Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in Quincy, Massachusetts
This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Historical and Architectural Survey - Gold mine
[edit][Here] is a survey of historical sites in Quincy. A random check suggests that most, maybe all, of the NRHP sites are shown here with a description and photo. I'm going to inquire about the copyright status of the photos, but at the very least this is a mine of information and as Nyttend suggested about a similar source in Cambridge, at least the photos will make sure we photograph the right building. . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 12:41, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Scan
[edit]Just went through the whole list to
- check to see that any images in articles were also here
- check to see if links needed revision
. . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 14:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Adams National Historical Park or Adams National Historic Site?
[edit]This listing shows Adams National Historic Site and links through a redirect to Adams National Historical Park.
The list at List of areas in the United States National Park System#National Historical Parks shows the Adams site as a Historical Park. Shouldn't we change it here? (Ordinarily I would BE BOLD and just do it, but this is a high visibility site, so I figured I'd consult.). . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 12:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
- I fixed this and added a lead paragraph per Wikipedia:Lists#List_content. This was obviously incorrect and you can definitely change things like that without waiting for consensus. Good catch. Sswonk (talk) 13:36, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Boston Harbor Islands Archeological District
[edit]I figured the question of including the Georges Island photo might come up. I would argue that Moon Island, although part of Quincy historically, is owned by Boston. Since it is the only island in Quincy that's far enough above the water to have any archeological interest, it can be the only place that's included in the district.
The point is moot, though, as User:Sswonk, my colleague on this project, had an image of it. . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 15:58, 6 November 2009 (UTC)