![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article divides Puerto Rico by counties. This kind of division is not used in Puerto Rico. Perhaps this is the grouping made by the Register? It makes no sense. Perhaps we can divide the list by Senatorial district: San Juan, Bayamón, Arecibo, Mayaguez, Ponce, Guayama, Humacao and Carolina? Smylere Snape 21:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
At Talk:Las Cabañas Bridge, User:Jmundo explained his/her moving the Las Cabanas Bridge article to Las Cabañas Bridge, "because its the proper Spanish name" with supporting link [1]. I am fine with that: articles about places should be put at what is the most common name for the place. However, the NRHP name for the place should show as a bolded alternative name in the text of the article, and the NRHP infobox in the article should show the NRHP name ("Las Cabanas Bridge" with no "ñ" in this case). That's just to show how the place is in fact listed on the National Register. And, this list article of NRHP places should show the NRHP names (linking by pipelink or redirect to differently named articles in some cases), because it is an index of the NRHP names for places.
It is also possible that the National Register name recorded in the NRIS database is simply wrong, due to a typo at data entry. Specifically, User:Jmundo noted that the National Register "has some minor spelling errors with Spanish entries, for example Faro de Punta Higueros is listed in the register as Faro di Punta Higueros, using the Italian "of" instead of the Spanish "de". " That would appear to me to be a case where there is probably an error in the National Register database entry. I expect that the actual, detailed NRHP application (which is an extensive, careful document) could not have such an error. There are many other cases of NRIS typo errors, which I and others record at wp:NRIS info issues for reporting to the National Register. I am working through, in batches, reporting these to the National Register for them to make corrections, and that is working. Putting in error reports is important, because otherwise there are many sources, including several private websites mirroring public domain NRIS data (such as www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com ) which will continually be found to give the other name, causing future conflicts among wikipedia editors. I support making obvious corrections, if and only if those corrections are recorded as error corrections at wp:NRIS info issues, for eventual confirmation. doncram ( talk) 06:54, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Trying to work with the list-article, i note that it was not organized by county (because there are no counties), nor was it clearly organized by municipality necessarily. I want to check and understand some location moves and other edits, including:
1. Two items were moved from the Guayama municipality section:
to another section.
2. In this edit, two items were moved from "Isabela" municipality section:
3. Also in the same edit, an item, Isabel II was deleted. I can't find it in the NRIS system.
4. In this edit, item Mona Island was deleted with note that it is part of Mayaguez. But, there is a NRHP listing for " Isla de Mona" which NRIS describes as being near Mayaguez, PR. It is an NRHP listing and should be included in this table. I think it is different than the lighthouse, perhaps called Mona Island Light, which is on the island. doncram ( talk) 22:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
5. There are a bunch of places in the Humacao section with Vieques indicated, and there is a separate Vieques section. I'll proceed with creating stub articles, but wonder which is the relevant municipality to organize these into. doncram ( talk) 19:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
I started splitting the list into northern and southern sections, hoping to split by the line of the Cordillera Central mountain range, and to put Vieques with the north section since it is served by port on north, and so on. Many classification errors apparent, as lighthouses off the south coast were included in northern municipality of Arecibo. Will require fine-tuning to split out and assign places correctly.
I may want to define northern vs. southern by a latitude line, perhaps 18 degrees north 8 minutes or so, which is to be picked to run north of Mayaguez and south of Utuado, cutting mostly along the Cordillera. This will be somewhat arbitrary but very objective and explainable. No rush in defining exact line, will just move obvious ones to north vs. south and leave some to be decided later. doncram ( talk) 19:08, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I think that the best way to separate the articles is by tourist econimic regions:
http://www.puertorico.com/regions/
just an idea El Johnson ( talk) 22:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
The PuertoRico.Com site is not a perfect source. Some other departures:
For the record, the split i did before was to put NRHP listings in south and west municipalities:
*[[Adjuntas]] * 2 Arroyo * 3 Cayey * 4 Coamo * 5 Guánica * 6 Guayama * 7 Hormigueros * 8 Jayuga * 9 Juana Diaz * 10 Maricao * 11 Maunabo * 12 Mayaguez * 13 Ponce * 14 Sabana Grande * 15 Salinas * 16 San German * 17 Yauco
In North and east:
* 1 Aguadilla, Puerto Rico * 2 Aibonito * 3 Arecibo * 4 Barranquitas * 5 Bayamón * 6 Cabo Rojo * 7 Caguas * 8 Canóvanas * 9 Carolina * 10 Ciales * 11 Comerio * 12 Corozal * 13 Culebra * 14 Dorado * 15 Guaynabo * 16 Humacao * 17 Lares * 18 Las Piedras * 19 Loiza * 20 Manati * 21 Naguabo * 22 Moca * 23 Quebradillas * 24 Rincon * 25 San Juan * 26 San Lorenzo * 27 San Sebastián * 28 Toa Baja * 29 Utuado * 30 Vega Alta * 31 Vega Baja * 32 Vieques
doncram ( talk) 23:18, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
This compares tallies in the wikipedia tables for Puerto Rico municipalities, vs. NRHP's NRIS system as of May, 2009. Note, the wikipedia total is a moving target. If a wikipedia omission or other error is identified, it should just be fixed. So reconcilation here will tend to show only apparent errors in NRIS, not wikipedia errors.
References
lvklock labels as in wikipedia lists but not in NRIS (But these, besides the National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center, are all in NRIS in some form, as demonstrated by their articles now all created using Elkman NRHP infoboxes based on an NRIS download. Maybe it needs to be identified which "county" NRIS lists them in? Ah, it appears these are ones that do not appear in NR.NPS, i.e. at http://www.nr.nps.gov , in any county )
missing from wikipedia lists:
both now added. Thanks!
date added is wrong:
Reconciliation | # | Notes |
---|---|---|
NR.NPS total | 281 | |
less duplications (sites spanning counties) shown in NRIS, not accounted for in NRIS total | (0) | |
plus NR-NPS not yet showing very recently announced NRHP sites | 0 | |
less NR-NPS misidentifications of sites as NRHP | (0) | |
plus NR-NPS omitting to recognize other NRHP sites (including duplications) | 9 | 7 that are in Elkman but not in NPSL
And 1 for
National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center was reported in weekly announcements as a featured listing, listed 9/23/2008 |
less duplications among those omissions | (1) | Plata Bridge |
Subtotal | 289 | |
less Wikipedia total | 289 | |
yet to be identified, net | 0 |
Now that all 289 NRHP listings are completely listed, it would be good to check all for how names appear. I've put, into each of the three list-articles, a note: "Names of places given are as appear in the National Register, reflecting name as given in NRHP application at the date of listing. Note, the National Register name system does not accommodate Spanish á, ñ and other letters." So currently the list is pretty much what is "official" according to the NRIS system, but that is just a database that has its limitations. The document about NRHP place names from Puerto Rico, mentioned in another discussion above, can be viewed as providing better official names. It could be good to cross check all names against that. And note changes here and/or at wp:NRIS info issues. doncram ( talk) 21:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I notice rearrangement by User:Mercy11 to reorganize into regions a different way. What is better about this partition, though? It's now stated that this is by the "official Government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico's Learn about Puerto Rico - Regions,[1] and it is presented in five groupings". But the link is to a tourism .COM site, like the previous partition was based on. I don't see where the tourism site is identified as being more official than any other. Mercy11, can you comment please? doncram ( talk) 05:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed that there are many black-and-white photos which have been uploaded which are NOT public domain, but rather appear to be copyright violations. While many U.S. government photos of lighthouses and of buildings are public domain, such as all covered in the Historic American Buildings Survey or the Historic American Engineering Record, there are many photos NOT in the public domain. In particular, there are photos of most NRHP-listed places included with their NRHP applications, and the documents and photos are accessible at the National Park Service's NPS Focus system. BUT, for the most part these ones are NOT PUBLIC DOMAIN, and it is a copyright violation to upload and use them. I've given some notice about that at one recent uploader's Talk page. However, everyone interested in NRHP places in Puerto Rico needs to be aware of the potential problem. I'll watch here to see if there might be any questions. -- doncram ( talk) 14:08, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey, would it be possible to bring the coverage up to U.S. nation-wide average of 50.3%, for percent of NRHP articles completed. See "NRHP PROGRESS". -- do ncr am 03:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The article divides Puerto Rico by counties. This kind of division is not used in Puerto Rico. Perhaps this is the grouping made by the Register? It makes no sense. Perhaps we can divide the list by Senatorial district: San Juan, Bayamón, Arecibo, Mayaguez, Ponce, Guayama, Humacao and Carolina? Smylere Snape 21:24, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
At Talk:Las Cabañas Bridge, User:Jmundo explained his/her moving the Las Cabanas Bridge article to Las Cabañas Bridge, "because its the proper Spanish name" with supporting link [1]. I am fine with that: articles about places should be put at what is the most common name for the place. However, the NRHP name for the place should show as a bolded alternative name in the text of the article, and the NRHP infobox in the article should show the NRHP name ("Las Cabanas Bridge" with no "ñ" in this case). That's just to show how the place is in fact listed on the National Register. And, this list article of NRHP places should show the NRHP names (linking by pipelink or redirect to differently named articles in some cases), because it is an index of the NRHP names for places.
