Talk:Landscape urbanism

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 August 2021 and 24 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Emuzgi.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): NILOU OU.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:11, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Comments

This page is obviously biased and makes numerous assumptions and false claims that attempt to discredit the legitimacy of the Landscape Urbanism movement. This article needs to be edited to present an informative, neutral and comprehensive view of the movement and its critics/opponents. A section should be added to this article that brings to light the heated debate between the two camps of Landscape Urbanists and New Urbanists- and discusses the points of contention between both sides with a neutral perspective. Additionally, this article should mention and link to the movement of Ecological Urbanism, which recently emerged as a critique and arguably an evolution of Landscape Urbanism. The following statements need to be removed or backed up with supporting evidence:

Section: "Landscape Urbanism":

"...is more capable of organizing the city and enhancing the urban experience, but it has yet to express a true nature of an 'urban' experience."

" Landscape Urbanism has emerged as a theory in the last fifteen years and is far from being a coherent doctrine."

"Thus, he is not promoting integrated urbanism and public transport, or medium to high density living; this contradicts the notion of ecological design."

"The processes of landscape (i.e. time based development) are merely concepts to the landscape urbanist, not an ecological approach to development. There is, hence, reason to believe that this is an open affirmation to suburbanization – low density development. Charles Waldheim, James Corner, Chris Reed, and Mohsen Mostafavi are among the instructors, practitioners, and theorists who have been most responsible for articulating the terms of Landscape Urbanism, but the field is still at a point where architectural graphics take precedence over applied methodologies."

Section: "Themes":

"James Corner, in an essay entitled "Terra Fluxus," describes the main qualities of Landscape Urbanism in abstract rather than practical terms, lending the genre to speculation rather than practice"

I'll do my best to implement these updates- but help is always appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cgoode00 (talk • contribs) 17:39, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

I think this page could be improved and expanded. I think i will have a go at assembling some more diverse references then make some improvements. I come for a landscape architecture background, help from other related disciplines would be good if anyone is up for it.Simeon Chilvers (talk) 11:30, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Territorial planning from the sustainability perspective must be grounded on ecologycal networks in a "continuum naturale" upon wich a whole matrix of connections e. g. roads, buildings will find their best place. Modernism and industrialisation broke the balance with nature, sustainability should be at the base of the planning process and not solely private property. Integration of man's action with the planet. Telmo Andrade —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.141.207.226 (talk) 08:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

MTA: As part of an Anthropology project at my University, I have been focusing on this particular Wkipedia page that discusses Landscape Urbanism. We have been asked to read through the article, and implement edits and ideas in order to improve the quality of the work presented on Wikipedia. In order to do this, I have located 4 sources:

Tanzer, K. (2007). The Green Braid : Towards An Architecture Of Ecology, Economy And Equity. New York, NY: Routledge.

Kapelos, G. (1994). Interpretations of Nature : Contemporary Canadian Architecture, Landscape and Urbanism. Kleinburg, Canada: McMichael Canadian Art Collection.

Duany, Andres. The New Civic Art: Elements Of Town Planning. New York: Rizzoli 2003. Print.

Moran, E. F. (2011). People And Nature: An Introduction To Human Ecological Relations. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

(2012). In Landscape Urbanism. Retrieved February 28, 2012, from http://landscapeurbanism.com/ - I have added these sources to the main page of the article, in order to expand the information available (March 6th, 2012) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jmmacphail (talk • contribs) 17:49, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

This article on Wikipedia discusses the theory behind Landscape Urbanism, and how landscape is more useful in structuring and organizing a city, than architecture. The author states that it is a theory that has been brought forward in the last fifteen years. The article presents the exact definition, and discusses the architect who originally coined the term. In the second paragraph, the author discusses the history of Landscape Urbanism - discussing various conferences and events when Landscape Urbanism was discussed and presented as a useful tool in city planning. In the final paragraph, the author discusses an essay on landscape urbanism by James Corner called "Terra Fluxus" and goes into more detail about the themes that are present within the essay itself.

In reading through this article, I have noticed that there is an extensive amount of information missing. There is a discussion within the article’s talk page that disputes the neutrality of the article itself. It seems that the article is arguing against the validity of landscape urbanism. With my edits of this article, I will attempt to regain neutrality within the article, and demonstrate more information within the article itself. I will also attempt to improve the citations within the article, and expand the variety of sources. The article is overall very critical, and statements made by the author need to be more supported in order to be considered valid. I will therefore attempt to improve on these various aspects. Throughout the sources that I have been using, I have noticed that there is a huge amount of information that could be included in this article, in order to make it a “good” Wikipedia article. Jmmacphail (talk) 23:01, 28 February 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Fail. While it is clear that editors have recently made efforts to improve the article, and while these efforts are commendable and have made a difference, there are still issues in the prose. For instance, in the second sentence, why refer to a span of years? This article could potentially be online longer than the editor is on this earth. Refer to specific decades rather than unclear timeframes ('late 1990s' rather than 'the last fifteen years') so that the article can age well. In the lead, how does the conclusion that Landscape urbanism is a response to changes in the planet logically follow from what comes before? From what I read, it appears that landscape urbanism grew out of critiques of modernism, not environmental issues. The history section is well written and clear. To improve clarity, make sure that every sentence, and every tidbit of information has a reason for being in the article. When adding new information, ask yourself why you are adding it where you are, then whether it would make more sense elsewhere. Ask yourself whether the statements of fact you are making follow logically from the facts that came earlier in the article. The sentences are internally sensical, meaning I can glean a point from everything written. But try unpacking comma splices by reordering sentences that are overloaded with commas. Just because a sentence is readable does not make it a good sentence. For instance, the sentence: "Peter Connolly separately used the term ‘landscape urbanism’ as the initial title for his Masters of Urban Design project proposal, presented at RMIT in Melbourne, Australia, two years earlier, in 1994." could be improved by shifting it above any mention of Charles Waldheim and moving some important information (dates / places) to the front of the sentence. For clarity's sake, it could read: "In 1994, Peter Connolly used the term 'landscape urbanism' as the title for his Masters of Urban Design proposal at RMIT Melbourne." It also seems from this sentence that Connolly coined "Landscape urbanism", not Waldheim. If Connolly used the phrase two years previous to Waldheim, why is he not being credited with coining the term? Hard to say.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Fail. My notes from above apply to the lead, as the lead is approximately 40% of the content of the article. Leads should stand alone, should not give large amounts of information not included in the rest of the article, should explain why the article is important, should give context to the article, should talk about controversies (and I can tell from the talk page there are a few), etc. Please read WP:LEAD and rewrite the lead accordingly.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Fail. The article does not appear to cite sources for all of its claims. Notably, where is the citation for Peter Connoly's Master of Urban Design project? Where is the citation for the last sentence of the lead? The History section is missing several citations. Where can I find the information about the Graham Foundation conference in the first sentence of the History section? These missed citations make the article unverifiable. Read WP:V for information on the importance verifiability. There is also some confusion in the article on what a citations actually are, and where they go. Citations should co-align with the reference list, or should be entirely in the notes section. There is a large reference list, but information in the article is not cited, and so the reader has no way of knowing what information comes from what source, again damaging the article's verifiability.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Fail. As stated above, there are two distinct reference lists in this article. The notes section either needs to be incorporated into the reference section, or the reference section needs to be incorporated into notes. In either case, most of the possible inline citations seem to be missing from the article. Reliability is a small problem in the article. The fourth note is a bare URL. Wikipedians should not cite bare URLs in their references because these links can change, and are susceptible to link rot. If the link changes, your citation is gone forever without more information about the link. Try using a reference template in the citation tab when you are editing the article, and accurately fill out as many of those fields as you can, or find a different source. Please see WP:IC and WP:RELY.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Fail. Without including accurate inline citations, there is no simple way of determining whether the article contains original research or not. Claims like the last one in the lead appear to be original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Fail. I get a general idea of what Landscape Urbanism is, but where are the critiques of the movement? Why does the history end in the 1990s? (History extends from the archeological past to about a minute ago, and a history section should reflect that) Are there multiple perspectives on the movement? Again, hard to say. There appears to be a lot of information left on the table. More research is advised.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Pass. The article does stay focused, but there is a paucity of information in the article to begin with. No reason to fail it in this category.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Fail. The talk page reveals that an entire set of negative opinions about Landscape urbanism have been suppressed. These should be researched, cited, and reinstated to create true neutrality. Suppression of dissenting voices is itself a bias.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Hard to say. The current page appears to be the current result of a slow motion content dispute, but the dissenting side has not edited the page in quite some time.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Neutral. There are no images, and thus no need to rate this section.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Fail. While the GA criteria states that images are not necessary to be a GA, the guidelines state: if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided. Find examples of Landscape urbanism projects in cities around the world, incorporate a discussion of those projects into the article, and include pictures of those projects.
	7. Overall assessment.	This article has failed its GA review. The article is improving, but has a long way to go before it conforms to GA criteria. Editors are to be commended for their continued efforts on the article. Continued revision, research, and a consistent application of WP:MOS will aid editors in improving this article until it reaches GA standards. At that time, I urge editors to resubmit it. Thank you.

Reviewer: Rawlangs (talk · contribs) 17:00, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

You succeeded in regaining neutrality in the article. Good use of sources which improved the content of the article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmawilson15 (talk • contribs) 02:45, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

MTA Peer Review

You succeeded in regaining neutrality in the article. Good use of sources which improved the content of the article! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emmawilson15 (talk • contribs) 02:52, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

As noted previously, Jmmacphail was successful in regaining neutrality in the article. The addition of sources was highly effective in further promoting credibility in the article. The addition of references, too, reflects a clear and thoughtful effort in editing the article. The addition of information was highly necessary and truly increased the overall quality of the article. Additionally, it should be noted, that the information added was highly relevant and informative for the reader- it fit very well in the article. Furthermore, the article presents itself in a clear and effective manner, that appeals to a wide variety of learners. Lastly, the article demonstrates a thorough understanding of how to properly facilitate a Wikipedia edit. Alliepa (talk contribs) 01.37, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Non-sequitur

"Therefore it is clear that landscape urbanism can be considered a response to changes in our planet." The sentence follows a paragraph explaining that Peter Connolly coined the term in an essay for his Masters about how landscape can affect the city environment more than architecture. How does a term used in an essay, then used by a chair at Harvard to describe the rise of landscape as the basis for urban order, end up being "considered a response to changes in our planet."? The "Therefore" made me think the paragraph had been structured in such a way as to introduce the Editors OR, but I can't find any evidence of it. It's just a confusing sentence. Chrissd21 (talk) 09:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Landscape urbanism. 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/20141217034444/http://www.worldbuildingsdirectory.com/project.cfm?id=801 to http://www.worldbuildingsdirectory.com/project.cfm?id=801

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) 09:05, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Landscape urbanism. 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/20120508062902/http://bettercities.net/article/street-fight-landscape-urbanism-versus-new-urbanism-14855 to http://bettercities.net/article/street-fight-landscape-urbanism-versus-new-urbanism-14855
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130503233057/http://www.thehighline.org/galleries/images/high-line-1999-2006 to http://www.thehighline.org/galleries/images/high-line-1999-2006
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110607080654/http://www.aho.no/en/AHO/Institutes/Urbanism-and-landscape/ to http://www.aho.no/en/aho/Institutes/Urbanism-and-landscape/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070221000859/http://www.pdp.ca/The_Finalists.416.0.html to http://www.pdp.ca/The_Finalists.416.0.html

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) 18:31, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Landscape urbanism. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.werk.us/portfolio/olympic-sculpture-park/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130517035417/http://project-phoenix.org/ourmission to http://project-phoenix.org/ourmission
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304102409/http://www.werk.us/portfolio/hellinikon-metropolitan-park/ to http://www.werk.us/portfolio/hellinikon-metropolitan-park/

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) 18:07, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Feedback from an Architecture Student

Landscape Urbanism has become increasingly relevant in discussing the future of cities in terms of density, public space, transportation, community interaction and environmental sustainability. This article provides accurate and relevant information about the history of landscape urbanism and the way that it has contributed to society. It also adds information about the criticism to landscape architects which is valuable to better understand the limits of the discipline. However, the examples of projects are scarce, outdated and don't provide a holistic view of landscape possibilities. Adding information about current situations that can be influenced by landscape architecture, referencing the studies of prominent professionals could modernize the article and further explain the major transformation that is taking place in the subject. Overall, a great informative article. Ennis Architect (talk) 22:30, 5 September 2019 (UTC)Ennis Architect (talk) 03:31, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Mount Allison University supported by WikiProject Anthropology and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2012 Q1 term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 16:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)