Talk:Union Avenue Historic Commercial District

Preliminary comments

Comments by elcobbola (talk · contribs)

Content:

• Such detail in the "Contributing properties" section is probably going to be unnecessary and might actually be sufficient to split into a new list article (e.g. List of notable Union Avenue Historic Commercial District buildings), with a summary (ideally in prose format) remaining to describe and summarize those buildings which are particularly notable and/or significant to the district.
• As a district of Pueblo, background on the the city itself is likely necessary to establish context. Even searching Google books for "Union Avenue"+Pueblo brings up numerous sources of information (quick example: here). Otherwise, searching local libraries, local historical societies and perhaps contacting members of the Colorado Wikiproject will likely yield more sources on Pueblo and the district itself. Featured articles require a "thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature on the topic".
• The "Politics" section seems more about the rally and city politics than its location (the latter being the subject of the article). It doesn't seem relevant to the article. One would expect a politics section for this article to discuss issues directly relevant to the district (e.g. zoning, historic status, etc.) Same issue with the Destruction of the Branch Inn. Like politics, a sentence may perhaps be warranted, but a whole section does not seem appropiate weight.

Technical issues:

• The lead should summarize the article and, as such, should not contain unique information. Information about merging municipalities, etc. should be added to the appropiate section.
• See this example edit for how to format sources. If you don't like using templates, they can, of course, be coded manually. Templates for other types of sources can be found at WP:CITET.
• It's probably not best to go over grammar and prose while content still needs to be added, but watch for commas to offset certain clauses (e.g. "While the area was still South Pueblo, Bat Masterson, best known for his association with Wyatt Earp and Doc Holiday was brought..." should be "While the area was still South Pueblo, Bat Masterson, best known for his association with Wyatt Earp and Doc Holiday, was brought..."

Obviously these are just things to get you started, not a comprehensive list of issues. Hope it helps. Эlcobbola _talk 19:45, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments

I noticed this article having been deemed not ready for FL status yet, at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Union Avenue Historic Commercial District/archive1. It seems like a good topic. I think it is fine to cover a lot of detail about contributing buildings within a historic district (HD) article. I strongly suggest obtaining and using the NRHP nomination document which exists for this HD and which will provide a wealth of detail. The NRHP nomination document (or variation called an "inventory" or a "registration" document) is available for free upon request by email to nr_reference (at) nps.gov. Good luck! doncram (talk) 21:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I was asked to comment again, and the most relevant thing i think to say now is what i said before: the article would be best improved by obtaining and using the NRHP nomination document. With that, one or more of the existing references, such as the current Fodors.Com reference #2 ("^ "Union Avenue Historic District" (in English). http://www.fodors.com/world/north-america/usa/colorado/south-central-colorado/review-436347.html, which has very little information at the source) should be replaced. The NRHP document would provide info for a much more meaningful article. doncram (talk) 01:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

To clarify I have sent for the refs. I am waiting for the response. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 02:09, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I used the material from NHRP to makae the changes seen here. How do I site it and should I cite every sentence I just added? It all came from the one source. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 17:57, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

citing NRHP document

For your use at Union Avenue Historic Commercial District‎ or elsewhere.

Here's an example reference for one of these NRHP documents, composed in this case for Bradford-Huntington House in Norwichtown, for which the NRHP document is available on-line. Note this uses "first=" and "last=" fields for the author name (while using "author=" field works for giving multiple authors), and it gives author preparation date which is always given in Section 11 of the NRHP document:
<ref name="nrhpinv3">{{cite web|url=http://pdfhost.focus.nps.gov/docs/NRHP/Text/70000720.pdf |title=National Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination: Bradford-Huntington House |date=May 27, 1970 |first=Constance |last=Luyster |publisher=National Park Service}} and [http://pdfhost.focus.nps.gov/docs/NRHP/Photos/70000720.pdf ''Accompanying four photos, exterior, from 1961 and 1970'']</ref>

The reference should be attached after punctuation. And, a second application of the reference, together with a page number (in this case page number 4) indication for example, can be given by:

<ref name=nrhpinv3/>{{rp|4}}

If the document is not available on-line, then I suggest just using a hard-coded reference in the same format, as follows:
<ref name=hardcoded>Luyster, Constance (May 27, 1970). "National Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination: Bradford-Huntington House". National Park Service. (with accompanying four photos, exterior, from 1961 and 1970)</ref>

These references above should all display as footnotes as follows:

Luyster, Constance (May 27, 1970). "National Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination: Bradford-Huntington House" (PDF). National Park Service. and Accompanying four photos, exterior, from 1961 and 1970

Luyster, Constance (May 27, 1970). "National Register of Historic Places Inventory-Nomination: Bradford-Huntington House". National Park Service. (with accompanying four photos, exterior, from 1961 and 1970)

Hope this example is helpful. (Adapted from a note i posted at Talk:List of RHPs in CT.) --doncram (talk) 18:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC)