Talk:Boston Theater District

Recent edits

Perhaps the editor who keeps on making this change can explain why he is continuing to change what: a) was a perfectly good presentation; and b) was superior to the presentation he changed it to, as it is in a list of theaters from different cities. His first explanation was "shouldn't link to redirects in See also". He failed to point to any policy basis for that statement. I pointed to policy, and wrote "It was fine as it was per WP:SEEALSO; it was not a link to a dab page". He again failed to point to policy, again reverted, writing "It may not be a dab page, but it should be; there's other theater district in LA (Hollywood Blvd, most notably) and the equivalency given is weak at best. And there's never a reason to link to a redirect in see alsos." If he can't point to a policy supporting the change -- and he has now made two changes, failing to do so, in the face of policy that fails to provide any support for his repeated revisions -- I would appreciate him not edit warring.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:29, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Come off the wiki lawyering nonsense. There's more to editorial judgement than policy, and you know it. Instead of calling, in true wiki lawyer style, for a policy, why don't you give one good reason for linking to redirects in a "see also" section. Considering they're just courtesy links to somewhat-but-not-directly related subjects, why not just link to the actual article title? It's no like they have to fit in surrounding text or are being searched for (the actual purposes of redirects). So why do you insist in linking to them? There's no policy for that, either! And, really, "Los Angeles Theater District" is a lousy redirect, for the reason I mentioned in my edit summary; Briadway hasn't been LA's primary theater district in decades, and others, especially Hollywood Blvd, are just as important, if not more so. oknazevad (talk) 18:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose that Washington Street Theatre District be merged into Boston Theater District. Washington Street is part of the Theater District and I feel the subject would best be addressed by one article instead of two. Postcard Cathy (talk) 22:50, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

If those are the same (I had trouble seeing the key ref here), then yup. --Epeefleche (talk) 00:09, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

The Washington Street Theatre District is listed as much for architectural significance as for the fact that it has theaters in it. It includes all of the buildings between the Paramount Theater and West Street, an area that includes the Modern and the Opera House, as well as several other non-theater buildings. Magic♪piano 17:58, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

@Magic -- if the districts cover the same area, then simply redirect the WSTD, and merge any relevant material into it. Epeefleche (talk) 21:30, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Someone has already merged them; the Washington Street HD was a two-line stub. As far as I can tell, what Bostonians consider "the Theater District" today is a geographic area generally centered on 1-1/2 blocks of Tremont Street (where the Wilbur, Shubert, Wang, and Cutler Majestic are located) and nearby blocks of Charles and Stuart Streets to its west (where the Stuart Street Playhouse and Charles Playhouse are located). The block of Washington Street that is in this historic district is two blocks (east one on Boylston, north one on Washington) from the corner of Boyston and Tremont, what at least I traditionally thought of as the northeast corner of "the Theater District", at least before the recent revival of the Paramount, Modern, and Opera House. The intervening block is partially occupied by the Loews Common movie complex. I would have considered the Washington Street block part of Downtown Crossing, being part of the old Combat Zone and bumping up against Chinatown. That said, this study of the Modern by the Boston Landmarks Commission says it is in the Theater District, and gives some historical background.

Since I haven't seen the nomination form for the Washington Street HD (it's not available online at this time, but the state and National Park Service are both digitizing these sorts of records), I can't comment on the relative importance of architecture vs. social history (of the area as a theater hub). If that district's description gets expanded, it may look odd here, which is what prompted my initial comment. Magic♪piano 22:45, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Boston Theater District. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141015135642/http://www2.suffolk.edu/49832.html to http://www2.suffolk.edu/49832.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:54, 6 November 2016 (UTC)