Wikipedia

Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in Philadelphia

(Redirected from Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania)
Latest comment: 7 years ago by Fuortu in topic Requested move 23 November 2016
Learn more about this page

Reorganizing into geographical areas of the city edit

Latest comment: 15 years ago22 comments4 people in discussion

As I just commented at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#Splitting a single city, I believe that this Philadelphia NRHP list should be reorganized into geographical districts rather than split into overlapping alphabetical "divisions".

As noted by Nyttend, there are geo districts very well defined at [this Philadelphia neighborhoods page].

I think that the way to proceed is to create smaller list articles:

  1. NRHP listings in Far Northeast, Philadelphia
  2. NRHP listings in Lower Northeast, Philadelphia
  3. NRHP listings in Center City, Philadelphia
  4. NRHP listings in South, Philadelphia
  5. NRHP listings in South West, Philadelphia
  6. NRHP listings in West, Philadelphia
  7. NRHP listings in North, Philadelphia
  8. NRHP listings in Upper North, Philadelphia
  9. NRHP listings in North West, Philadelphia
  10. NRHP listings in Oak Lane, Philadelphia
  11. NRHP listings in Frankford/Kensington, Philadelphia

and to split the big list-table into those 11. Perhaps that name list needs to be refined. Who knows Philadelphia at all, to help with some rough, imperfect division into those rough areas? I could do it using Google maps but it would take me longer. Comments? doncram (talk) 16:57, 5 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

I just took a look at that UPenn site, and the map there is wrong. A better reference is the List of Philadelphia neighborhoods article here in wikipedia.--BillFlis (talk) 18:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I believe I found a better map on page 21 of this PDF. --​​​​D.B.talk•contribs 18:43, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I think you'll find a disproportionate number (I'd guess a third to a half) of NRHPs in Center City, Philadelphia, which contains all of William Penn's original city. Of the 64 NHLs in Philadelphia, at least 37 are in CC. If you're going to go geo, I think a better grouping would be the seven broader divisions you'll find in the template at the bottom of the CC article:
  1. NRHP listings in Northeast Philadelphia (includes Lower and Upper Northeast, Frankford, Kensington)
  2. NRHP listings in Center City, Philadelphia
  3. NRHP listings in South Philadelphia
  4. NRHP listings in Southwest Philadelphia
  5. NRHP listings in West Philadelphia
  6. NRHP listings in North Philadelphia (includes North, Upper North, Oak Lane)
  7. NRHP listings in Northwest Philadelphia

--BillFlis (talk) 20:51, 5 January 2009 (UTC) (Philly native)Reply

Okay, and i notice u revised the Center City neighborhood name to be better, relative to how it was proposed in other discussion. doncram (talk) 05:00, 6 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
Okay, how about just beginning to classify the listings in their current alphabetically-organized tables. I added a column for neighborhood into National Register of Historic Places listings in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, A-E and began identifying neighborhoods for a few. It's harder for a non-local to do this, especially as the only official neighborhood maps i know of (linked in reference i added) don't allow zoom in for detail on defining edges. But maybe it is enough for others to classify them, all at once or over time. Then eventually the lists could be reorganized into geo groupings. doncram (talk) 11:13, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I'm adding neighborhoods to Pittsburgh currently or I'd help. I was, however, able to draw the borders into Google Earth and was able to export it, if you would like the file. I believe the borders are fairly accurate and should make it easier. --​​​​D.B.talk•contribs 18:04, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I'm working on identifying neighborhoods in the Baltimore list, where there's just pugdog and me. It's a bit shorter, and the maps for its 9 districts are easier to read, so maybe i can get it categorized without that tool, which i don't know how to begin to use. By all means, if someone else would please go ahead and do the district identifications in this Philly list using DTB's method, that would be great. By the way, it seems strategic to focus on identifying neighborhoods for all NRHPs outside of the central district. After the non-central ones are moved out to separate list-articles, it will be easy to recheck the google map and verify that all those remaining are in the central district, and/or kick out any stragglers. doncram (talk) 01:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

how many and what are names of official planning districts anyhow? edit

 
Version at List of Philadelphia neighborhoods with 12 districts including Kensington

Compare this Version with 11 districts including Frankford/Kensington vs. the one pictured at right. Are there 11 or 12 planning districts? Depends if Northwest is one, or if there are 2: Roxborough/Manayunk vs. Germantown/Chestnut Hill. Also, is one named Kensington or is that named Frankford/Kensington (or should it be called Greater Kensington as used in List of Philadelphia neighborhoods)? doncram (talk) 19:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC) Superscript textReply

