Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject National Register of Historic Places (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Stock post message.svg To-do:


Civic Stadium (Eugene, Oregon)[edit]

Project members may be interested in Civic Stadium (Eugene, Oregon), an NRHP site that was destroyed by fire yesterday. All constructive contributions welcome. We can add the 'Former NRHP sites' category after it is officially delisted. ---Another Believer (Talk) 13:53, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

If the Oregon SHPO follows the example of Pennsylvania's, delisting may take decades. Smallbones(smalltalk) 15:50, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
ORSHPO is variable on that. Sometimes they're quite prompt, other times they take years. — Ipoellet (talk) 16:41, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Noted. Is it best to go ahead and add the 'former' category, or should we wait until it is official? NRHP participants would know best practices better than me. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:34, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Entries remain listed until they are formally delisted, regardless of the physical status of the property. There are many listed-but-demolished properties on the register. Magic♪piano 18:11, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
There's also at least one demolished-then-listed property, Site of Ferdinand Branstetter Post No. 1, American Legion in Van Tassell, Wyoming, which was a vacant lot when listed in 1969, and which remains a vacant lot, albeit one with a historical marker. — Ammodramus (talk) 02:14, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
And one listed-then-demolished-then-listed-again property, the John Marshall House Site in Old Shawneetown, Illinois. And if that wasn't strange enough, the house was demolished so a less-accurate reconstruction of the house could be built. TheCatalyst31 ReactionCreation 02:52, 1 July 2015 (UTC)
However, the Branstetter site was listed as a site, intentionally commemorating where the American Legion post had been; it's not like they listed a building after it was destroyed. See Holy Rosary Catholic Church (St. Marys, Ohio) for that kind of situation: the building was listed a year after being destroyed, and the NR gives no indication that they knew of its destruction. Ohio's bad on that kind of thing; I've visited a lot of NR-listed empty lots that have been empty since the 1990s or 1980s. For example, see the Lockington Covered Bridge, destroyed in 1989. Nyttend (talk) 21:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Delisting success[edit]

I've seen a number of people express frustration about demolished properties staying on the Register for a long time. I've been making my own list, some of which is at Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places/NRIS information issues/Utah#Demolished but still listed. Late last year I tried reaching out to the Utah SHPO, and I emailed them a list of 10 demolished properties. They thanked me and said action would be taken after appropriate bureaucratic delays. The July 2 weekly list shows two from my list: the Utah Slaughter Company Warehouse in Salt Lake City and the Utah-Idaho Sugar Factory in Salt Lake County. I know my report was the impetus for at least the first one, because the SHPO official told me they had extensively searched the records and found no one had noticed that building had been gone since at least 1991 to make way for what is now EnergySolutions Arena (aren't building projects supposed to be checked for impact on historic places?). So it can be done; I recommend you give it a try! Ntsimp (talk) 16:43, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

I've also had success with the Maine SHPO -- there are a few delistings on the pending list now, one of which I brought to their attention. There will also likely be further ones, as I recently asked them about two properties, which they had apparently petitioned for delisting some years ago. I really ought to work on the SHPO of Massachusetts, where there are a significant number of "issue" properties. Magic♪piano 19:05, 3 July 2015 (UTC)

Requested move of Independence Park (Houston, Texas) to McCullough Park (Houston, Texas)[edit]

I have started a discussion on the talk page about moving Independence Park (Houston, Texas) to McCullough Park (Houston, Texas), as this reflects the current name of the park. Your feedback would be appreciated. 0x0077BE (talk · contrib) 20:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

New UNESCO World Heritage Site[edit]

Morning, FYI, the San Antonio Missions were added to the UNESCO World Heritage Site list today [1]. The list does include all 5 missions, including the Alamo. 25or6to4 (talk) 12:59, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

Rebuilt house?[edit]

I was completing photos of NHRP sites in three rural Georgia counties today (Appling, Pierce, and Jeff Davis). However, the Pace house at National Register of Historic Places listings in Jeff Davis County, Georgia was destroyed by fire in 2011 and rebuilt as accurately as possible. I added my photo of the rebuilt house - is that OK? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:32, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

It's fine to add a photo of an empty lot, or a lot where a different building has been built; at worst it's that. Definitely not a problem. Nyttend (talk) 22:50, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm not sure if it was rebuilt at the same location - I can call the historical society and ask. But I think it probably was built on the same site because most of the bricks at the front stairs are old bricks, except for a layer of new ones on the top. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 03:34, 10 July 2015 (UTC)


Where does the degrees/minutes/seconds in "NHRP sites in X County" come from? Many of them are not accurate.

