Talk:Landscape architecture

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Architecture (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Definition of masterplanning?[edit]

I came here in search of a definition of "masterplanning". This article uses the term without any real explanation. Nor is there one elsewhere. This is one of the few places on Wikipedia where the term features.

Is the term synonymous with landscape architect? It doesn't seem like it.

-A Masterplan is a term commonly used amongst landscape architects. It is typically a final drawing consisting of a graphical representation of all the elements on a site. Buildings, paths, vegetation, key features, and basic reference material like scale and orientation. Since a majority of design time is spent on research and many layers of data, analyzing it on a map of the site a masterplan is not derived till the conclusion of this process. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:59, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Maybe a brief definition here, or a link to a new page somewhere else? MK (talk) 16:29, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

It would be best to do the merge the other way around: merge 'landscape architects' with the section 'landscape architecture'. The profession/discipline in it self should not be put second to the practicioners.

You have a hyperlink to "garden design". But it is just a redirect to this page. --Jmccorm 19:24, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

I think the use of the terms 'Landscape Gardening', 'Landscape Design' and 'Garden Design' need to be better defined in relation to Landscape Architecture. They all overlap but they are all (with the possible exception of landscape design) different things. Supergolden 15:31, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

---The History of gardening article covers some of the above 3 terms' turf rather extensively. Wraps up with 'modern design' in startling brevity. There is also a list of projects there. Oddly (at least to me), the article is about history of designing gardens-landscapes and not the care of them - not of gardening. ---Look2See1 (talk) 06:19, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Landscape Architects and Works[edit]

I took out the section headings added by User: earlier today. We already have a List of landscape architects. I'm not sure a list of examples would be that helpful, but I think it should be on a separate page if someone wants to start one. :: Supergolden 13:10, 19 December 2005 (UTC) This guy needs to be in your wiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edenflux (talkcontribs) 02:03, 25 April 2012 (UTC)


I think there is a section here that is really off-topic: "In many countries, the practice of landscape architecture is regulated by a professional institute, in order to protect the standing of the profession and promote its interests, but in the United States, this does not include fluency in the English language and illegal immigrants are most common as landscapers."

First, English fluency is neither the intent nor purpose of registration or licensure of professional landscape archtitects in any country (especially those that do not use english as a predominat language).

Second, due to the requirements of university education and more specifically of the CLARB national exam (including some intense legal knowledge), it would be impossible for a person not fluent in english to pass the US licensure test. The test is not conducted in any language other than english.

Third, if you are trying to make the political point that english should be legally required to be the preferred tongue of the USA, this point should perhaps be made in a different location.

Finally, although a great many landscape contractors (the distinction with not landscape architects is not made) are non english-speaking and non-american by birth (some undoubtedly illegal) it is untrue and unfair to suggest that they comprise predominantly illegal immigrants. There are a large number of opportunities for foreign workers to legally gain employment in the USA. To assume or suggest that they are illegal is "tarring them all with the same brush". Again please place opinionated comments about immigration where they belong, not in this location.

Thanks for flagging this up, must have missed it getting snuck in again. Nonsense about Illegal Immigrants and rakes vs. leafblowers is periodically added to this page by vandal(s). Whoever is doing this please read comments above and desist. This page isnt even about landscape contractors anyway - I dont know any landscape architects who use rakes or leafblowers. :: Supergolden 12:43, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
It looks good to me. I will add it back. It is clear you believe by your constant reversions that this is your personal article. Do you own it in some way? Are you Jimbo? No. Stop adding your point of view! FurryiamIAM 14:35, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Sorry FurryIAM, I am not Jimbo, and I do not see this as 'my page', I just dont want people adding nonsense to it. The fact that 'illegal immigrants are most common as landscapers', even if true, is irrelevant here because 1) this is an article about landscape architects, not landscapers, 2)Fluency in the English language is not a prerequisite for any profession, and 3)'illegal immigrants' are not the most common members of the profession of landscape architecture, even just in the US. Additionally, even if I am wrong on all the abovepoints, I think a statement like this needs a reference. This 'illegal immigrants are most common as landscapers' sentence is an irrelevant POV in this article. I have left it in for now, until we, and the other people who edit this page, can agree :: Supergolden 21:41, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the response on the anti-immigrant landscape contractor stuff (the first comments on this topice were mine (I wasn't logged in at the time). Those pesky vandals. I have modified this section to remove the offending statement and make it a little more international. I'm guessing that whoever initially wrote the section is from the UK (Apologies if not)? Having experience both sides of the "pond", I wanted to highlight that the operation of the UK Landscape Institute and the ASLA is quite different (membership in the ASLA is not required for licensure, and they do not regulate). As UK, Canada and the US tend to dominate these discussions, it would be nice to get some input from other nations. --Lardpants 21:13, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Too true Lardpants, and thanks for your (positive) input :: Supergolden 10:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
I read the article and it sounds like every illegal immigrant who does lawn work, calls themselves a landscaper, and can't speak English has trained as long as a doctor. This is simply not true. Lardpants, do you have proof that these people went to college for 10 years to trim bushes and mow lawns? Tempoo 23:54, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
This article should not maintain the illusion that every gardener went to school for 10 years
This article is not about gardeners :: Supergolden 13:33, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Okay, let's make this clear. Landscaper redirects to this article. Well, okay. My mistake. Tempoo 22:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I agree that Gardeners, Landscape Contractors, people with a Landscaping business, etc. do not belong here - whatever there primary language, country of origin, education level, or immigration status is. Thanks for clearing out the mean 'illegal' immigrant jargon with the misplaced job types. Regarding this talk page section only, and writing from California, I feel some concern about the discussion's tone. My landscape architecture projects and most of the state's 'intentional landscapes and gardens' would fall apart (if even created in the first place) without the range of: gifted artisans to construction outfits to laborers; and gardening specialists to landscapers to 'mow and blow' maintenance people; whose first or only language is Spanish. In addition, Gardening itself is an honorable profession and job, Thomas Church took clippers to on-site client meetings. The Garden Conservancy shows us this too, with the design work already done, but an incredible need for good maintenance work and care by gardeners. And finally, our dear Beatrix Farrand, one of the ten that founded the ASLA, refused the L.Arch. label and always called herself a Landscape Gardener until her passing in 1959. J.P. Morgan, The Bliss's, the Rockefellers, et al seemed to favor the creative work she accomplished, not proprietary titles. The stratification has grown since those times, but elitism need not follow. The Article itself is an excellent condensing of much information and maintains its clarity well. Good work by all the editors and thank you for it. ---Look2See1 (talk) 06:00, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


