# Talk:Art's Auto

Looking through the NRHP photo and the current photos of the site, it is pretty clear that the front roofing and the false mansard roofing has been at least repainted. Given that the building was completed by 1928, it is certainly possible that asbestos shingles were used. Though later familiarized with the 1930s, they were present even the early 1900s and mixed with concrete to form "indestructible" shingles. Unlike modern shingles their life expectancy is actually over 50 years and the key factor is whether or not they get damp and deteriorate. If in fine condition, they do not need to be replaced, but given that some 80 years have passed and their is a clear color change from the 1976 to 2014 photos, its fair to say they were removed. Around the NRHP nomination time, the dangers of asbestos were becoming understood and its likely why this property included this specific reference. Pretty sure they are replaced or sealed and topped with some siding, but I do not have a reference for it. So that's as close as I can get with the renovation note. Google maps clearly shows that the garage doors have been removed and replaced with windows, but I cannot cite that either. Fun. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:36, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Art's Auto/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Wizardman (talk · contribs) 02:22, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll review this article shortly. Wizardman 02:22, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Here are the issues I found:

"stands on a triangular lot and intersected by Main Street and Lonsdale Avenue," rm and
"This attempt to revitalize and preserve historic sites was not unique, more than 4000 such organizations existed by 1977 to re-use or save the site from destruction" The way it's written makes it sound like 4,000 organizations sprang up to help Art's Auto, rather than historical preservation in general; reword.
"has continued to retain its the historic features" rm the
Article on hold, will pass when the issues are fixed. Wizardman 03:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Wizardman - Thanks and good catch with the "site" instead of "sites", but I also rectified it by clarifying this as a local attempt amidst the 4,000+ organizations nationwide. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:26, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Article reads better there now, so it now passes GA status. Wizardman 03:10, 18 February 2015 (UTC)