The 12-district version map is by the city's official planning commission, and judging by the other maps that they have (lots of official boundaries), I'm guessing that this is the official layout. Not to say that the idea of "neighborhoods" is bad, but if we want to divide by the city's official districts, we really need to go with the 12-district version map from philaplanning.org. Nyttend (talk) 19:41, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
Okay, yes, drilling down from http://www.philaplanning.org's map section at left, you can get to this map of 12 "Planning Analysis Sections" of the city, which line up with image at right. That map doesn't state the names of the sections though. doncram (talk) 20:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I posted a link to a PDF from the planning commission in the discussion above. Page 21 of that document has a really nice map with labels and the names of streets the make up the borders. --​​​​D.B.talk•contribs 20:12, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
Okay, yes, that is very good, that p. 21 map should do pretty well for identifying the boundaries. The PDF is 14MB, takes a few minutes to download. It gives "Bridesburg, Kensington, Richmond" as the name of that one district. doncram (talk) 20:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
We should emphasize here that we're using the Planning Commission's defs of the neighborhoods, because, for example, this "Kensington" (which I might call "Greater Kensington") doesn't match up with Kensington, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Possibly the same is true for Center City Philadelphia, which gives two possible northern boundary streets.--BillFlis (talk) 21:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I agree then that neither "Kensington" nor "Greater Kensington" should be used. Perhaps our district label for that one should be "B,K,S" or "Kensington PAS" with a wikilink to a new article on the Bridesburg, Kensington, Richmond Planning Analysis Section of Philadelphia, or, perhaps better, to a "B, K, S" section in a new article on the "Planning districts of Philadelphia". There is 1990 and 2000 population data and other info available on each of those PAS districts. The article could have a section for each district and include the population info and describe the borders, for a start. How about that? doncram (talk) 23:08, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I'm not sure that we have as much of a conflict as (if I understand you rightly) some of you are thinking — are these districts really official neighborhoods? It seems that they've borrowed the names of neighborhoods to describe districts that are created for statistical and probably other reasons — almost like the city's version of census-designated places. Am I correct, BillFlis? Do the districts have any power? Do these district boundaries have any significance in average daily life? You know, there are some times when I wish I'd travelled more, so I wasn't so clueless about so many places...:-) Nyttend (talk) 23:49, 8 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I didn't see any conflict at all. BillFlis is definitely right that the districts used for partition and/or display in a location column should be very clearly identified as being what they are. I defer to those with more local expertise to choose what the labels for districts should be. And perhaps the one district could be called simply "Kensington" after all, especially if each usage is wikilinked to an article that defines it. Anyhow, i'll pretty much opt out now as there seems to be plenty of expertise here. Enjoy. doncram (talk) 01:55, 10 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I have edited my previous post suggesting 7 "districts" to show that they already have wikiarticles.--BillFlis (talk) 13:07, 10 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

If there are no objections, I liked to start marking off which one of 7 district (and possibly neighborhood) that each site is in. --​​​​D.B.talk•contribs 17:47, 10 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

I hope you would please go ahead with that, if you are still willing. I'd be happy to help rearrange the material into the 7 area articles, once you've identified the neighborhood for most of them. List of RHPs in Baltimore got finished well enough for now, already, by the way. doncram (talk) 08:02, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I've sorta started doing them offline (in Notepad) and I can, if you want, start the lists with what I have done already. --​​​​D.B.talk•contribs 15:17, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply
I've been adding the districts to the (alphabetically sorted) articles here in wikipedia. Please don't discard my work!--BillFlis (talk) 16:23, 23 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 23 November 2016 edit

Latest comment: 7 years ago10 comments10 people in discussion
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) Fuortu (talk) 11:27, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

– Per WP:USPLACE. These are unambiguous. I made an exhaustive search of Wikipedia articles, and the "city, state," convention is almost entirely exclusive to WikiProject NRHP and disambiguation pages. Categories have also recently stopped using them. The city, state, convention is also by no means uniformly followed: See NRHP listing in Chicago, Baltimore, St. Louis. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 06:06, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Support Seems like a no-brainer to me, although there may be a reason to keep as is that I'm not aware of. I will add a notice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places to see what the NRHP project folks think. Andrew Jameson (talk) 11:24, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Rename all, remove excessive disambiguation and match main articles. "in Phoenix" does not need disambiguation the way "Phoenix" alone does. Timrollpickering 12:07, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose - we most certainly do need disambiguation. There are at least 5 Philadelphias in various US states... so the reader needs to be told which Philadelphia (etc) our list is discussing. Blueboar (talk) 12:16, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply
In general, this whole affair looks like yet another example of "busy work" and not exactly something that's going to move the encyclopedia forward. Specifically, common sense tells me that Philadelphia, Mississippi doesn't have a large number of NRHP listings necessitating a separate list versus Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and that we're going to unduly confuse people by doing this (in fact, Neshoba County doesn't even have its own list, but rather it's a section of the Mississippi state list). RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 11:40, 24 November 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Support. All of the cities listed are the primary topics for their name, and are the exceptions listed at WP:USPLACE for requiring a state name in their article title. With categories dropping state names, it only seems right to do it here per WP:CONSISTENCY. Nohomersryan (talk) 19:01, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Support. It makes sense to rename these to match the main articles and the categories. I don't see a good reason to have these lists follow a different standard than everything else, and this isn't the place to re-litigate the discussion that led to the categories being renamed (or USPLACE in general). TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 20:52, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Support per nom, as well as avoiding overprecision per WP:PRECISE and WP:CONCISE. Station1 (talk) 05:31, 24 November 2016 (UTC)Reply
  • Support per WP:CONCISE. Calidum ¤ 03:42, 25 November 2016 (UTC)Reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:National_Register_of_Historic_Places_listings_in_Philadelphia&oldid=1209332252"