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I suppose the references could all be moved to the end of each sentence, or even removed entirely from the lede as the MOS doesn't absolutely mandate them in the lede. It's a bit tricky, though, because that would mess up the numbering in the rest of the article. I'm reluctant to remove all the names though, since the lede is already fairly short, given the length of the article. Jayjg (talk) 05:40, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

What a tragedy![edit]

How unfortunate that such a beautiful building should be demolished when rehabilitation assistance was available. Keraunos (talk) 00:17, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Topic of article: building or congregation[edit]

Yes, what a tragedy, about the building; but since this article is titled as if it were about the congregation can someone tell me the congregation's fate? I can't find it in the article, just section after section about the building. Maybe retitle the article, "First Roumanian-American congregation's Rivington Street building. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:44, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


Isn't the correct spelling 'Romanian', without 'u'? -- (talk) 08:24, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

The English spelling has varied over the years. "Roumanian", "Rumanian" and "Romanian" have all been used. I'm assuming that "Roumanian" is what was used by the original congregation. --Khajidha (talk) 11:13, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
That's very interesting. Thanks for clearing that up. (talk) 11:33, 20 June 2011 (UTC)