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
Asserting that Mission Hill is a neighborhood that borders Roxbury and that Mission Hill contains anything put a peripheral part of the Longwood Medical and Academic Area seems indicative of a very flawed understanding of Boston geography and the long-established terms used in discussion thereof. I have made several major corrections and plan to make several more, as well as providing citations for the correct material, within a few days. House of Scandal07:45, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
HOWEVER, it has come to my attention that some editors may be thinking in terms of the newly-modified City Council electoral districts rather than long-established historical definitions one encounters outside this specific sphere, in which case we'll have to reconcile these differences in the articles somehow. Therefore, I am going to modify the Neighborhoods in Boston, Massachusetts article so that the this whole matter is straightened out and cited with plenty of references. Then we can all use it as a guide. House of Scandal08:05, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
-------------------------------
I HIGHLY AND DISTINCTLY DISAGREE with your edits, House of Scandal. Mission Hill is most definately a neighborhood in its own right and completely separate from the neighborhood of Roxbury. To yours and all other editors attention: 1) Mission Hill is recognized by the office of the Mayor and the BRA as a separate entity, just as is Back Bay, Beacon Hill or South End. See either the Mayor's website or the BRA site. 2)Mission Hill has separate resident parking stickers just as above mentioned neighborhoods. 3)A search on the MLS real estate sites also lists Mission Hill properties as within its own neighborhood. 4) The zip code for Mission Hill is 02120 - Roxbury Crossing - named after the once prominent intersection. It is not "Roxbury, MA" but rather "Roxbury Crossing, MA". (However, this too should be changed to just Boston, MA as Mission Hill is part of Boston Proper and does not need a separate, confusing postal name.) 5)Mission Hill has its own Main Streets program, a nationally recognized project.
We do not live in the past. Historically, South End was considered part of Roxbury, but not today. Just is true with Mission Hill. I reiterate, Mission Hill is separate from Roxbury. It has its own newspaper, its own branch library, and (up until the renovation of Huntington Ave) its own blue oval "Welcome to Mission Hill" neighborhood sign at Brigham Circle. Most of all, it has its own identity that is far and away from neighboring Roxbury, Fenway and South End.
(Note the diagram on the City web site outlining Mission Hill that corresponds with the geographical description listed in the Wiki article.)
The proper postal code IS Roxbury Crossing, MA - NOT Boston. While Boston will get your mail to you, 02120 is defined as Roxbury Crossing. Drhamad (talk) 19:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your comments on this matter and am sorry that it has apparently caused you great frustration. As you see in my second paragraph of comments above, the realization that my understanding might be flawed was dawning on me prior to your admonishment. After checking with the City of Boston website and some other sources I feel I was wrong and you are correct on the point of Mission Hill not being considered a part of Roxbury today. I am glad to end 2006 with a reminder of the wisdom of questioning what one knows.
By way of explanation, my understanding was not only based on historical record but also on living memory of a situation which has changed only in recent decades. Knowing many people who grew up on Mission Hill when it was universally regarded as a section of Roxbury just as Forest Hills is still regarded as a section of Jamaica Plain put some very definate ideas in my mind.
I've spent considerable time on the Hill myself and was never confronted by evidence to the contrary. I hope you're satisfied that I've eaten my crow and will be open-minded to the explanation that most everything you list as defining Mission Hill as being on an equal categorical level with (for example) Hyde Park or Back Bay actually does not. Forest Hill has parking stickers. Newbury Street has a newspaper. Washington Street has a naming program. Many minor areas of the city have library branches or community associations with the name of that area. There is one of those round blue signs for New Market (or maybe its South Bay, I don't recall which). The zip code situation in Boston is way more complex than you may realize.
So what does define a neighborhood in Boston? That's the rub. There are no official boundaries to these neighborhoods, only (often debated) conventions. They only exist de facto and don’t exist de jure. Even this official document regarding City Council districts is meant to reflect rather than define the names and boundaries of the neighborhoods (it is defines districts instead). This is the same document which is excerpted here on the City of Boston website. My admission that your view is more correct than the one I advocated is based in part on the fact that Mission Hill is listed in its column as MH rather than listed as ROX/Mission Hill the way ROX/Highland Park is listed.
