Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places

Add discussion
Active discussions
WikiProject National Register of Historic Places (Rated Project-class)
This page is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Stock post message.svg To-do:


Development
Images
Maintenance


Madison biggest NHL?Edit

“In 2006, the majority of Madison's downtown area was designated the largest contiguous National Historic Landmark in the United States—133 blocks of the downtown area is known as the Madison Historic Landmark District” [pipelinked to Madison Historic District (Madison, Indiana) ] ...can this be true? I thought there were some huge ones in Alaska and in Montana. That’s from Madison, Indiana article, which i looked while watching Madison (film) movie from 2005 on Amazon Prime. —Doncram (talk) 06:58, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Looks like peacock language. There are probably any number of NHLs that are larger than the Madison Historic District, which the nomination says is about 2,000 acres (Alaska's Cape Krusenstern is >600,000 acres). Even claim of the largest number of resources (more than 2000) is probably suspect as well -- I wouldn't be surprised if there are other urban districts with comparable resource counts, and large archaeological districts may also have more. Magic♪piano 20:31, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Could be highly couching the phrasing - it could well mean that it's the largest out of all of the NHLs where the entire area is contiguous, but even if true, it seems so couched with qualifying things that I don't know that it's worthy of mentioning in the article. Hog Farm Talk 20:42, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Even if you disallow archaeological districts with otherwise non-contiguous features (as opposed to districts composed of discontiguous sections), the Lincoln Historic District (Lincoln, New Mexico) is 2348 contiguous acres, more than Madison's ~2150. Valley Forge is also larger; it is basically contiguous, although the map in the nom is drawn to exclude the Schuylkill River, a feature separating a sliver of land from the bulk of the site. Magic♪piano 21:23, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
The claim is definitely meaningless puffery, then. Hog Farm Talk 21:31, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, this clarifies that it is not the largest in geographic area. Could it be largest in population or number of buildings or similar? I was also thinking of Savannah Historic District (Savannah, Georgia), a huge city area. Actually it is apparently approx. 1,300 acres (5.3 km2), but maybe has more structures/buildings/population. --Doncram (talk) 02:48, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
Lincoln Historic District article linked above states it has 48 structures. Valley Forge National Historical Park (1966-listed), per NRIS2013a version, has 2,515 acres (10.18 km2) with 25 contributing buildings and 4 contributing structures (and 2 contributing sites). Madison Historic District of Indiana (1973-listed) has 2,160 acres (8.7 km2) with 1666 contributing buildings, 12 contributing structures, and 14 contributing sites. Savannah Historic District (1966-listed) on 1300 acres had approx 1100 contributing buildings per NRIS2013a, and later 60 acres with 20 buildings or structures was added. So, hmm, it seems maybe not inaccurate to say Madison HD was in fact a huge district, a big deal, perhaps the biggest deal in NHLs and even in NRHPs up to 1973 at least. It would be nice to have reports/tables of NHLs and of NRHPs sortable by areas and by numbers of buildings/structures. --Doncram (talk) 03:55, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Dyas Hexagonal BarnEdit

It was noticed off-wiki that this building is actually octagonal. Is it possible to persuade the registry to correct the listing and name? Mangoe (talk) 18:25, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Was it really necessary to imply that I was being a jackass when my edit was just a bit of copy editing (tweaked the coordinates and a couple of citations)?
Trappist the monk (talk) 18:51, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Is this place listed?Edit

New article Shore Apartments has an uncited claim that it was added to the NRHP as NHL in 2014. I have confirmed that it is a contributing property of the Normandy Isles Historic District which was listed in 2008. But I can't find anything further about a 2014 listing. Everything else about the article looks legit, so I don't know the basis of this. MB 22:51, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

I added a {{citation needed}} tag to this dubious claim. Magicpiano went ahead and removed it (the dubious claim) from the article. The editor that created the article hasn't edited in three weeks. I'll keep an eye on the article in case they or someone else puts it back in. MB 05:45, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Tennessee NRHP templateEdit

Why is there no statewide NRHP template for Tennessee? I was just checking out the Bristol Virginia-Tennessee Slogan Sign, and saw one for the Commonwealth of Virginia, but not the Volunteer State. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 23:47, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Missing from county listing?Edit

The data for this house File:Jackson headquarters.png says that it is NRHP 67000027. But it isn't listed at National Register of Historic Places listings in Frederick County, Virginia. Why isn't it there? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 22:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Because it's in National Register of Historic Places listings in Winchester, Virginia. Magic♪piano 22:57, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, I didn't notice that the city had its own listing (usually only much larger cities have their own listing). Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:01, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
@Bubba73: Winchester's an independent city - it's not part of the county. See Independent city (United States). One of my favorite quirks of living in this beloved ol' Commonwealth of ours. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 02:54, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, I'd never heard of that before. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 03:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
The really strange thing about Virginia is that the independent cities are sometimes county seats (as Winchester is for Frederick County), despite not being part of them. I don't know any other state that does this. Magic♪piano 16:29, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Santuario de la Monserrate de Hormigueros and Casa de PeregrinosEdit

