Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Historic sites

Cradle of Humankind

Could someone please reassess the above article ? Thanks Anthere (talk)

South African Heritage Resources Agency

I would like to use the Historic Site infobox for articles on the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA) and so I need a designation. I believe this register meets all the criteria:

1. It is a register that exists under legislation of South Africa as the National Heritage Resources Act, number 25 of 1999
2. The article South African Heritage Resources Agency has existed for some time on Wikipedia
3. Its scope is of National importance and currently has 1720+/- entries (and will continue to grow slowly over time)
4. The text should be "South African Heritage Resources Agency" (which is its official name and is unambiguous). If it needed to be shorter, the acronym "SAHRA" could be used. The national colours of South Africa are Green and Gold and as World Heritage Sites are indicated by Yellow/gold it would be preferable for the South African Register to be a dark Green colour.
5. Hundreds of pages already exist from the SAHRA registry and I would like to make more over time.

Thank you, User:SpringbokSam 27 March 2017

Nominating Palais Rohan, Strasbourg, for A-Class (this time without interference)

The article failed its FAC, but it was much expanded and edited in the process since it became a GA, and actually got some support: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Palais Rohan, Strasbourg/archive1. It most probably fulfils all the criteria to be promoted A-Class. Thank you in advance to all future reviewers! --Edelseider (talk) 10:13 pm, Today (UTC+2)

Revise designation for the New South Wales State Heritage Register

@Aguyintobooks:@Kerry Raymond:@The Drover's Wife: A revision of the exiting designation for the New South Wales State Heritage Register is proposed. The Register currently lists items of international, national, State, and local heritage. As a result, the existing designation structure on Wikipedia does not allow the reader to distinguish if a heritage item is of local or state significance. It is proposed that seperate codes be established, as follows:

Code for {{Designation/colour}}

|NEW SOUTH WALES STATE HERITAGE REGISTER|NSW STATE HERITAGE REGISTER|NSW|NSW SHR = #DACAA5
|NEW SOUTH WALES HERITAGE DATABASE|NSW HERITAGE DATABASE|NSWHD|NSW HD = #A8BDEC

Code for {{Designation/text}}

|NEW SOUTH WALES STATE HERITAGE REGISTER|NSW STATE HERITAGE REGISTER|NEW SOUTH WALES HERITAGE REGISTER|NSW HERITAGE REGISTER|NSW|NSW SHR = New South Wales State Heritage Register
|NEW SOUTH WALES HERITAGE DATABASE|NSW HERITAGE DATABASE|NSWHD|NSW HD = New South Wales Heritage (Local) Register

Code for {{Designation/colour2}}

|NEW SOUTH WALES STATE HERITAGE REGISTER|NSW STATE HERITAGE REGISTER|NSW|NSW SHR = #DACAA5
|NEW SOUTH WALES HERITAGE DATABASE|NSW HERITAGE DATABASE|NSWHD|NSW HD = #A8BDEC

Explanatory notes for inclusion in Template:Designation/doc and Template:Designation/Supported designations

{{designation/Supported designations/row|t={{{t|}}}|New South Wales State Heritage Register|[[Australia]]|~2000|NEW SOUTH WALES STATE HERITAGE REGISTER; NSW STATE HERITAGE REGISTER; NEW SOUTH WALES HERITAGE REGISTER; NSW HERITAGE REGISTER; NSW; NSW SHR}}
{{designation/Supported designations/row|t={{{t|}}}|New South Wales Heritage Database|[[Australia]]|???|NEW SOUTH WALES HERITAGE DATABASE; NSW HERITAGE DATABASE; NSWHD; NSW HD}}

RfC at Montacute House

Hello! I've opened an RfC at Talk:Montacute House on the placement and size of the images in the article, please join in if you would like. Thank you, A.D.Hope (talk) 11:13, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Hotel Constance