It is also possible that the National Register name recorded in the NRIS database is simply wrong, due to a typo at data entry. Specifically, User:Jmundo noted that the National Register "has some minor spelling errors with Spanish entries, for example Faro de Punta Higueros is listed in the register as Faro di Punta Higueros, using the Italian "of" instead of the Spanish "de". " That would appear to me to be a case where there is probably an error in the National Register database entry. I expect that the actual, detailed NRHP application (which is an extensive, careful document) could not have such an error. There are many other cases of NRIS typo errors, which I and others record at wp:NRIS info issues for reporting to the National Register. I am working through, in batches, reporting these to the National Register for them to make corrections, and that is working. Putting in error reports is important, because otherwise there are many sources, including several private websites mirroring public domain NRIS data (such as www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com ) which will continually be found to give the other name, causing future conflicts among wikipedia editors. I support making obvious corrections, if and only if those corrections are recorded as error corrections at wp:NRIS info issues, for eventual confirmation. doncram ( talk) 06:54, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Trying to work with the list-article, i note that it was not organized by county (because there are no counties), nor was it clearly organized by municipality necessarily. I want to check and understand some location moves and other edits, including:
1. Two items were moved from the Guayama municipality section:
to another section.
2. In this edit, two items were moved from "Isabela" municipality section:
3. Also in the same edit, an item, Isabel II was deleted. I can't find it in the NRIS system.
4. In this edit, item Mona Island was deleted with note that it is part of Mayaguez. But, there is a NRHP listing for " Isla de Mona" which NRIS describes as being near Mayaguez, PR. It is an NRHP listing and should be included in this table. I think it is different than the lighthouse, perhaps called Mona Island Light, which is on the island. doncram ( talk) 22:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
5. There are a bunch of places in the Humacao section with Vieques indicated, and there is a separate Vieques section. I'll proceed with creating stub articles, but wonder which is the relevant municipality to organize these into. doncram ( talk) 19:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
I started splitting the list into northern and southern sections, hoping to split by the line of the Cordillera Central mountain range, and to put Vieques with the north section since it is served by port on north, and so on. Many classification errors apparent, as lighthouses off the south coast were included in northern municipality of Arecibo. Will require fine-tuning to split out and assign places correctly.
