This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
The hidden message in the WikiProject National Register of Historic Places assessment is confusing and raises far more concerns than benefits. Many times sourcing evidence of "a building" or other structure can only be found in sources that contribute to certain historical aspects outside of such a particular building or structure (Wikipedia subject). These sources still include the subject and editors will see this as a historical repository for that sourced material that might not warrant a stand-alone article.
If there is not enough content to supposedly qualify for a "NRHP project edit count inclusion" criterion (none that I am not aware of) it is suggestive that the project be boldly withdrawn and the infobox changed. If this is something requiring a RFC or project discussion, if this is a project sanctioned opinion (consensus) then that should be the direction. To deny the article proper project assessment, simply "because" there is dissatisfaction on the edit count devoted to the NRHP aspect of the subject, does not make sense. Should we ignore the historical significance of a building (structure etc...) to the project or stop including the project from any future articles if the overall edit contribution in one direction is more than that of the particular building(s) or structures on the NRHP list? Otr500 (talk) 14:43, 12 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