NRHPPR Hormigueros has a church and an article.
An editor named Luciferman with this edit, moved the article without discussion.
Editor was blocked a month later.
This is the form that shows the name of the church as "Santuario de la Monserrate de Hormigueros and Casa de Peregrinos".[1]
Can / should this be moved back to the name as it is seen on the NRHP form?
Cheers and Happy New Year. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 00:55, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

References

I don't think so. It looks like the status was upgraded in 1999 to a Basilica, so the name changed (24 years after the listing). It seems reasonable that the article is at the new/current name. The name/title on the infobox is the name when listed. The prose discusses it all. So I think it works as is. MB 01:21, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
OK. Thanks. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 02:08, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Navbox creation and replacement at state/county levelsEdit

Hey all, I've returned after a long WikiBreak, and have taken to creating navboxes at the state and county levels for those divisions lacking them (as well as for insular areas and associated states). I sifted through years of discussions regarding NRHP navboxes here and on NRHP template talkspaces. The general consensus has always seemed to be that state-specific navboxes (such as Template:National Register of Historic Places in Michigan) should be created and used on state NRHP pages and NRHP county lists; and that Template:National Register of Historic Places should be phased out of county-level lists and individual listing articles in favor of county-specific navboxes (such as Template:National Register of Historic Places listings in Keweenaw County, Michigan). This is also supported at the project MOS. This is something that has slowly been implemented in each state independently over the years, but I'm taking the initiative to start implementing it on a wide scale as this process has been very slow to roll out.

Some examples of navboxes I've created are Template:National Register of Historic Places in the Northern Mariana Islands, Template:National Register of Historic Places in Nebraska, and Template:NRHP in Sioux County, Nebraska.

Three points especially here:

  1. I hesitate to create county navboxes with an overwhelming number of redlinks. Should we hold off on those until articles are created, or should it not matter? In many states, the counties with the lowest percentage of articles created are the most populous ones-- the ones that will generate the most use.
  2. What should we do about counties and insular areas that only have, say, 1-3 listings? Should they even be given a new navbox, or should we just use the state (or next-highest division) one?
  3. Should we officially set a standard about how to handle counties or cities that get absolutely enormous? We can set the navbox to collapsed and/or split it. See Template:National Register of Historic Places listings in Wayne County, Michigan, which as the kids say these days is an absolute unit.

I should have said something here before starting this process, buuuuut.... I am doing so now. Thoughts, objections, comments? TCMemoire 19:37, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

I modified the template for Indianapolis/Marion County, which is also quite large, by grouping the listings by various categories such as residences, commercial, manufacturing, etc. To date, no one has complained about that change. Indyguy (talk) 20:31, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
Oh, this is a really great idea! That template looks much better this way. TCMemoire 01:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I like the state and county examples. Question: one county example you give uses "National Register of Historic Places listings in..." and another uses "NRHP in..."...should the naming be consistent?
For #2, I'd say use the next-highest division/state nav box. Schazjmd (talk) 01:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Great point. The existing state and county navboxes have not followed a consistent naming convention (see Nevada vs. Michigan vs. New Jersey)—we should set a standard there too. I followed New Jersey in using NRHP for its counties, solely to cut down on wordiness; for states and insular areas, I used the full name. TCMemoire 12:46, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Another point to bring up: although state and county are different, there are many things about these navboxes that should be standardized. One of these is the way county-level templates are organized. Some (like Oklahoma) group by the town, and this is the example provided on Template:NRHP navigation box; but this can quickly balloon the template, and in many places would result in 12+ rows even in rural areas. Although place names are more recognizable to users, my opinion is that it's better to do it by grouping them by NRHP type (as is done in the vast majority of counties already, like Alabama and my templates) or by the building/site type like Indyguy demonstrated, and as New Jersey does. TCMemoire 12:46, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

New listing / new article? Or not?Edit

Last week's new listings (1/14) includes a new Leelanau County, Michigan HD, listed as "Fishtown." It turns out that this HD is wholly contained within the 1975 NRHP Historic District Leland Historic District (Leland, Michigan). Per the new Fishtown nom:

The Fishtown Historic District is contained within the previously-listed Leland Historic District (1975). In 1975 local residents feared that both the commercial district of the Village of Leland and Fishtown would be negatively impacted by the new Harbor of Refuge, hence the boundaries drawn in 1975 include both. Fishtown, however, has long been a distinct area.

However, the 1975 Leland Historic District consists primarily of the Fishtown section. So. Question is, should the new 2022 listing have its own article, or should it be (remain) combined with the 1975 listing? Andrew Jameson (talk) 13:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

It could have a separate article is someone writes one with enough new information. There is no need to have a separate article; the existing article could be expanded a bit first to explain the new HD within the 1975 HD and why it was listed separately. MB 14:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Featured article review for Avery Coonley SchoolEdit

I have nominated Avery Coonley School for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm Talk 06:02, 22 January 2022 (UTC)