Category talk:Historic gardens in the United States
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
What are the criteria for inclusion in this category?[edit]
What are the criteria for inclusion in this category? Commons categories are supposed to be reasonably clear as to what belongs and what does not. In this case, I'm afraid I don't have a clue. - Jmabel ! talk 03:58, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- The contained subcategories were moved by me from the category Category:Landscape design history where they were directly located formerly. I tried to group them into adequate subcategory, I didn't seek for other US gardens. I don't know why just those US gardens were categorized in Category:Landscape design history. See the edit history ([1], [2], [3], [4]...) and ask Look2See1 for more information. --ŠJů (talk) 16:06, 11 May 2011 (UTC)
- Hi, Sorry to be slow responding here, questions are good. There is not a good, or even mediocre, wikipedia article on this topic yet. The en:History of Gardening article is actually more 'history of gardens-landscape design' and so the best 'across time and cultures' source for now, with some historic U.S. projects listed. Also, looking through 'style era survey' articles within parent wikipedia en:Category:Landscape design history and individual U.S. sites articles in sub-wikipedia en:Category:Landscape design history of the United States can give some backround for U.S. media articles inclusion.
- Briefly, the criteria for inclusion is design quality that was/is historically influential (as the former cat. title spoke to ?), and not for important historical events that happened to occur in an undistinguished garden or one only famous by associations. The White House gardens are an example, very historical and important, but not an example of garden theory-landscape design. They certainly belong in Category:Gardens in Washington, D.C. and maybe in Category:History of Washington, D.C., but not Category:Historic gardens in the United States.
- Hope this helps as a start, am tired tonight so will collect more links-examples-thoughts over next days to share for discussion. Perhaps a sample category lede also. Please ask any questions.
- Thanks again-Look2See1 (talk)
- I assume "White Hose" ==> "White House". This still seems much more like something that merits a Commons page rather than a category. I don't see how people can make objective judgments what belongs in this category and what does not, and generally categories should be objective. - Jmabel ! talk 04:57, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Agree with Jmabel, is useless in its current form, so either delete or provide a clearly defined and useful criteria for inclusion. --ELEKHHT 22:57, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
- I assume "White Hose" ==> "White House". This still seems much more like something that merits a Commons page rather than a category. I don't see how people can make objective judgments what belongs in this category and what does not, and generally categories should be objective. - Jmabel ! talk 04:57, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- All the gardens in the category, except the Getty, are on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places, and a few are National Historic Landmarks of the United States. Perhaps that criteria, and also those that have been awarded state and municipal registered landmark status, gives boundaries to this category for older works.
- For those few that are newer civic-design landmarks making U.S. landscape history but too young to be awarded official status, such as the High Line Park elevated gardens in NYC or the Getty's Robert Irwin Central Garden in California, a substantive amount of professional reviews and publications about them, especially if cited in a wikipedia article, could be considered criteria.—Look2See1 (talk) 22:29, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- The first two seem to be clear criteria, and indeed we already have Category:National Historical Parks of the United States. --ELEKHHT 22:37, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- Interested in how the Category:National Historical Parks of the United States can tie into the U.S. landmarks of garden and landscape design history. The National Historical Parks are for sites of battles, expansionism, industrial revolution, transport, etc; and the people involved. Alas, they have yet to include sites of designed-engineered aesthetics-placemaking and the people involved. Please do explain.—Look2See1 (talk) 23:00, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- Because a is a park created to memorialize important events in national history. It has nothing to do with the park itself being 'historic'. Some parks of historic significance are on the National Register of Historic Places, as noted above. - Jmabel ! talk 02:16, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- Therefore Category:National Historical Parks of the United States is not synonymous with this category. In addition park is not synonymous with garden.—Look2See1 (talk) 21:22, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- Because a is a park created to memorialize important events in national history. It has nothing to do with the park itself being 'historic'. Some parks of historic significance are on the National Register of Historic Places, as noted above. - Jmabel ! talk 02:16, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- Interested in how the Category:National Historical Parks of the United States can tie into the U.S. landmarks of garden and landscape design history. The National Historical Parks are for sites of battles, expansionism, industrial revolution, transport, etc; and the people involved. Alas, they have yet to include sites of designed-engineered aesthetics-placemaking and the people involved. Please do explain.—Look2See1 (talk) 23:00, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
- The first two seem to be clear criteria, and indeed we already have Category:National Historical Parks of the United States. --ELEKHHT 22:37, 23 June 2011 (UTC)