Deletion of Temple Emanuel (St. Louis, Missouri)

Comment: the architecture-related parts of the article to William Bernoudy, delete the rest. The architecture of the synagogue building seems to be notable, so it could be effectively covered in the article about architect Bernoudy. Otherwise, I don't see evidence of notability for the synagogue. I've looked at all of the "sources" cited in the article and I find that many of them are merely directories of synagogues -- listing in a lot of directories does not make this synagogue notable. Other than the architecture, the only possible claims of notability here are (1) the sourced indication that the temple conducts most of its services on Sunday morning, which turns out not to be true -- the website shows services on Friday evenings and religious education programs on Sundays, and (2) providing a venue for an interesting photo exhibition (that's more about the photography than it is about the synagogue -- |notability is not inherited). Most of the article is trivia that should be expunged
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: Notable for being a fairly large (300 families) for a Reform Jewish temple, and because of its architectural significance (both in design/shape and notability of the architect - and yes, this is another exception to ).  Those are the two most used reasons for claiming notability of houses of worship.  I added "The Temple is notable not only for its size, but for its unique modern architecture." to the lead
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)