It's often claimed that Harvard and its Longwood Area neighbors acted successfully to have that territory not considered Roxbury. In a similar vein, West Roxbury absorbs several streets of Roslindale each decade as homes in the Roslindale side of the undefined border are listed and sold as being in West Roxbury; The Roslindale post office delivers an ever-increasing mail load that reads "West Roxbury, MA 02131". My guess is that he relative speed in which Mission Hill has grown to be considered separate was driven by the desire of property owners (institutional and private) to not be in Roxbury.
Harvard's Rappaport Institute has this great article about the ambiguous neighborhood boundaries of Boston that is so worth reading in whole that I won't excerpt from it here. Keeping the spirit of this article in mind while writing this Forest Hills, Boston article, I avoided the pitfall of pedanticism and prescriptivism when discussing the boundaries of Forest Hills and the White City subsection. With Mission Hill, unfortunately, I stuck my foot in it.
All articles about Boston areas should note the ambiguity that frequently surrounds city geography. Accordingly, I think somewhere in the Mission Hill article it would be very informative and accurate to mention (maybe in the history section) something along the lines of:
Until recent decades, the Mission Hill neighborhood was considered a section of Roxbury immediately around Mission and Parker Hill and extending only about as far as the Brigham Circle area. Now Mission Hill is almost always regarded as separate from Roxbury and refers to the much larger area described above.
I hope this epistle is well-met not only as a satisfying concession in the specific debate at hand but also as at least somewhat interestingly illustrative of now complex the issue of neighborhood is in Boston. Happy New Year. House of Scandal12:51, 30 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I highly agree. I've been to many community meetings where distinct boundries are characteristically ambiguous. Not that they shouldn't be in some way. Neighborhoods grow, change, prosper and decline -- then begin the process again. This is the beauty of cities. In this, boundries often move around as well.
The institutions in Mission Hill, those that can be definately tied to the neighborhood -- Brigham & Womens', Harvard Medical, Public and Dental, and DFCI -- have sought to be away from the Hill but I do think that is changing. Many are realizing the area's rising political might.
Your wording should be included somewhere on geography, true. And perhaps, additionally, on the Neighborhoods in Boston page, we could go with what the City currently says the neighborhoods are and use their map. I'll see what I can do in this respect, post it and see where it flys.
In spite of what real estate agents want to tell you, Mission Hill is, and always was, part of Roxbury. Mission Hill is not analagous to Jamaica Plain. Jamaica Plain seceded from Roxbury as part of West Roxbury, before it was annexed by Boston. Mission Hill was never independent and self-governing in any official sense. The existance of special parking stickers notwithstanding, Mission Hill remains part of Roxbury as Hyde Square is part of Jamaica Plain. MarkinBoston05:50, 9 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
MarkinBoston,
Please do not try to change the facts. Mission Hill is a recongized, independent neighborhood of Boston, as attested by offical documents from the City, the Mayor's Office, and the BRA. We are are the same as Back Bay, Beacon Hill, Fenway and South End in that we are a neighborhood. True there is no self-governance, but there isn't for any of the other neighborhoods either. Roxbury was once huge, as it was a city in its own right -- just like Dorchester. But it isn't anymore. Roxbury is a neighborhood -- something defined by those that live there and the city that governs them. Roxbury is Dudley Square and on the other side of Columbus Ave. Multiple maps point to this fact. Mission Hill is its own and proud of this.
This has been discussed earlier on this page and concluded. 141.154.31.19602:21, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Mission Hill may be its own neighborhood, but it is still in Roxbury. The effort to pretend otherwise has been done traditionally for two reasons: to get more money for real estate owners and property owners, or to cut it off from "Black" Roxbury. Greed and racism do not justify erasing four hundred years of history. The statements made in this and other entries above show a profound ignorance of Boston history. City departments have NEVER followed boundries in any consistant sense. The Police, Fire, Public Works and Inspectional Services have all dedided on their own how they divide up the city. Traditionally, Mission Hill students went to Jamaica Plain High School. Their addresses in their yearbooks - Roxbury. It is actually stated above - by another anonymous poster - that Mission Hill has a ROXBURY Zip code. And in some bizarre logic that is used to support the argument that Mission hill is not part of Roxbury. It is claimed in a post above that the South End was a part of Roxbury. The South End is filled in land, and was NEVER a part of Roxbury.
Boston has been a city of neighborhoods for over a hundred years, but the neighborhoods were not Jamaica Plain and Dorchester. The neighborhoods were Uphams Corner and Hyde Square - and Mission Hill. Fifty years ago, children from Parker St. considered themselves "from Mission Hill", but they knew they lived in Roxbury. Today there are Main Street programs all over the city, and none of them take their "neighborhood" out of its community. Roslindale Square is still part of Roslindale the last I hears.
