Congregation Beth Israel (New Orleans) has been listed as one of the Philosophy and religion good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 7, 2010 Good article nominee Listed
	A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the " Did you know?" column on July 31, 2008. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Congregation Beth Israel of New Orleans, Louisiana, severely flooded after Hurricane Katrina in 2005, was flooded again in 2007?

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Judaism Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States: Louisiana / New Orleans Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Louisiana (assessed as Low-importance). This article is supported by WikiProject Louisiana - New Orleans (assessed as Low-importance).

This review is transcluded from Talk:Congregation Beth Israel (New Orleans, Louisiana)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:55, 5 March 2010 (UTC) reply

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   In the lead, and in the Recent events section, "As of 2010, the congregation was sharing space in Gates of Prayer's building", shouldn't it be ---> "As of 2010, the congregation has been sharing space in Gates of Prayer's building"? Same sections, if this ---> "The rabbi was Uri Topolsky" is part of the "As of 2010" sentence then it should be "The rabbi is Uri Topolsky". If not, then it's fine as it is. In the Hurricane Katrina and aftermath section, this sentence ---> "In the wake of Katrina another 50 member families left New Orleans and the congregation" reads very odd. In the Recent events section, "...in the summer Topolsky started a recruitment campaign, placing an advertisement in New York's The Jewish Week newspaper" ---> "...in the summer Topolsky started a recruitment campaign, placing an advertisement in the New York newspaper The Jewish Week", works better.

   Check.

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   In the lead, and in the History section, should this ---> "1903/1904" be formatted like that? In the Hurricane Katrina and aftermath section, it would be best if "Federal Emergency Management Agency" was followed by ---> (FEMA), I mean, I know what it means, but how 'bout your reader. Same section, "Torah" and "siddurs" should be linked once.

   Half-check.

   Check.

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   There appears to be a dead link.

   Check.

   B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:55, 5 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for your thorough review. Responding to the issues you've raised:

• In the lead, and in the Recent events section, "As of 2010, the congregation was sharing space in Gates of Prayer's building", shouldn't it be ---> "As of 2010, the congregation has been sharing space in Gates of Prayer's building"? Same sections, if this ---> "The rabbi was Uri Topolsky" is part of the "As of 2010" sentence then it should be "The rabbi is Uri Topolsky". If not, then it's fine as it is.

Fixed.

Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:19, 7 March 2010 (UTC) reply

• In the Hurricane Katrina and aftermath section, this sentence ---> "In the wake of Katrina another 50 member families left New Orleans and the congregation" reads very odd.

I've re-worded it in a way that I hope is more clear.

Yeah, it reads better, thanks for fixing it.

• In the Recent events section, "...in the summer Topolsky started a recruitment campaign, placing an advertisement in New York's The Jewish Week newspaper" ---> "...in the summer Topolsky started a recruitment campaign, placing an advertisement in the New York newspaper The Jewish Week", works better.

Changed, per your improved wording.

Check.

• In the lead, and in the History section, should this ---> "1903/1904" be formatted like that?

Fixed.

Check.

• In the Hurricane Katrina and aftermath section, it would be best if "Federal Emergency Management Agency" was followed by ---> (FEMA), I mean, I know what it means, but how 'bout your reader.

Fixed.

Check.

• Same section, "Torah" and "siddurs" should be linked once.

Fixed, I believe.

"Torah" is still linked twice.

Oops! Fixed now.

Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:59, 7 March 2010 (UTC) reply

I think that covers all of it. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:37, 7 March 2010 (UTC) reply

One minor thing. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:19, 7 March 2010 (UTC) reply

OK, I think I've got it all now. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:42, 7 March 2010 (UTC) reply

You have, and thank you for being patient with this review. Anyways, thank you to Jayg for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:59, 7 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you! Jayjg ^(talk) 23:21, 7 March 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Congregation Beth Israel (New Orleans). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110811124241/http://washingtonjewishweek.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=7290&SectionID=4&SubSectionID=4&S=1 to http://www.washingtonjewishweek.com/main.asp?Search=1&ArticleID=7290&SectionID=4&SubSectionID=4&S=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402063947/http://www.isjl.org/history/archive/la/HistoryofOrthodoxCongregations.htm to http://www.isjl.org/history/archive/la/HistoryofOrthodoxCongregations.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071018074608/http://www.ou.org/oupr/2006/katrinatorah66.htm to http://www.ou.org/oupr/2006/katrinatorah66.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110728053855/http://starofdavidfoundation.org/newsletters/nl1/nl1-4.html to http://starofdavidfoundation.org/newsletters/nl1/nl1-4.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{ source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 04:42, 12 May 2017 (UTC) reply