Hotel Constance is an NRHP-listed historic building in Pasadena, California. Three days ago, the article was moved unilaterally and without discussion to Pasadena Hotel & Pool. The article is about the historic buiding that has been known for a century in the historic perservation world as the "Hotel Constance". (Despite that name change, we did not change the Wikipedia article name to suit the branding decision. The building was purchased in 2014 and rebranded as the DusitD2 Constance Pasadena. It went into bankruptucy and was sold again in 2022, and the new owner in 2023 decided to rebrand the hotel that operates in the building as the "Pasadena Hotel & Pool". With historic buildings, it has been my understanding that we typically seek constancy (no pun intended). We don't change the name every time a new owner comes along and decides to rebrand the business. This is based, as I understand it, on the fact that the notability flows from the historic building and not from the hotel operation which may change its corporate affiliation and/or branding every decade or so. Accordingly, it is my pressent intention to revert the rename. Before doing so, I am interested in feedback from experienced users in this project. Cbl62 (talk) 09:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

With regard to WP:COMMONNAME, a search of Newspapers.com turns up 5,610 hits for "Hotel Constance" and zero hits for "Pasadena Hotel & Pool". Cbl62 (talk) 10:01, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Historical Marker Database

Lately I have been corresponding with a "Regional Editor" at Historical Marker Database about possible collaboration. They have a little more than a dozen "Regional Editors" some of whom double as a "Topic Editor" like for war memorials or something. Each Regional Editor has a bit of the United States, and one of them also handles the Americas and another the rest of the world. So, the 200,000 markers are almost all USA. They have hundreds of "Contributors" who actually write most of the pages and snap the photos (they are big on photos) but new entries only get published into the site when the Editor approves, unless the Contributor has done well enough, often enough, to be promoted to Correspondent. (Have I reversed the ranks?) This all results, far as I see, in slow production of pages but high quality and rare revision after it's published.

I figured every article that mentions something for which HMDB has a marker page, and every WD item about it, and every Wikimedia Commons picture of the marker, ought to have a link to the HMDB page. I have noticed that Wikidata has a Property for HMDB but if I put it in the WD item for a church or something, it raises an error flag because a church or town hall or battlefield or whatever isn't a historical marker, even if it has one standing on the lawn. Also I notice that ENWP has a Template for HMDB, but it seems broken and unused. And, in our List Articles (List of National Register of Historic Places in . . . ) most list items have not even a Wikidata link, much less a HMDB one.

There is also an "Open Plaques" website that seems pretty much limited to the United Kingdom; presumably it works similarly but I'm concentrating on USA which implies sticking with HMDB.

Can anyone suggest good ways for how we might go about linking this stuff together? I haven't even asked about links in the opposite direction; first I'd like to figure what we can do in our own house. Jim.henderson (talk) 04:45, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Montacute House

There are discussions at Talk:Montacute House about image placement and infobox format which would benefit from editor input. Thank you, A.D.Hope (talk) 20:02, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

China Designations

Strange that there aren't any supported designations for China considering its importance in human cultural heritage. Here are a few designations I think should be added.

• Major Historical and Cultural Sites Protected at the National Level
• Historical and Cultural Sites Protected at the Provincial Level
• Historical and Cultural Sites Protected at the Level of a City Divided into Districts or at the Level of an Autonomous Prefecture
• Historical and Cultural Sites Protected at the County Level

These are all under adminstration of the National Cultural Heritage Administration, and all have an abundance of cultural relics listed under them. Please update the list, thank you. Hi (talk) 11:15, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Cannons (house)

Cannons (house) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:48, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for George Rogers Clark National Historical Park

George Rogers Clark National Historical Park has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm _Talk 14:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Golubac Fortress

Golubac Fortress has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm _Talk 17:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Chester Rows

Chester Rows has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 13:09, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Architecture of the medieval cathedrals of England

Architecture of the medieval cathedrals of England has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 15:24, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for Louvre

Louvre has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 02:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Good article reassessment for National Register of Historic Places

National Register of Historic Places has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 17:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC)