Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in Oahu

Kawaiahao Church and Mission Houses

Hi Joel -- You're doing a great job developing this list-article and the related individual articles. I quibble with one recent edit though, in which you replaced the link for the NRHP/NHL entry Kawaiahao Church and Mission Houses by two links, one for Kawaiahaʻo Church and a red-link for Mission Houses. My issue is that this is a list of NRHP listings, and that the NRHP listing for "Kawaiahao Church and Mission Houses" needs to be explained in one place. It could be appropriate to have separate wikipedia articles about the church vs. the Mission Houses, but that is separate from how it should be handled in the NRHP list-article. In my view, if the Mission Houses cannot be described properly in the same article as the church, then what is needed also is a very short combo article to define the NRHP listing and to link to the two separate articles. Three examples of similar NRHP combo articles are: Atalaya and Brookgreen Gardens, Boston Common and Public Garden, and Deady and Villard Halls, University of Oregon (actually these three are cases where NHLs were declared that combined two separate NRHP-listed places, but the idea is the same). doncram (talk) 17:38, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

More discussion at my talk page: User talk:Doncram#Kawaiahao Church and Mission Houses. doncram (talk) 22:43, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Historic Districts vs. Thematic Groups

I'm struggling with two issues: (1) how to treat Historic Districts, where a lot of individual NRHP landmarks are not listed anywhere on this page but usually deserve their own listings (Capitol District being the biggest such problem); and Thematic Groups, where each and every member of the group is listed here, but many don't need separate entries and most were in fact added to NRHP as a group on the same date (Batteries, Fire stations, Tudor houses). Thus, individual landmarks in HDs are invisible here, while individual members of TGs are overly visible.

So I intend to embark on two small experiments. I plan to create an entry for Fire stations of Oahu, the name by which most were added as a NRHP Thematic Resource Group (first Palama in 1976, then the rest in 1980). I have photos of each, but otherwise only very sketchy references. And I plan to create an entry for the Merchant Street Historic District that lists the individual landmarks, for which I have much better sources, and photos of most. Any advice before or after I get underway will be welcome. Joel (talk) 22:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Actually, buildings in historic districts don't deserve their own articles unless they're notable for other reasons. The district itself is notable, and of course those buildings can be notable, but they aren't necessarily. A much better idea would be your second suggestion, because having some good details on the various buildings in the district would be quite useful and far better than having a tiny district article such as this one. As far as the thematic groups (now called Multiple Property Submissions if I remember rightly), ask Doncram, who has done work on these. After researching the issue, he came to the conclusion that they're not necessarily notable per sé, but having an article on the group and redirecting the various property articles to it would surely not be problematic. Nyttend (talk) 00:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Nyttend, that having an article on the group would be fine, with redirects to it. It should be titled about the group and not have TR or MPS or anything like that in the title; the TR or MPS document is just a one-time document. That was a distinction made in previous dicussion Nyttend refers to. It's like we don't write an article about every book or other source about historic sites; this is just one source, a one-time study. But, the firehouses are notable, either for individual articles or, probably better, for one article about all of them. doncram (talk) 23:02, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Okinas etc in Hawaiian words

Hi Joel -- thanks for adding several correction notes to wp:NRIS info issues. I note your perspective that some okina marks need to be used in replacing NRIS terms, as you also implemented this diff to this Oahu article. However, i think we need to represent to wikipedia readers in a NRHP list-article what is the National Register name for a place, not what should be the actual name for the place. Note, an individual article's title can differ (and often should) from the NRIS name for a place, which often was assigned long ago. And, the NRIS database system simply can't handle okina marks or any accent marks for that matter, so i don't think we should represent that the NRIS name includes them. I'll watch here to discuss further. doncram (talk) 05:12, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I replied at NRIS issues. The easiest solution is just to lowercase the cap Ohs, which are clearly typos. (I also find the okina template to be more trouble than it's worth. An open single quote is usually sufficient.) Joel (talk) 07:04, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Preposition

The title of this article sounds strange to me: Register of Historic Places listings in Oahu, rather than ...on Oahu. I would think we'd say on an island, but in a group of islands or in a political division such as a state or county:

• on Oahu vs. in the City and County of Honolulu
• on the island of Hawaii vs. in Hawaii County
• on Necker Island vs. in the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands
• etc.

Does anyone else have a thought on this? — Ipoellet (talk) 19:31, 1 October 2014 (UTC)