# Talk:James Charnley House

I found the following source(s) via JSTOR (unless otherwise noted), I will add some info if I get a chance.

Morgan, Keith. "The Charnley-Persky House: Architectural History and the Society (in Editorial)," The Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 54, No. 3. (Sep., 1995), pp. 276-277.
IvoShandor 14:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:James Charnley House/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 03:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs) 12:34, 2 October 2025 (UTC)
I'll get to this shortly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:34, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

Images appropriately licensed
File:Charnley-Persky House, Astor Street and Schiller Street, Gold Coast, Chicago, IL - 54193898232.jpg seems rather redundant to the image in the infobox
Removed. - EG
Are any photos of the interior available?
Unfortunately, not on Commons. - EG
Earwig reports 28%, copyvio unlikely
The first use of cite 9 doesn't support the text
The source says "Palmer did indeed build a rental house on the south side of Schiller between the Charnley house and the lake". This is referring to that mansion. - EG
The Palmer Mansion was not a rental property. It also predates Charnley House by about a half-decade or so.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 07:44, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
@Sturmvogel 66, fair enough. I removed that ref. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:39, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
Cite 30 calls Wright Sullivan's apprentice, not draftsman
I changed it to "who worked under Adler & Sullivan". Other sources in the article referred to him as a draftsman (e.g. Architect magazine), but I changed it to reduce confusion. - EG
Explain the Blue Book for readers who first think of a pricing guide
Done. - EG
Vincy, typo for Vinci?
Oops, fixed. - EG
Cite 130 doesn't support the statement
I've removed this. The source says "Given the shallowness of the lot and the apparent desire for an axial entrance, most of the stairs leading to the raised main floor were placed within the house." It does partially support the fact that the stairs were inside, but my interpretation of the why was incorrect, so I removed that bit. However, this is already in the interior section, making the rest of the sentence unnecessary. - EG
I'd suggest combining these two sentences with an "although" in the middle The house's design was extensively covered in architectural publications starting in the 1930s,[99] After 1970, many architectural publications did not pay much attention to the design.
Done. - EG
Spot checked cites 44, 60, 82, 91, 135--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:25, 17 October 2025 (UTC)
Thanks for the review @Sturmvogel 66:. I've addressed or replied to all these now. Epicgenius (talk) 01:01, 17 October 2025 (UTC)