Talk:Cultural heritage management

The term "Cultural Heritage Management" is redundant, overly vague, and illogical

All heritage, except for genetics, is cultural. Why not Culture Management, or Heritage Management? Is it that we need 3 words to make us feel good? And anyway, how is "Cultural Heritage Management" a clearer term than CRM? Frankly, I read "Cultural Heritage Management" and I have no idea what that means. It looks more vague than CRM to me. Couldn't a library be "Cultural Heritage Management?" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.92.83.171 (talk) 18 August 2007

The term is cultural heritage to distinguish it from natural heritage i.e. in considering protecting a national park because of its natural environment or because of its anthropogenic resources, and although CRM is often used synonymously with cultural heritage management, CRM is also used in a wider sense of non-heritage, current cultural resources as in, for example, contemporary art. Viv Hamilton 09:44, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Sure Viv, whatever. Except here's the thing: Cultural Resources management is a term WE AMERICAN ARCHAEOLOGISTS created to refer to the protection and preservation of OUR archaeological sites, not sites in England or wherever. It is worded to set it apart, and to contrast it, with Natural Resources Management. How is that different from your explanation of the CHM/NEM issue? The fact that you all have co-opted the CRM term and twisted it into meaninglessness is not our problem, it is yours. You all can fiddle around with Wikipedia all you want, it won't alter reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.92.83.171 (talk) 19 August 2007

The terms cultural heritage and natural heritage are used in UK, Europe and other parts of the world - e.g see UN examples - to distinguish the anthropogenic from the natural resources. There is in some ways a difference between the archaeological sites in the US that as I understand King etc was dealing with, where there are indiginous people still using their sites, and hence a conflation of their current culture with their heritage, (see definition from King on Cultural resource management) and archaeological sites in Europe, which (until we started getting interested in industrial archaeology), were in the main divorced from current use. Anyway, the point of the encyclopaedia is to reflect what is out there - even if you think it is an illogical term, CH is used e.g. in UN conventions, government policy etc, so we need to explain it. CRM is used in both senses in US, UK and rest of world: it is no longer used exclusively in context of archaeology even in the US - your real gripe is not with archaeologists on this side of the pond, but with government, tourism and businesses who adopted CRM in the wider use. As you say, we can't change reality so we need, as the CRM article does, to explain that it can have different meanings, and to provide explanations of them all. Viv Hamilton 08:54, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

"Cultural heritage" is indeed a universal term, however, an article for that page already exists. Some of the material seems to be redundant or might be better placed on that page. Further, as with respect to CRM there is as-yet no verifiability of those statements (including giving a nebulous and fuzzy "google search" method), ergo even if it is a true usage, that usage may be a neologism (see WP:NEO). A serious discussion must take place if the pages are to remain this way, otherwise, they will be changed to reflect common usage, per WP:TITLE Morgan Riley (talk) 18:09, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

How to organize & interrelate heritage topics?

These topics, although interrelated, are not well integrated on Wikipedia. What is their hierarchical relationship and how should they be organized? Often multiple terms are used for the same activity with slight national variations. Should parallel topics exist? Which are the main topics?

UK/Europe | U.S.

• heritage conservation | historic preservation
• heritage management | cultural resources management
• conservation area | historic district

Other

• building restoration

Tous ensemble 16:21, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Greetings! I've spent several days working on a schema, as it is quite a mess. I figure that the highest order article is Cultural heritage, which covers the abstract theoretical, philosophical issues as well as an umbrella for explaining and contextualizing the critical subsidiary terms, international preservation ideas and organizations, physical preservation issues, legal and emerging issues, etc. Cultural heritage management would cover the aspects and sector surrounding general physical preservation, itself an umbrella for such as national regulatory schemes, general national or local preservation organizations, listed/registered sites, conservation areas/historic districts, rescue archaeology, and other hands-on macroscopic aspects of managing cultural heritage at a societal level. For the architectural side, architectural conservation (the overarching article under which the aforementioned building restoration falls) and conservation-restoration seem to already cover the physical-technical aspects of preservation (e.g. materials science), rather than the institutional issues of preservation. Historic preservation would then redirect to the United States scheme (given its usage peculiar to the United States, and preponderant usage in links to said article), and heritage conservation would redirect here or to cultural heritage. cultural resource management is thus redundant with existing articles (see talk page there for issues), and would merely redirect here (per the usage in the old CRM magazine of the NPS), with a hatnote to its specific "rescue archaeology" usage in context. Morgan Riley (talk) 14:50, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Removed redirect

I've rewritten this article (which previously redirected to Cultural resources management), including some material which was moved from Cultural Resources Management Viv Hamilton 17:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Move request

{{Move|Cultural heritage management}} —Dogears 23:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I support the rename in accordance with Wikipedia capitalisation policy Viv Hamilton 19:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Moved --Stemonitis 07:33, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Merger proposal and vote

In 2011, someone proposed to merge Cultural resources management into this article. This proposal would provide answers to some of the issues raised above in this talk page (in 2007); it would also give to the first article, which has no apparent single topic, the coherence and context that it is lacking.--Caleb Crabb 13:00, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Your opinion about this merger

I proposed it, and am still in favor of it for the same reasons as you and I mentioned.Morgan Riley (talk) 03:38, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

History section

The history should mention that CHM started as early as 1903 already in Germany (Hesse). I might add a few facts from the corresponding article de:Denkmalschutz. Ahoi Horst-schlaemma (talk) 11:01, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cultural heritage management. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160330114112/http://arts.adelaide.edu.au/linguistics/guide.pdf to https://arts.adelaide.edu.au/linguistics/guide.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.urbact.com/hero

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:32, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cultural heritage management. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060827080922/http://www.unesco.org/culture/heritage/ to http://www.unesco.org/culture/heritage/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:11, 17 September 2017 (UTC)