Talk:Our Lady of Lourdes Catholic Church (Minneapolis, Minnesota)

message: I removed the following from the article:
"The church became a National Historic Landmark in 1934. (reference: )"
The source document (the Minneapolis Public Library web site) says, "The church was nominated to the National Historic Registry (sic) in 1934", but the National Register didn't even come into existence until 1966.  I'm not sure what kind of designation it got in 1934, but I think the library source is wrong.  In any case, the building isn't currently listed as a National Historic Landmark.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 02:36, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Hello, Elkman. I am more than happy to remove the designation, the infobox and all claims to the building being historical, if that is what is borne out in the facts. I also think we need to proceed with caution. The church is not listed as a contributing property either (no Y in that field at MNHS). The Minneapolis Public Library, the church itself, and Emporis all say it was made a U.S. landmark in 1934. The Dept. of the Interior made a Historic American Building Survey (images  1, 2) in 1934. What would you suggest? I am happy to telephone the government on Monday if that would help. -Susanlesch 02:54, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * Hmm.  I'd suggest giving the Minnesota Historical Society a call.  (This page has a contact number for the library.)  The National Park Service has a contact number for a regional office in Omaha listed here.  I don't have any strong feelings about this, but it seems like there's a disconnect when the official list of National Historic Landmarks differs from what three references are saying.  If you're willing to call the Historical Society or the National Park Service, hopefully someone will provide an answer and some more explanation.  Their library is open until 8 pm Tuesday evening, so I could conceivably go down there after work and see if they have the National Register nomination forms in the library.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 03:56, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Surely, I will try to telephone MNHS and the Park Service this week and report back. Best. -Susanlesch 05:43, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Anyone reading this doesn't have to believe me but based on phone conversations I am convinced that Elkman is correct, Our Lady of Lourdes is not a U.S. landmark. The Dept. of Interior recorded the building but their project could have been more like WPA employment than part of designating the church a landmark. The Minneapolis Public Library, the church, and Emporis may all be mistaken. By the way, I heard two people say that the MNHS Register database is being double checked for errors, and someday we may see that missing Y. I am convinced Our Lady of Lourdes is a contributing property, and have no plans to remove the infobox. Thank you for the correction. -Susanlesch 18:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: * Thanks for checking on that.  The WPA employment program sounds like the Historic American Buildings Survey, which was founded as a program to create work for out-of-work architects and draftsmen during the Great Depression.  It's been a useful source for historic preservation, and it also functions as a good source of photos for Wikipedia.  --Elkman (Elkspeak) 19:10, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

text: May want to just request the nomination form (if you can't find it at the library), see . Make sure you request the original form from the 1971 nomination and the documentation from the 1991 reassessment. This should clear it up once and for all. IvoShandor 13:29, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: "The church teaches Christian beliefs, the morality and model for conduct taught by Jesus, the sacraments and prayer. Members believe in caring for the ill and those who are physically unable to attend services. The parish offers classes called faith formation for all ages."
Could this not be said for literally every Catholic church in the world? --Jfruh (talk) 13:06, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems very fluffy, almost advertorial. I say remove, reword, not sure if it really matters for this particular article what the church teaches. IvoShandor 13:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: *Vote to keep the sentence. -Susanlesch 23:49, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fluffy sentence