This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all
list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
I think any site that no longer exists should not be kept in the main list. The properties are either demolished or were destroyed by fire. They should be put into the "other" status to raise awareness that they need to be delisted. --
Marcbela (
talk)
13:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC)reply
No, they should be added to
WP:NRIS issues, but they should be kept with the others as long as they're listed. The primary list is for all sites that are currently listed; the secondary is failed listings and delistings.
Nyttend (
talk)
14:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)reply
I am involved with the local Preservation Society. One of our current goals is to update the current list in the city, and review possible new candidates. I understand that everything goes through Boston first (Mass Historical). --
Marcbela (
talk)
14:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC)reply
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all
list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the
United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
I think any site that no longer exists should not be kept in the main list. The properties are either demolished or were destroyed by fire. They should be put into the "other" status to raise awareness that they need to be delisted. --
Marcbela (
talk)
13:53, 9 March 2009 (UTC)reply
No, they should be added to
WP:NRIS issues, but they should be kept with the others as long as they're listed. The primary list is for all sites that are currently listed; the secondary is failed listings and delistings.
Nyttend (
talk)
14:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)reply
I am involved with the local Preservation Society. One of our current goals is to update the current list in the city, and review possible new candidates. I understand that everything goes through Boston first (Mass Historical). --
Marcbela (
talk)
14:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC)reply