I hit four cities the other day, taking photos of NRHP sites. A lot of the time I spent more time looking for one NR site than it took to drive from one city to the other. If I enter a street address into the Tom Tom GPS that I've had for a few years, it will say "you have reached your destination" - often when I'm not even within sight of the destination. My old Garmin got me closer AND would even say which side of the street it was on.

So when the GPS tells me I'm there, I start walking looking for the address. Most buildings these days don't have the street address, which makes it hard. So I figured that when that fails, I will use the latitude and longitude, and that will get me right to it, since if degrees/minutes/seconds are accurate, that will get within 70 feet. But some of these are off by 2 blocks (or more).

So where does that data come from and why is it so inaccurate? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:46, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Copying this from the coordinates note that's sometimes on the state/county lists:

The latitude and longitude information provided in this table was derived originally from the National Register Information System, which has been found to be fairly accurate for about 99% of listings. For about 1% of NRIS original coordinates, experience has shown that one or both coordinates are typos or otherwise extremely far off; some corrections may have been made. A more subtle problem causes many locations to be off by up to 150 yards, depending on location in the country: most NRIS coordinates were derived from tracing out latitude and longitudes off of USGS topographical quadrant maps created under the North American Datum of 1927, which differs from the current, highly accurate WGS84 GPS system used by most on-line maps. Chicago is about right, but NRIS longitudes in Washington are higher by about 4.5 seconds, and are lower by about 2.0 seconds in Maine. Latitudes differ by about 1.0 second in Florida. Some locations in this table may have been corrected to current GPS standards.

So basically, it's mostly NRIS errors that we unwittingly propagated, with a bit of a mapping oddity thrown in. If you see any locations that are a bit off, please go ahead and fix them. TheCatalyst31 ReactionCreation 05:06, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
On my next trip, I plan to take my hand-held GPS too, for when the car GPS doesn't get me close enough. I'll see how it corresponds to the data we have. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 05:31, 10 July 2015 (UTC):::
I've found that it reduces frustration on my photo-trips if I locate my targets in advance using Google Maps/Earth/Streetview. While the coords and addresses provided in our lists are typically sufficient for this purpose, more often than not I will also review the nomination file and photos to glean any location and appearance details. Just going out with my GPS and camera without the advance prep often leaves me irritated and dissatisfied. — Ipoellet (talk) 06:54, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
As a rule I'm opposed to working out locations in the field or from maps. It's one thing to correct obvious typos, but pulling out the GPS is original research. You can always reduce the precision of the coordinates; that's what I do for lighthouses when I don't have a light list entry or Kraig Anderson available. Mangoe (talk) 12:48, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Errors are plentiful especially in 20th century entries. In the field I use the GPS in my camera and the better GPS in my camera phone, and get more errors but usually different errors which can be worked out. When bad listings make me miss the target completely it takes a lot of web searching and other study to get right. Sometimes it's a couple miles off. When it comes to correcting our WP coords, I treat Google Earth aerials as authoritative. Across the decades they only vary by a few meters in the New York area. In Pittsburgh there's often a ten, sometimes twenty meter variation, caused perhaps by the higher altitude. Perhaps we should have a standard method of specifying the source of our coords. Jim.henderson (talk) 14:00, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
Back to Bubba and Ipoellet — a couple of years ago, I did exactly this, going through all the Louisville nominations and tightening the accuracy of the coordinates for all 400+ sites. A good deal of work, to be sure, but it saved tons of wasted effort when next I visited the area. Nyttend (talk) 16:38, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
@Mangoe - I couldn't disagree more. The core piece of information that we're drawing from our sources here is "location". "Coordinates" are just one of numerous different means of expressing/specifying the "location". Others in our source documents (NRIS and nominations) include prose, maps, photos, addresses, etc. Coordinates themselves can be expressed as lat-long or UTM, and in different datums like NAD27, NAD83, or WGS84. It is not OR to translate among these different means of expression as long as we're still expressing the same "location" idea from the source. Nor is it OR to correct errors as long as we're still expressing the same "location" intended by the source. Nor is it OR to synthesize multiple location expressions in the source to publish one that describes the fundamentally same "location" even if it looks superficially different. (Synthesizing information from multiple sources is OR, but here I'm talking about synthesizing multiple expressions of the same information in the same source.) At minimum, we owe it to our readers to standardize our source data to express coordinates in the same format (lat-long) and datum (WGS84 - Wikipedia's unstated default, the current nomination form's stated default, and the datum that Google uses) and with features that work with the geographic tools our readers are most likely to use (see {{GeoGroup}}). This demands departing from a verbatim transcription of the coordinates in the nominations or the NRIS. — Ipoellet (talk) 19:44, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

