Talk:Urban wilderness

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.

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Need for references[edit]

This article is interesting and well-written, IMO. However, it relies on a certain interpretation of the word "wilderness." It needs one or more references to support this point of view. Please add citations from a reliable source. Sunray 17:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I find the article biased and uninteresting. It reads like someone's personal writings. I recommend it be deleted swiftly. -69.47.186.70 (talk) 07:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also agree this article does not seem to be straightforward about the definition or to help understanding of urban wilderness. If this information came from reputable sources, then they need to be referenced clearly. If it is just written by someone unqualified, then I don't think this page should still be up. If so, then it needs to be clearly laid out and thoroughly researched.Spongylumps (talk) 18:43, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A vote AGAINST merger[edit]

From what I can see, "urban wilderness" qualifies as a movement, while urban forestry is a practice or profession that may draw inspiration from a number of ethics or aesthetics movements related to architectural or landscaping. Now if the intent is to merge all articles dealing with specific ethical or aesthetic movements with articles on associated practices or professions, that might make sense. But I don't see what is gained thereby, especially if today's one-paragraph article becomes a multi-page production over time. This one already has a link to "New Urbanism" & "Gentrification" -- I'm sure other legit links and elaborations will occur to participants. But we're more likely to see such contributions and elaborations if movements are allowed some logistical independence from larger articles they might otherwise be included under merely for the sake of tidiness.

--Disgustedandamused 18:06, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Urban wilderness is a wider movement of which urban forestry is only a small but significant element. By the way: I added some See Also links to the bottom. Tell me if they're not appropiate/conform to standards. --Egregius 15:33, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education assignment: Communicating Science[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 January 2023 and 8 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): GreenHairGreenThumbs (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by Maeflowerbailey16 (talk) 14:31, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]