Your logic is specious, your lack of knowledge of the city is profound. Your misplaced confidance in your argument makes me question your motivation. This matter has NOT been concluded, whatever you may think.
The things in the article only state the current facts. http://www.cityofboston.gov/neighborhoods/general.asp?id=14 (note graphic of nieghborhood at top of page), http://www.cityofboston.gov/bra/maps/mapsPDFs.asp (note heading of neighborhood listings, Mission Hill has its own). And many other sources...
Boston is a city of neighborhoods, and they are defined as Back Bay, Beacon Hill, West End, North End, South Boston, South End, Roxbury, Dorchester, Fenway, Mission Hill, Jamaica Plain, West Roxbury, Mattapan, and Allston/Brighton. This is commonly accepted model of the definition of "neighborhood". The simple fact is that Roxbury is in Boston as well. It isn't a separate place. It's a neighborhood in its own right. So how about some further clarification in the article, perhaps under the history section that says something to the effect of "once an area of Roxbury, it, along with West Roxbury and Jamaica Plain, became part of Boston when Roxbury was annexed and gradually emerged as a separate neighborhood of the city." 141.154.31.19606:04, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why is this article collecting a list of external links to unremarkable local businesses? An encyclopedia shouldn't be functioning as directory. These sections should be cut back to the root or removed entirely. --House of Scandal (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I propose that this be the primary article under Mission Hill. It's a more intelligent and relevant article in an encyclopedic sense than that of a failed television show. Let's stop Wikigroaning here, shall we? 132.177.45.143 (talk) 19:58, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The article reads: "In 1870, the Redemptorist Fathers built a humble wooden mission church that was replaced by an impressive Roxbury puddingstone structure in 1876." My understanding is that the Mission Church 'puddingstone' building was completed in 1878, not 1876. Some give the date at 1879. The Wikipedia article Basilica and Shrine of Our Lady of Perpetual Help gives the completion date as 1878. For that reason, I'm changing the date in the Mission Hill article. MaynardClark (talk) 23:42, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would question the accuracy of "the population of approximately 18,000 people" (I have been told, consistently, that the poulation of the Mission Hill area is about 12,000). MaynardClark (talk) 09:20, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I made the following content additions to improve this page: Demographics, urban policies, community resources, green space, education, and health care.I made changes to the Mission Hill, Boston Wikipedia page because I felt that it needed more information on the page. This page consisted of Geography, History, Notable residents, Newspapers and MBTA Subway stops. I thought it was important to add other aspects of the Mission Hill neighborhood. I made a small changes to the population number because the link provided did not have dates or references and I also added a sentence to the lead section about the leading age living in Mission Hill. This is being done for coursework in the wikipedia education program so I would appreciate edit suggestions made to me rather than just changed.
The Brigham Circle photograph shows the Mission Hill sign that still says "Mayor Tom Menino" - a newer photograph is needed (with a more current Mission Hill sign). MaynardClark (talk) 04:30, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The same sign is still there (though I don't know if Walsh's name is now on it). I don't think the former mayor's name in the current picture takes away from what it's trying to portray. Grk1011 (talk) 00:47, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Is it really a good use of time and resources to take new pictures of all the neighborhood signs around Boston simply because there's been a change in the administration? —Tim Pierce (talk) 00:05, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's not a good use of time and resources. I've changed it back to the older picture because it actually shows something. It's a street view with the distant Mission Church and the sign. If someone wants to take a similar picture with the updated Mayor that's fine, but a wicked zoomed version of just the sign doesn't add much to the article and IMO is not suitable as the main image. Grk1011 (talk) 03:26, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Re-emphasizing this point. The older picture is better overall. It doesn't matter that the old mayor's name is on the sign. The sign portrays the business district of the neighborhood. It's purpose is not to remind the reader of who the current mayor is. Grk1011 (talk) 00:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, BUT so MANY persons in Boston and Mission Hill had asked for a newer photograph. Mission Hill residents will NOT be very happy with the change to an outdated photograph. MaynardClark (talk) 01:33, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Someone tried to 'improve' footnotes 31, 32, and 34 but 'messed them up'. Could someone who CAN properly footnote those online websites please repair footnotes 31, 32, and 34? MaynardClark (talk) 20:05, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