latitude and longitude[edit]

Here is an example of an incorrect lat/long - The Bryan County Courthouse, in Pembroke, GA. National Register of Historic Places listings in Bryan County, Georgia lists 32°08'00" N, 81°36'39"W. Since the listing just says "college st", I put in the lat/long. The GPS took me to an industrial park and it was obvious that the courthouse was not there. I found the courthouse and parked right at the front of it (on the city street). My GPS said that I was at 32° 08.007' N 81° 37.318' W. That is 32° 08' 00" (correct), but 81° 37' 19" - 40 seconds of arc off. It isn't an apparent typo (at least in D/M/S). About 1,050 meters off. I haven't corrected it yet, but I plan too. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:03, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

In decimal degrees the listing is:

  • lat=32.133333
  • lon=-81.610833

but I measured (my car GPS, parked on the street closest to the main entrance):

For what its worth, the nomination form gives the location as zone 17, easting=442390 northing=3555200. The actual location, where you found it and using a point near the center of the nominated block is easting=441390, northing=3555400. This is an error of easting=001000 and northing=000200. Possibly a mis-reading of the original topo map when the nomination form was written? In any case, human error reading the map, multiple conversions and rounding from decimal and d/m/s, its a wonder it all works as well as it does. Generic1139 (talk) 20:28, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. I didn't know what Easting and northing were until just now. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 20:40, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

North Carolina ostensibly done[edit]

Happy to report that stubs and updates to existing articles to link to nomination forms at NORTH CAROLINA LISTINGS IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES done. Some counties are not quite 100 percent because nomination forms from April 2015 not yet posted and NC does not post nomination forms for archaeological sites. Cheers!--Pubdog (talk) 13:12, 11 July 2015 (UTC)

Congratulations! That's a big state, and one that was near the bottom of the Progress table until you started working on it. Any plans for the next state? (Maybe the last Southern colony left, now that its nominations are in NPS Focus?) TheCatalyst31 ReactionCreation 15:34, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Bravo!! I know how much of an encouragement it is to others (e.g. photographers) working on the state when you come in and write articles for the whole state. Well you didn't ask "What should be my next project?" but I can make some suggestions: Georgia, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Maine would complete your east coast romp. But somebody is doing some great work in Arkansas, so I'm sure some articles there would be appreciated. Or talking about great work, why not Nebraska (though Ammodramus never seems to need encouragement!). Once again, Bravo! Smallbones(smalltalk) 16:23, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes. I'm working on photos of NR places in Georgia. I feel more likely to get a photograph of something if it will also go in an article about the place, instead of just "List of NRHP in X county", which few people see. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 16:37, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Or you could hit Indiana, where virtually everything's illustrated. Nyttend (talk) 00:03, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks to all! Let me ponder a bit. I really dread the thought of using Focus.--Pubdog (talk) 11:24, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
That's an advantage of doing Indiana; virtually everything's online through the Division of Historic Preservation and Archaeology. Nyttend (talk) 13:45, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Nice work, Pubdog! Not only have you created good stubs to replace redlinks, but it looks like you've gone through existing bluelinks and expanded two-sentence NRIS-only substubs into something that a reader might actually find useful (e.g. this version to this one). If you're keeping a count of articles that you've created, I think you have every right to add those to your list. Ammodramus (talk) 14:19, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
OK Nyttend ... how does this first stub look. Devised template for Indiana NRHP county links, citation, and county stub.--Pubdog (talk) 17:42, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you; if you keep this up, it will be a huge help. Curious, though: are you doing anything with the SHAARD site besides using it as a way to access the nomination form? If not, why cite it? You can just cite the nomination form; see what I did at John L. Nichols House, for example. Meanwhile, be sure to check Commons for a relevant category; around 350 of the state's sites, i.e. nearly 1/5 of the sites statewide, have their own Commons categories. Nyttend (talk) 23:31, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Well, the articles themselves may be finished, but they're far from fully illustrated. Check out National Register of Historic Places listings in Wilson County, North Carolina. There's a historic church that I'm sorry isn't listed on NRHP. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 04:10, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
I like doing photos, but that is a 6-hour drive for me. Perhaps someday I can talk my family into a vacation there. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 04:22, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Although perhaps this old AME Zionist Church is part of a historic district.
Yes, that's a contributing property in the Wilson Central Business-Tobacco Warehouse Historic District. Ntsimp (talk) 08:45, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

