Talk:Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board

A fact from Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 January 2018 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board oversees a park system that has been called the best-designed, best-financed, and best-maintained in America?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2018/January. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board.

Wikipedia

Minnesota Low‑importance

	Minnesota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota 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.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Urban studies and planning Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning 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.Urban studies and planningWikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planningTemplate:WikiProject Urban studies and planningUrban studies and planning articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

submitting article as DYK[edit]

I saw this article was recently created, and think it would make a great Did you know...? candidate for the front page. I think the article is in great shape - just wondering if there were plans to add content to the Activities section? Perhaps notable annual events and the like?

Pinging Mnnlaxer and Bobamnertiopsis. I would happily submit and help with the nomination, though I would welcome one of you to take the lead. = paul2520 (talk) 16:45, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that's great. I've never been involved in a DYK before. You can take the lead, but give me (and hopefully others) the weekend to add material. I'm happy to expose the article and get new editors contributing, but the current article is so stubby, I would rather the DYK would be next week. - Mnnlaxer | talk | stalk 00:16, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to take the lead and guide you on the process, Mnnlaxer. I'd recommend taking a look at the aims and objectives of the DYK process - it's meant to be a way to feature new content that meets a set of criteria -- all of which this page seems to meet. An article I started that recently was approved is Phillipe Cunningham. So you can see, the articles don't have to be very long or detailed - it's more of a quality threshold.

As DYK is not the same as the featured articles process, the idea is just to showcase the fact that our encyclopedia is still growing at a rapid pace.

There is a requirement of nominating new or recently improved articles within seven days of the creation or expansion. So I'll plan to submit it early next week. If you can add some content to the Activities section, I'd think it's good to go. Let me know if there is anything else I could do to improve the article, as I'll have time over the weekend, too. = paul2520 (talk) 14:26, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I get it, I'm just being self-conscious. Go ahead and nominate it now. I took the blank header out. - Mnnlaxer | talk | stalk 15:06, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mnnlaxer: Great! I think I understand where you're coming from - and like I said, I'll happily help. Also the DYK will be good publicity for others who may want to contribute.

The question is, what is the hook that we should use?

Some ideas:

...that the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board overseas a park system that The Trust for Public Land has rated #1 in the United States five years in a row?

...that Minnehaha Falls, overseen by the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board, sees more than 850,000 visitors every year?

...that the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board overseas a park system that has been called the best-designed, best-financed, and best-maintained in America?

We could also do something with the stats listed, but I feel like hooks tend to be more a quick, quality statement.

If you don't have a preference or other suggestions, I can suggest all of them and the DYK reviewer can pick one that they think is best. = paul2520 (talk) 15:39, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The first one for sure. "MPRB has been rated the #1 park system in the United States for five years in a row by the TPL?"- Mnnlaxer | talk | stalk 16:16, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Great. I'll try to do the nomination later, but it might not be until tomorrow. = paul2520 (talk) 19:21, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mnnlaxer and Bobamnertiopsis, just so you know, I nominated the article for DYK. See the nomination here. Feel free to respond to any comments; I'll keep an eye out myself. = paul2520 (talk) 18:21, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright[edit]

Thanks, @Bobamnertiopsis:, for the edits. Why does the spoonbridge photo violate copyright? It's an own work at Commons. [1] I put it on the Sculpture Gardern article also. If it doesn't pass muster, I would favor a different photo, that one is a bit boring I think. And it's at the other article if someone is interested in the garden. - Mnnlaxer | talk | stalk 05:08, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, it shouldn't be on Commons either. Freedom of Panorama laws vary from country to country; in the US, it's okay to take pictures of buildings and license them with free (CC) licenses but 3D artworks are not protected, so a photo of Spoonbridge is, according to US copyright law, a violation of Oldenburg's copyright. —Collin^{t c} 05:17, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I'd suggest: File:Harrietbandshell.jpg, File:Lake Harriet Bandshell and skyline 2015-05-23.jpg great but a panorama, File:Calhoun Isles, Minneapolis, MN, USA - panoramio.jpg, File:Lake Calhoun MN.jpg unique, File:Lake Calhoun-Minneapolis-2006-07-22-crop2.jpg another panorama, File:Minneapolis and L. Calhoun 20.jpg, or File:Loring Park Aerial.jpg. - Mnnlaxer | talk | stalk 06:21, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Parks list draft[edit]

Hi! I just wanted to point out User:Molandfreak/sandbox#Minneapolis Parks article, a draft list of parks in the MPRB system. —Collin^{t c} 16:06, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's great! Only fix I see is that Three Rivers doesn't manage any of those parks. They don't have any within the Minneapolis borders. - Mnnlaxer | talk | stalk 19:07, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mnnlaxer: @Bobamnertiopsis: it's been quite a while since I've updated the list, but at the time I read that North Mississippi Regional Park was jointly managed by the Three Rivers Park District and the MPRB since part of it is in Brooklyn Center. Regardless, it's a placeholder for now and I don't think the text should go on the article if/when it's made.--Molandfreak (talk, contribs, email) 11:51, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Corrections[edit]

Hi. Has anyone here read the 2008 book City of Parks? Here's what the author says about Theodore Wirth (who he highly praises later):
Today, many Minneapolitans think of Wirth as the man who created the Minneapolis park system. In fact, he did not—but he greatly improved it. He inherited a park system that already included most of the shores of the city's lakes, creek and river. The lakeshores that were not yet owned by the park board were in various stages of acquisition or had been ardently promoted for more than a decade before his arrival.... Although Wirth is often given credit for this expansion of the park system, he was a reluctant supporter of some of the new acquisitions. Wirth said when he arrived in Minneapolis that the city already had enough park land.
On the occasion of Minneapolis slipping in ParkScore to #3, behind Saint Paul and Washington DC, I am going to make some quick corrections here. Normally I like the National Park Service as a reference. But their biography of Mr. Wirth uses his son Conrad as a source, and his son directed the NPS. All of that is a conflict of interest. Sorry I don't have time to do major work on this but maybe somebody else does. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:05, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]