Talk:Chautauqua Institution

Start quality or higher

I just replaced "unassessed" status by Start quality rating for this article, for both WP:NRHP and WP:NY. It could be higher, but it is at least Start, IMO. doncram 21:30, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Name of historic district

I beg to differ with doncram on his recent change to name of the hisoric district. The underlying National Register listing is for Chautauqua Institution Historic District.[1] Anyway it better describes the district, since even just locally Chautauqua refers to many things: the county, the town, the lake, the post office, the institution, the hamlet (which extends outside the gate), etc. And yes, I spent 4 summers on the grounds. clariosophic (talk) 12:05, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Summary of a response elsewhere: There are frequently differences between the NRHP names for sites (as reported from nris by Elkman's infobox generator), vs. the NHL program names for sites (as given in individual NHL webpages linked in articles, which is usually the same as the NHL name in the NPS PDF listing of all the NHL sites, linked at bottom of List of National Historic Landmarks in New York). And often current common names for sites are different than when the NHL was declared. I have consistently gone to the NHL name for sites, for use in the NRHP infoboxes, to reflect NHL program usage, at times over-riding the NRHP name. Right now, the NHL name for the site in both NHL sources is "Chautauqua Historic District", and I think that it is fair to represent that that is the NHL name for the site, by showing it in the infobox and as an alternate name (used by some, the NHL people) in the text. I do think there could be a problem with the NHL program name. I see that the "Chautauqua Institution Historic District" name was used in the NRHP registration document linked in the article. Perhaps the NHL program should have used that. I wonder, do you want to document that Chautauqua Institution Historic District is the common name or that it should be the NHL name, for correspondence with the NPS? I would be happy to work with you on that. And, if you wanted to footnote or otherwise indicate in the text that the NHL program and/or other outsiders are using an incorrect name, that would be fine. However I would appreciate being able to keep Chautauqua Historic District listed as the NHL name for the place in the NHL/NRHP infobox. This is consistent with all other NYS NHL names in the List of National Historic Landmarks in New York article and in the NHL/NRHP infoboxes of all the sites it covers, I believe. doncram (talk) 22:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

The NRHP name was/is Chautauqua Institution Historic District[2].

I had acknowledged that specific point already. But I do bow to your opinion that the NHL program had it wrong, however. My gradual change is in part due to your consistent view, to yet another source just added to the article (the coffee-table one, not properly developed yet) also calling it Chautauqua Institution, and also to my noting more outright errors in NHL webpage names for sites in editing other NHL articles. I have been corresponding with the NPS about them but my list has been growing and recently they have not been responding. So i now agree with the thrust of your concern that the "Chautauqua Historic District" name ought to be dropped entirely from the article (except as the title of the NHL webpage in its reference footnote), in favor of Chautauqua Institution Historic District. I agree also with the sense of your recent name change in the article. I only further edited it to go further along, is that acceptable to you? I note my edit leaves perhaps undue prominence for NRHP and NHL in the first paragraph, but I did it that way to convey accurately that the NRHP name is Chautauqua Institution Historic District and then that district was also designated an NHL, without going into the NHL name being different. Perhaps that could be phrased better? Please go ahead and try to improve in any way to reduce the prominence of NRHP and NHL up front or make other improvements. Sincerely, doncram (talk) 22:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

There are other Chautauqua historic districts. One in Norman, Oklahoma,[http://www.ci.norman.ok.us/planning/Revitalization/Historic_District.htm}, another in Colorado, Colorado Chautauqua is also an NHL, and closer to home is the Point Chauququa Historic District just down the road. Anyway I think the full name needs to be an aka in the article and in the infobox. There is also a Chautauqua Park Historic District in Des Moines, Iowa, clariosophic (talk) 21:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

clariosophic (talk) 21:53, 14 February 2008 (UTC) clariosophic (talk) 22:05, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Seems those would be appropriate to add as "See also" links in the article, even where they may be red-links for the moment (although then why not create a quick stub article?). doncram (talk) 22:39, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

"town gown" relations of Chautauqua Institution with neighbors

A non-logged in user added the following statement to the article, which another editor or I will strike from the article because it is not encyclopedic and is not sourced. The statement was: "They do need manners in the local community where they treat the locals rudely. There is a real town and gown situaltion which makes the opening of the season down right unpleasant." I am not averse to the article describing "town vs. gown" issues in the article if there are adequate, reliable sources such as local newspaper articles available. However, my quick Google News searches on "Chautauqua Institution town" and "Chautauqua Institution" bring up local newspaper articles about concerts and speakers at the Chautauqua, but no examples of any issues between locals and the Chautauqua. So, while the non-logged-in user may have valid complaints, those seem not to be Wikipedia-notable. (This is way off-topic for wikipedia: Perhaps you need to write letters to the editor of local newspapers, or raise your complaints in some other venue?) doncram (talk) 19:53, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Getting the distinct impression that Wikipedia does not care about present day or the history of the Chautauqua. That's sad. Wikipedia obviously has an agenda. If your intention is to redefine what a Chautauqua is then I would suggest all references and information about all existing Chautauqua's be removed from Wikipedia entirely. May I suggest a new topic, say the dawn of multicultural socialism. That should keep you entertained for a while. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.118.118.231 (talk) 04:49, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Coordinate error

{{geodata-check}}

The following coordinate fixes are needed for —221.12.22.208 (talk) 19:54, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

You haven't said what you think is wrong with the coordinates in the article, and they appear to be correct. If you still think that the coordinates are erroneous, you'll need to give a clear explanation of the error. Deor (talk) 21:21, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Internet Archive Bot link not better

I just reverted an edit by the internet archive bot. It replaced a valid google books link with an inferior archive.org link. Philoserf (talk) 22:51, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Others have noticed this issue and it has been raised with the bot operator. —¿philoserf? (talk) 07:43, 4 June 2020 (UTC)