NPS site - search / direct link to specific National Register of Historic Places broken?[edit]

Hi, history nuts! Am I missing something obvious, or is the NPS search function broken? Looking for direct link to NRHP Reference # 91000254 for Robert_E._Lee_Monument_(New_Orleans,_Louisiana). As embedded in my citation needed tag, could not find Lee Circle from 2008 cited link of nor on advanced search by reference number, name, or location at; found on 7.8 MB spreadsheet at Can we do better? Thank you! -- Paulscrawl (talk) 09:15, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Try that's from the Louisiana state SHPO. NPS Focus is notorious for going down and being otherwise difficult to work with. You can however send an email or snail mail to the NRHP and they will send you a copy of the nomination form. There are also photos (usually we presume they are copyrighted, but ...) that you can also get through some SHPOs. For this one go to search in the "Historic name search" for Robert E. Lee and you'll get a list of the nomination form (above) 3 pix and a map. Sometimes you can't link to the pix, but this is an attempt seems to work. Note that somebody, somewhere is always trying to patch the system, so that these links tend to be unstable.
BTW this nomination form is very short, but very interesting with material on the "cult of the Lost Cause" and the "deification of Robert E. Lee." Smallbones(smalltalk) 13:16, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you! That helps. -- Paulscrawl (talk) 17:28, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

NPS Focus has been updated[edit]

NPS Focus has finally been updated. Links to nomination PDFs have been altered, e.g. the nomination form for Centre Street Congregational Church, NRIS #75000114, is at the wonderfully mnemonic . Magic♪piano 12:15, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

Looks like the links to the old nomination forms are broken too, and they aren't using the reference numbers in the links anymore... oh God, if this is permanent it's going to be a maintenance nightmare (and takes away a very useful part of Elkman's infobox generator). TheCatalyst31 ReactionCreation 12:34, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
I can't see any automated way to convert to the new links based on the URLs. Should I start manually updating or is that jumping the gun? RevelationDirect (talk) 15:06, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Before we embark on a manual update campaign, lets see if we can avoid doing in again in a few years. States that are in Focus are now broken. Some states that aren't in Focus are also recently broken - PA, for example, was now is New York was is now We need to start using or something similar for every reference where we have a url to a document rather than an app. Or, we need to use some sort of template that provides a redirect database that we can maintain - a pain, but at least we won't have to edit every article each time something changes - just the database. It doesn't look too hard to write a page scraper to get all the new urls from Focus, though maybe someone with a contact there could get an updated nrhp_links.xlsx spread sheet to build a table? A template with a db lookup, fed by such a table, would have made this transition a lot easier. If we're going to have to edit each article, lets try to protect ourselves from doing it all over again in a few years. As it stands today, it many cases we still have valid citations even with a dead link, title, date, etc., but in others the citation is simply "nomination form" and a url. Generic1139 (talk) 15:09, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
It is probably also worth asking NPS if they plan to maintain the old links as more durable URLs. Magic♪piano 15:27, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
As of right now, the old URLs are working. — Ipoellet (talk) 19:21, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Are you talking about the ones used in "List of NRHP sites in X county", etc? For me, they now link to the form to fill out. (Before that they were dead.) Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 20:36, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Perhaps the best solution is to request a bot that will save these URLs in Visit an active page that they don't have in the database, and their bot will archive it as part of the process of resolving your request. It would be eminently simple; five minutes' work would be enough for me to write a Macro Express program that would do it. If we could have a bot archive the currently-active nomination URLs, we could stop worrying about what NPS is doing; it would still affect Elkman if they remove the HTTP redirects from the old names, but our references wouldn't be broken. The bot could also create a page (or group of pages) in our projectspace that would list the URLs, so we wouldn't need to visit to get them. Nyttend (talk) 01:51, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
That would be really helpful. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:12, 20 July 2015 (UTC)


