Talk:St. Paul's Chapel

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

National Register of Historic Places High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anglicanism Low‑importance

	St. Paul's Chapel is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AnglicanismWikipedia:WikiProject AnglicanismTemplate:WikiProject AnglicanismAnglicanism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture

	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Fair use rationale for Image:StPaulsChapel1.jpg[edit]

Image:StPaulsChapel1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I note that Image:StPaulsChapel1.jpg is first and foremost a HABS photo, which was used by the NYU site that someone took it from for uploading. So we can upload the original high-quality HABS photo properly, and it is fine for this low-quality image copy to be deleted. The HABS photo is here. Anyone know how to communicate that the image can be deleted, to the bot? doncram (talk) 03:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Been a long time since I've done any editing on here other than reverting vandalism occassionally but I think all you need to do is edit the description on the image page and just type delete and their bot should remove the image in a day or two. Dennis (talk) 14:26, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, didn't see your reply before i just went and deleted the bot-added tag. I amended the Image description to assert it is licensed as public domain. Hopefully this works, and don't need to delete this one only to add the same thing elsewhere. doncram (talk) 09:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:StPaulsChapel3.jpg[edit]

Image:StPaulsChapel3.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 05:24, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I responded with fair use rationale in the image page and provided further comment on its talk page. Hopefully this will resolve it. doncram (talk) 09:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I put in a new, free photo instead dm (talk) 03:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Better pic for box?[edit]

The commonscat has new pictures of the facade. Some are mine, and I wonder whether someone else would like to decide whether any of them should replace what we've got now. Jim.henderson (talk) 04:41, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

September 11, 2001[edit]

This section should be made into a separate article, it's taking too much space in an article dedicated to a Church building of 250 years of history. We should not be driven with emotions, as was clearly the case here. Pertaining information can be mentioned in 1-2 sentences. --Гатерас (talk) 02:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on St. Paul's Chapel. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061202231256/http://www.saintpaulschapel.org:80/in_depth/news/article_775.shtml to http://www.saintpaulschapel.org/in_depth/news/article_775.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:17, 15 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]