![]() | This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I believe Category:New Urbanism is misnamed. Topics such as Smart Growth is a related idea, not a topic within the field of New Urbanism. Other articles such as Transit-oriented development, Urban village, Ecovillage and Village Homes should be put in the same category, but are not subtopics of New Urbanism.
I propose moving this category. But before agreeing or opposing, what's a better name? I suggest either:
Of course, whether these are really "sustainable" is open to debate. The category page should state something like:
Any other suggestions? Is there a broader term that encompasses these various approaches? -- Singkong2005 13:50, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't see precedent for this name change. New Urbanism is a design movement and a phrase that is very alive in journals, classrooms, and industry discussion. I believe the definition of what New Urbanism is or isn't is still a topic that is very much alive and open, and hasn't quite gelled yet.
New Urbanism claims ownership to any, all, or none of those things you list, depending on who you ask.
I believe you're attempting to make a category that lumps things together based on their (objective) sustainability. Am I correct?
I believe you're on to something, because I don't believe New Urbanism is neccessarily about sustainability. However, I don't believe the solution involves messing with this Category, however. I don't know if a solution is even possible until practitioners and debate narrows and sorts what is or isn't New Urbanism.
I see some room for the possibility of making Category:Sustainable urban design a parent or child of Category: New Urbanism, however, the burden will be on you to fill it with other examples which are clearly distinct from New Urbanism. This will be tough because the lines are not well defined yet. Yeago 19:10, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
![]() | This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I believe Category:New Urbanism is misnamed. Topics such as Smart Growth is a related idea, not a topic within the field of New Urbanism. Other articles such as Transit-oriented development, Urban village, Ecovillage and Village Homes should be put in the same category, but are not subtopics of New Urbanism.
I propose moving this category. But before agreeing or opposing, what's a better name? I suggest either:
Of course, whether these are really "sustainable" is open to debate. The category page should state something like:
Any other suggestions? Is there a broader term that encompasses these various approaches? -- Singkong2005 13:50, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
I don't see precedent for this name change. New Urbanism is a design movement and a phrase that is very alive in journals, classrooms, and industry discussion. I believe the definition of what New Urbanism is or isn't is still a topic that is very much alive and open, and hasn't quite gelled yet.
New Urbanism claims ownership to any, all, or none of those things you list, depending on who you ask.
I believe you're attempting to make a category that lumps things together based on their (objective) sustainability. Am I correct?
I believe you're on to something, because I don't believe New Urbanism is neccessarily about sustainability. However, I don't believe the solution involves messing with this Category, however. I don't know if a solution is even possible until practitioners and debate narrows and sorts what is or isn't New Urbanism.
I see some room for the possibility of making Category:Sustainable urban design a parent or child of Category: New Urbanism, however, the burden will be on you to fill it with other examples which are clearly distinct from New Urbanism. This will be tough because the lines are not well defined yet. Yeago 19:10, 30 March 2006 (UTC)