Fort Argyle lacks a photo. This PDF about Fort Argyle, page 8, figure 5 has a photo that looks like it can be used. Since this is the work was done by the US government, it is OK to use the photo, right? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 22:55, 15 July 2015 (UTC)

I looked at the PDF and I don't see where it credits the author of that photo. We would need to see that or know who took the photo in order to determine if it's public domain. Jonathunder (talk) 00:45, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
There is no copyright notice and it is a publication of the US government. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:43, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
The DoD doesn't employ many archaeologists (unlike e.g. the NPS), so it's highly likely that the dig and photo are the work of private contractors and not the US government itself. Without more author/license information, we can't make the assumption that the photo is PD. (And don't get me wrong, the same would apply to a pic in an NPS document as well.) — Ipoellet (talk) 04:58, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Well, there is a historical marker on public land near where I'm going this weekend - I'll try to photograph it. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 02:21, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
Well, I drove three times through the area where it was supposed to be but I didn't see it. Since then I got the coordinates for it, which should help. I put them into Google Maps and the street view shows it there. I'll be back in the area sometime... Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 01:06, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Reflinks broken[edit]

I just found out one of the reference links to the Roslyn Village Historic District was changed, so I tried to fix it, and it still doesn't work( I don't know if it's just my PC, but it keeps going to my anti-virus site's safety search page. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 14:57, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Right now it is working for me. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 15:25, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
The HDB link that had been giving a 404 error works fine here in firefox, chrom, and IE after you made your 14:51, 20 July 2015 change. The nomination form uses the older link to a system that requires java, that will result in security messages of various types depending on the brower and java plugin you have. I replaced it with the newer link that doesn't need java as long as I was there. Generic1139 (talk) 15:28, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Help needed at Masonic Lodge (Missoula, Montana)[edit]

Stubby-stub article that I would like to improve... but I have run into a problem. While there is a Masonic lodge building at the location... I can not find a NRHP listing for it. I checked the NPS focus website... and the reference number given in the article's infobox does not get a hit - I have also tried an advanced search search for "Masonic" with Montana as the state, and Missoula as the county. Again no hit. Is the building actually listed on the the NRHP? If so, what is the correct reference number? I would like to check the the nomination docs for background history. Blueboar (talk) 12:45, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

It is listed under the refnum given (90000649) in Elkman's database, which is valid up to about 2010 (i.e. it will not include a later delisting). It also shows up on the Montana SHPO list for Missoula County; you may be able to get a copy of the form from them. You might also write the Park Service ( about why it's not in Focus. (Although lookup of gave "file not found" when I tried it, the nomination form is in Google's cache here.) Magic♪piano 18:32, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Moving images to the commons[edit]

Can somebody move File:Hortonpoint.jpg to the commons? Wikimedia took my ability to move images to the commons away from me when they reformatted their tool for doing a while back. A category already exists for that lighthouse and it only has one image. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 14:27, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done, using commonshelper--Ymblanter (talk) 17:50, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
That's pretty much what I used, and it didn't help me. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 18:32, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
The first time you use it is says you are not logged in and gives a link. You need to follow he link and log in (or possibly be recognized by the software). The second time everything is ok.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:51, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Problem after going to Windows 10[edit]

I went to Windows 10 today. Now, in IE, when I click on the lat/long and click on "Google Maps", it brings up a map briefly, but then some things in the upper left corner drop down, the map disappears, and I can't get it back. OpenStreetMaps works, but I often need to look at the Google Earth from Google Maps to see if a site is accessible. Is there a fix for this problem? Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 05:25, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Firefox doesn't have the problem. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 05:31, 30 July 2015 (UTC)