I may want to define northern vs. southern by a latitude line, perhaps 18 degrees north 8 minutes or so, which is to be picked to run north of Mayaguez and south of Utuado, cutting mostly along the Cordillera. This will be somewhat arbitrary but very objective and explainable. No rush in defining exact line, will just move obvious ones to north vs. south and leave some to be decided later. doncram ( talk) 19:08, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
I think that the best way to separate the articles is by tourist econimic regions:
http://www.puertorico.com/regions/
just an idea El Johnson ( talk) 22:39, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
The PuertoRico.Com site is not a perfect source. Some other departures:
For the record, the split i did before was to put NRHP listings in south and west municipalities:
*[[Adjuntas]] * 2 Arroyo * 3 Cayey * 4 Coamo * 5 Guánica * 6 Guayama * 7 Hormigueros * 8 Jayuga * 9 Juana Diaz * 10 Maricao * 11 Maunabo * 12 Mayaguez * 13 Ponce * 14 Sabana Grande * 15 Salinas * 16 San German * 17 Yauco
In North and east:
* 1 Aguadilla, Puerto Rico * 2 Aibonito * 3 Arecibo * 4 Barranquitas * 5 Bayamón * 6 Cabo Rojo * 7 Caguas * 8 Canóvanas * 9 Carolina * 10 Ciales * 11 Comerio * 12 Corozal * 13 Culebra * 14 Dorado * 15 Guaynabo * 16 Humacao * 17 Lares * 18 Las Piedras * 19 Loiza * 20 Manati * 21 Naguabo * 22 Moca * 23 Quebradillas * 24 Rincon * 25 San Juan * 26 San Lorenzo * 27 San Sebastián * 28 Toa Baja * 29 Utuado * 30 Vega Alta * 31 Vega Baja * 32 Vieques
doncram ( talk) 23:18, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
This compares tallies in the wikipedia tables for Puerto Rico municipalities, vs. NRHP's NRIS system as of May, 2009. Note, the wikipedia total is a moving target. If a wikipedia omission or other error is identified, it should just be fixed. So reconcilation here will tend to show only apparent errors in NRIS, not wikipedia errors.
References
lvklock labels as in wikipedia lists but not in NRIS (But these, besides the National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center, are all in NRIS in some form, as demonstrated by their articles now all created using Elkman NRHP infoboxes based on an NRIS download. Maybe it needs to be identified which "county" NRIS lists them in? Ah, it appears these are ones that do not appear in NR.NPS, i.e. at http://www.nr.nps.gov , in any county )
missing from wikipedia lists:
both now added. Thanks!
date added is wrong:
Reconciliation | # | Notes |
---|---|---|
NR.NPS total | 281 | |
less duplications (sites spanning counties) shown in NRIS, not accounted for in NRIS total | (0) | |
plus NR-NPS not yet showing very recently announced NRHP sites | 0 | |
less NR-NPS misidentifications of sites as NRHP | (0) | |
plus NR-NPS omitting to recognize other NRHP sites (including duplications) | 9 | 7 that are in Elkman but not in NPSL
And 1 for
National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center was reported in weekly announcements as a featured listing, listed 9/23/2008 |
less duplications among those omissions | (1) | Plata Bridge |
Subtotal | 289 | |
less Wikipedia total | 289 | |
yet to be identified, net | 0 |
Now that all 289 NRHP listings are completely listed, it would be good to check all for how names appear. I've put, into each of the three list-articles, a note: "Names of places given are as appear in the National Register, reflecting name as given in NRHP application at the date of listing. Note, the National Register name system does not accommodate Spanish á, ñ and other letters." So currently the list is pretty much what is "official" according to the NRIS system, but that is just a database that has its limitations. The document about NRHP place names from Puerto Rico, mentioned in another discussion above, can be viewed as providing better official names. It could be good to cross check all names against that. And note changes here and/or at wp:NRIS info issues. doncram ( talk) 21:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
I notice rearrangement by User:Mercy11 to reorganize into regions a different way. What is better about this partition, though? It's now stated that this is by the "official Government of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico's Learn about Puerto Rico - Regions,[1] and it is presented in five groupings". But the link is to a tourism .COM site, like the previous partition was based on. I don't see where the tourism site is identified as being more official than any other. Mercy11, can you comment please? doncram ( talk) 05:05, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
I've noticed that there are many black-and-white photos which have been uploaded which are NOT public domain, but rather appear to be copyright violations. While many U.S. government photos of lighthouses and of buildings are public domain, such as all covered in the Historic American Buildings Survey or the Historic American Engineering Record, there are many photos NOT in the public domain. In particular, there are photos of most NRHP-listed places included with their NRHP applications, and the documents and photos are accessible at the National Park Service's NPS Focus system. BUT, for the most part these ones are NOT PUBLIC DOMAIN, and it is a copyright violation to upload and use them. I've given some notice about that at one recent uploader's Talk page. However, everyone interested in NRHP places in Puerto Rico needs to be aware of the potential problem. I'll watch here to see if there might be any questions. -- doncram ( talk) 14:08, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey, would it be possible to bring the coverage up to U.S. nation-wide average of 50.3%, for percent of NRHP articles completed. See "NRHP PROGRESS". -- do ncr am 03:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC)