Talk:Roland Park, Baltimore

Untitled

Neither Olmsted was an Architect - both were Landscape Architects. --Teda13 (talk) 01:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The Architect field in the template shows how the historic district is listed in the National Register of Historic Places only. The NRHP does not distinguish between landscape architects and regular architects in this field.--GcSwRhIc (talk) 11:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Then that is a flaw that should be corrected in the template. As an Architect I take exception to someone representing themselves (or advertising someone else) as an Architect when they are not - in most states within the U.S. doing so is against the law, whether you do it on the internet or elsewhere. Teda13 (talk) 01:49, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Your issue is with the National Register of Historic Places. The template only reflects the fields that are part of the NRHP listings. If you take a look at a number of the listings, you will see that sometime builders and developers are listed as the "architects". In any event replacing architect with planner doesn't work as it is not a field. Regarding the legality of the matter, the details of the architect field come the National Park Service's web site.GcSwRhIc (talk) 03:45, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

The National Park Service's web site is not Wikipedia and it is not subject to the laws of states like a private entity is. Teda13 (talk) 21:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Don't shoot the messenger. I am following the conventions of Wikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places and Template:Infobox nrhp which is to be faithful to to the NRHP listing. It might be better to go to those talk pages and discuss the issue there. GcSwRhIc (talk) 22:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not shooting the messenger - i'm pointing out that in this case, and from what you say - in other cases too- Wikipedia is propagating inaccurate information about important historical figures. I'm also not making trying to make a federal case out of it but this is a talk page so this is where i'm discussing this inaccurate information. The subject of this article and it's designers are important historically, and they are important to me. Teda13 (talk) 00:13, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

"Roland Park is the first planned "suburban" community in North America, located in Baltimore, Maryland, USA." This is not true. Llewellyn Park, NJ and Riverside, IL spring immediately to mind as being older planned suburbs. For material on nineteenth century suburbs, please refer to Crabgrass Frontier by Kenneth Jackson, Bourgeois Utopias by Robert Fishman, and Borderlands by John Stilgoe. Oldsanfelipe (talk) 19:45, 21 October 2014 (UTC)oldsanfelipe

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Roland Park, Baltimore/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I challenge the statement that Roland Park is the first planned community in the USA. Frederick Law Olmstead and Calvert Vaux designed Riverside, Illinois in 1869 and construction began the next year. The Village was incorporated in 1875 and is recognized by the National Park Service as the first planned community in the nation.

Last edited at 16:29, 12 May 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 04:49, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Racial Convenants

I believe the article is conflating Roland Park with the Roland Park Company. I do not believe any racial covenants made it into the Roland Park development, but were included when the Roland Park Company developed Guilford. I know my original deed has no racial covenants. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.224.239.219 (talk) 16:33, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

References