Talk:Deady and Villard Halls, University of Oregon

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Higher education, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of higher education, universities, and colleges on Wikipedia. Please visit the project page to join the discussion, and see the project's article guideline for useful advice.Higher educationWikipedia:WikiProject Higher educationTemplate:WikiProject Higher educationHigher education articles

Oregon Mid‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon 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.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

National Register of Historic Places High‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal 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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merger proposal[edit]

There are separate articles on Deady Hall and Villard Hall as well as this article on the combo, "Deady and Villard Halls, University of Oregon". I suggest merging the two separate ones into this combo article. This combo article is needed to describe the U.S. National Historic Landmark which is the combo. The separate ones have to carry repetitive information, and could best be merged in here. If they are not merged, this combo article must be retained. doncram (talk) 10:36, 5 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge. Buildings have long been separate entities with separate histories. The only reason there is a combo article is because it was recently created, and I don't feel it is necessary. Who says the combo article must be retained? Make the combo article a soft redirect to the other two articles instead, if absolutely necessary. Katr67 (talk) 21:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What i meant about the combo article must be retained, is that it is needed to describe the National Historic Landmark, which was awarded to the combination of the two. Each one of them is a Registered Historic Place on its own, and each is part of the NHL, but neither separately is an NHL. It seems to work out better, in systematically describing NHLs nation-wide, that we create an article about any such combinations which are created in NHL designations. One way this works properly is that only the combination article gets the category tag "National Historic Landmarks in Oregon", as only the combo not any one part is actually an NHL, and that keeps the number of items in the category matching up to the number of NHLs in the state. I could probably describe other ways in which having the combo article works and is needed, if necessary.

I don't want to push a merger if there are people who oppose, who want to keep separate articles on the separate buildings. I just thought it was possible that one combined article could cover the two individual buildings and also describe the combination of the two of them. I am fairly indifferent, though, between having 1 merged article or having 3 separate articles as it is now. I just would oppose attempting to go back to having just 2 articles on the 2 buildings, with no proper place to "be" the combination, and to hold the NHL-level designation information and category tag and so on.

So, Katr67, if you want to keep the separate articles, that is fine by me. It is okay by me either if you wish to delete the merger proposals, or if you wish to leave it open for more discussion. By the way, though, probably it would be helpful in both separate building articles to add the NRHP Inventory/Nomination document that is the main source i added to the combo article, as it provides extensive detail on each of the buildings. doncram (talk) 07:42, 10 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Deady and Villard Halls, University of Oregon. 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/20080430235109/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1260&ResourceType=Building to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1260&ResourceType=Building

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 04:25, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]