The following two sentences (from two different sections of the otherwise great article) may be accurate but, as written, they read as inconsistent: "The term "landscape architecture" was invented by Gilbert Laing Meason in 1828 and was first used as a professional title by Frederick Law Olmsted in 1863.... The term "landscape architecture" was then taken up by JC Loudon and AJ Downing." funkendub 16:10, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Merge Proposal[edit]

Please discuss this merger suggestion.

see here. [[User:Claudiala|Claudia]] 17:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

'Landscape architecture' is the profession and 'landscape architect' is the title of those that practice. The merger makes sense. Treekiller 02:31, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I strongly disagree (see Talk:Landscape architect). I think many sections relating to practice and the professional should move to Landscape architect and the remainder expanded for the discipline- much like Architect and Architecture. Mariokempes 00:34, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I think you need to read about and add him to this history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edenflux (talkcontribs) 02:02, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Landscape recognition[edit]

I was looking for what "landscape recognition" means, and thought that may-be this page should mention the term. 16:12, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Product placement?[edit]

Does anyone else think it's inappropriate that Aquascapes, Inc. is listed under "See also"? Can anyone just throw their company's name on that list? Bjfewell 20:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Moved to talk for discussion - The Netherlands[edit]

The first two paragraphs have no sources and I can't make sense of the broken English. --Ronz (talk) 01:12, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

The Netherlands[edit]

Landscape architects in the Netherlands require are enlisted with at he Architectenregister and have a protected status. You're not allowed by law to use the title of "Landschapsarchitect" unless you are registered. Besides this registration a landscap architect may adhere rules of conduct and so become a member of the 'Bond voor Nederlandse Tuin- en Landschapsarchitecten' (BNT. Body of Dutch Garden en Landscape architects) There is also an association of Dutch Garden- and Landscapearchitect called the NVTL

Garden en Landscapearchitects typically follow one of the following education paths. Main institution is the Wageningen University and Research center) which leads to a university degree (MSc) Other educational paths are through a bachelors education at Larenstein or a postdoc course.

Dutch landscap architecture has had some highlights and distinct examples like "the Dutch Classical style" or "Functionalisme". Typical landscapearchitect are Vredeman de Vries, Zocher, Springer, Roodbaard, Warnau, Bijhouwer, Ruijs [1]


this article is not very neutral. the first paragraph alone singes the praises of Landscape architecure wih out realy explaining what it is.--Found5dollar (talk) 18:54, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Anglo centric view[edit]

This article is so Anglo centric that it can't be taken seriously. It totally ignores the history - as if the Americans were the first ones to start designing the parks in the world (in 1800?). The photo: 'Central park is an example of landscape architecture' is plain wrong. So can be any park in Europe or Asia dating centuries before the Central park was designed. Just because the Americans and other Anglo nations started to call gardeners 'landscape architects' it doesn't mean it starts in 1800s, in USA.

Till today the term 'landscape architect' is not used in many countries ie. France, yet they are designing parks (much better than the American or Australian ones). This article needs to be rewritten and make some sense, include more history and embrace the whole of the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

Central Park is not an example of landscape architecture? Instead of making blunderous comments, it would be much better to add to the article with any information you might have on the history of non-American parks. Kbog (talk) 20:15, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

More refs?[edit]

What is the problem? Hafspajen (talk) 12:16, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Much of the article is unreferenced. Please see this resource for suggestions on how this article's references may be improved. Thank you, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 15:22, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Indeed I know about references. I do not need help for new beginners, like this 'Help:Introduction to referencing', as you mentioned above. But is there anything incorrect in the article? People ask nowadays for references all the time, but it has to be a reason behind it, and you were not giving it. This is from Wikipedia:Citing sources :By citing sources for Wikipedia content, you enable users to verify that the information given is supported by reliable sources, thus improving the credibility of Wikipedia while showing that the content is not original research. You also help users find additional information on the subject; and you avoid plagiarising the source of your words or ideas by giving attribution. In particular, sources are required for material that is challenged or likely to be challenged – if reliable sources cannot be found for challenged material, it is likely to be removed from the article. Sources are also required when quoting someone, with or without quotation marks, or closely paraphrasing a source. Discussing is to improve articles, and I meant it seriously. Or you don't want to disscus this matter? Hafspajen (talk) 15:46, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi Hafspajen, I have no problem with any of the seven references already there. There are a number of places in the article where it is indicated that citations are needed, and many more where there could be. I am not an expert in the field, so do not have any particular suggestions or recommendations. My interest is simply a general one in seeing much more documentation of sources in support of the information presented in the article. Thank you for your interest & efforts to improve this article. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 21:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
You are not an expert in the field?? Well I thought you were. Anyway, I am a landscape architect ( profession)and I think most of the things are pretty correct in the article, but I can try to find refs for what was asked for. Best regards. Hafspajen (talk) 15:23, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Great, thanks Hafspajen. Kind regards, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 17:59, 13 May 2013 (UTC)