Talk:Washington National Cathedral

message: There are several nouns not yet linked. Is this an oversight? --Wetman 02:30, 15 February 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikify

message: Who does it belong to? Which organizations fund it? David.Monniaux 13:32, 4 April 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The Episcopal Diocese of Washington owns and funds the Cathedral Church of Saints Peter and Paul from its own fundraising pools, like any other Roman Catholic and Episcopal cathedral in the United States.  --Gerald Farinas 13:50, 4 April 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's what I thought (I know very well that the US government is not supposed to fund religions). Then, I think this should be noted in the article, because people unfamiliar with the US may get the false impression that this "National" cathedral is somewhat publicly funded. I added a sentence to that effect. David.Monniaux 15:01, 4 April 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record... Washington National Cathedral is operated by an organization called the Protestant Episcopal Cathedral Foundation, not the Episcopal Diocese of Washington D.C. It is funded entirely by private donations, gifts, bequests, memberships in the National Cathedral Association and proceeds from the Cathedral gift shops. 69.140.206.138 02:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: WNC is supported by the National Cathedral Association, a non-profit organization to raise money for the Episcopal Churich in America. The government, however, did provide support for the early stages of building it. 71.231.91.187 14:17, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ownership?

message: Does anyone else find it amusing that this article about a single cathedral is almost as long as the article about the entire Church of England? Contrafool 03:27, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You could say the same thing about Canterbury Cathedral.  But at any rate, it's wikipedia, so if you think an article is too short, get going and add to it!  Cheers, brother. 24.91.244.221 (talk) 00:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Amusing

message: "In addition, a memorial service for Harry Truman took place at National Cathedral, which foreign dignitaries attended because of the advanced age of his wife, Bess." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.122.141.9 (talk) 20:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: caption makes no sense

message: Some pictures & info. if needs be.
.  I already know it is in the article.  Thanks, CarpD 4/24/07 — Preceding undated comment added 21:44, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Darth Vadar

message: I've twice reverted an observation that the cathedral's 83 years construction time is similar to the human lifespan simply because it's not at all relevant to the topic of the article. -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpmullins (talk • contribs) 14:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 83 years construction time

message: I found some great historical photos of the Cathedral (thanks to the LOC), thinking it would be a nice addition to the article's history section. Unfortunately, there's doesn't appear to be one at the moment. That's surprising, considering the building's significance. I'm a history nerd, but also a nerd that has 1.3 million items on my WikiToDoList. I just thought it should be mentioned in case someone wants to take on the task. (hope this doesn't make me look lazy) APK is not a Womanizer 15:44, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm doubtful they ever actually worked up any drawings of alternate designs; the choice of Gothic was not done on the basis of a competition. As far as I know, they decided on Gothic before they approached Bodley. Mangoe (talk) 15:11, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: History

message: This image appears at the top of the Architecture section. Surely the two massive stone columns (or whatever the correct term is) are in reality straight, not severely bowed as they appear in this photograph. The distortion is unfortunate, because the photograph is good otherwise.
I have left  that someone who knows how to use Photoshop remove the distortion. If that is not done, I think this image should be removed from this article. The distortion is so severe that it detracts and distracts from the article rather than enhancing it.--Jim10701 (talk) 03:21, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  severely distorted image 

message: The cathedral has a magnificent carillon, which is controlled somewhat like an organ, a keyboard that is connected to wires that ring the bells.  A write-up on this would be a nice addition to the Music section.  There was a recent (Nov 2011) article on this in the Wash. Post.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.43.86.70 (talk) 18:16, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  info on carillon 

message: Until a relatively short time ago, the only members of the cathedral parish were the bishop and his family, and the dean and his family. This was ended in 2006, and the cathedral started reporting membership figures the following year. However as one can see by looking up the cathedral on this page (note that you cannot permalink the charts generated) there is a certain ramp-up in the membership numbers; one cannot really tell how much of the week-to-week attendance represents people who treat this as their main parish, but comparison with other parishes suggests that it's probably well in excess of attendance (usually membership is two to three times ASA). I have reported the 2009 ASA number as notable and reliable (ASA is an actual head count of people in the church) rather than the probably misleading membership number. Mangoe (talk) 14:34, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  On attendance and membership 

message: How and when did it gain the nickname (if it is that) of the 'National Cathedral? Is it because it's in DC? Seems odd since there are other cathedrals in DC as well. 138.162.128.52 (talk) 14:35, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  National Cathedral 

message: How many bells are there in towers? - Prücsök (talk) 20:45, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: See under "Music".  There are 10 bells in the ring and 53 in the carillon. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 21:05, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

text: An editor fixed it the next day. Ken Gallager (talk) 21:04, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bells 

message: I have just deleted a paragraph commemorating the large contributions by Frank Q. Nation, of the extraction empire.  An Internet search showed no mention of him except this article.  I take the impudent suggestion that it is on his account that the church is called National! and that he spent many happy summer vacations in the crypt of Notre Dame de Paris as a thumb on the nose.  Please don't let this information back in without firm documentation, which I doubt we will see.
I also deleted the challenge to the mention of intentional flaws because back in my student days (when the Internet was the Arpanet) a professor explained to us in class that the Parthenon doesn't have a straight line in it anywhere. J S Ayer (talk) 01:16, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for removing the vandalism. But your removal of the "original research" tag was inappropriate. There is no citation to a reliable source, making it original research. Sundayclose (talk) 02:19, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deleting apparent mischief 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* Lawrence Saint Moses Closeup.JPG
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:22, 23 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: I'm confused about the purpose of the section "Spiritual home for the nation". It seems like the title of the section is making a claim and then trying to support that claim in the details. However, I think designating it as a "spiritual home for the nation" is arbitrary and implies the cathedral is important to people of all religions, which doesn't seem to be the case. I would change the title of that section, but I don't understand what point that particular section is trying to make as it stands. Pythagimedes (talk) 20:31, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand what you mean, User:Pythagimedes. I'm not sure if this is any better, but I've changed the section to "National role" since the section seems to be about the fact that the Cathedral sees itself or is seen by others as having a significant albeit unofficial role in national life.Ltwin (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Spiritual home for the nation"? 

message: I'm working on an article for the designer of the space window and I noticed the picture on file here is pretty poor quality. Our archives uploaded a slightly better one, but I didn't want to be presumptuous and change it. Sharris2000 (talk) 19:05, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Space window picture 

message: The Cathedral should use the Infobox church and put the Infobox NRHP below it. A bunch of the other articles of historic churches and cathedrals are formatted like this (Example: Basilica of the National Shrine of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary), so it'd make things more consistent and allow for more information to be readily accessible via the infobox. TheFriendlyFas2 (talk) 19:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox