Knowledge (XXG)

:Featured list candidates/List of National Historic Landmarks in Indiana/archive2 - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

1072:, which should be at least mentioned in the article, IMO. The National Park Service does make a point of mentioning these two non-NHLs in its official list of NHLs (the mention is on page 114 of the nation-wide PDF list that is the first reference in this article, or on the same page of the Indiana-specific PDF list of NHLs that the NPS also provides, not linked from this article). I believe it is appropriate to follow their lead in the Knowledge (XXG) list-article about the Indiana NHLs. These two sites are comparable to a NHL and, if the sites were not NPS units, they probably would be designated as NHLs. There is no specific source I can point to right now about this, but places which are NPS units already often do not get NHL designation, presumably because there are no significant additional benefits in terms of tax incentives or otherwise, for a site that is already a NPS unit. The George Rogers Clark National Historical Park and the Lincoln boyhood memorials are the only other contenders, anyhow, besides the NHLs, for being among the most important historic sites in the state that are recognized by the Federal government. This list-article, mainly covering the NHLs, is improved by covering these 2 in addition, so that it covers all of the most highly recognized sites of national historical importance in the state. I personally would want to include location information including coordinates for these, so that the Google/Bing map links are more useful to readers, too. 1018:", from footnote explaining the first column. Given that the article has an explicit key section defining the only two colors used in this article, the "defined here" link to the NRHP colors legend is not needed though. The footnote explaining the first column is still needed, to explain the ordering is by first "significant" word and that the numbering should not be interpreted as something too highly significant. It seems the table is sorting properly by that number column now. By the way, the table can be sorted to its original order in any browser, I believe, by refreshing the page. But it is helpful to have the first column be sortable to provide that option of sorting explicitly. 1172:
Plaza Historic District entry do not appear in its NHL summary webpage. As I stated in the closing minutes of the first FLC, I would support the descriptions being summaries of their corresponding articles as they are now, without representation that they are fully sourced from the NHL summary webpages (which is not accurate). I do want to support the FL candidacy of this article without requiring excessive footnoting, without requiring all the references that appear in each of the corresponding articles. But I would hope FL status be given with some more explicit understanding consensus of what's being done.
1060:
anticipate that state officials and "other parties" other than National officials will make recommendations (which then the NPS would evaluate and come to its own recommendations about). The possibility that state officials or private owners will nominate a property for NHL designation should be admitted, as that does happen (or technically they may be "recommending" rather than "nominating" their property for NHL status, if "nominating" is technically to be reserved for referring to the National Park Service's step in the process, while "nominating" as an English language word is what they are in fact doing).
449:
including FAs. So, I would hope you could focus your concern on facts that you feel need sourcing, and not be unduly irked by a gotcha-type discovery about something that in the larger scheme is not so important. I do appreciate your attention to detail here and elsewhere, though, and I don't mean to imply that good sourcing is unimportant for Featured Lists. It clearly is important; I just think there can be overkill in sourcing that makes some list-articles less helpful for readers.
1199:
document, say. I assume the height is accurately/adequately sourced in the corresponding article about the HD. I think this is fine, but then I would prefer for a footnote to the title of the descriptions column be given that clarifies some non-controversial facts are sourced in the corresponding articles. I had composed and/or applied such a footnote in the NY NHL list-article.
560:"They illustrate the state's industrial and architectural heritage, as well as battles, circuses, education, and several other topics" to me this reads that "They illustrate the states ... battles, circuses, education.." - do you mean that? or do you mean they also illustrate the state's battle heritage, circus heritage, education heritage? Just reads a little strangely to me... 1105:
what you want. While I would prefer having that, and including location and coordinates info for it, as I believe that readers interested in NHLs in IN are well served by having that. It is a lesser step, though, to just include mention of the place in the text. Can we just do that, which is part of clarifying what the NHLs are, anyhow (they are
1339:
believe that with just 42 sources, the list is a long way from being "excessively" footnoted, but the height issue is incredibly minor. After the comments from everyone else, and as my own concerns from the previous FLC have been addressed, I am happy to support the list. Good job Reywas, I'm glad to see this back at FLC!
1338:
From a quick sample of the sources (I don't have time to do as detailed a review as I did last time), but they seem mostly sorted. Most examples of prose being lifted straight from the source and of details creeping in from elsewhere have been addressed. I'd prefer it to be dealt with completely, and
1104:
Yes, whether to separately list the non-NHL NPS historic places has been discussed some before; i have not revisited what was said in the previous FLC. Reywas92, I take it your view is that having a separate table for them (just the George Rogers Clark National Historical Park in this case) is not
443:
Well, it has been discussed below (and argued some elsewhere, previously) that by the nature of this list being an index of well-sourced articles, the list-article can be regarded as well-sourced although not every unsurprising detail is explicitly sourced on this page. For example, discussed below
1147:
Well, the table is all NHLs/NHLDs, that is understood. Whether one is further a relatively rarer National Historic Site, National Memorial, etc. is usefully indicated by a color of that. That is how the wider system of NRHP lists is devised: in NRHP lists, all NRHPs are indeed NRHPs but we don't
895:
Sorry, if it appeared I was I being rude then forgive me. Just that being a Mac user we're often overlooked since we utterly never use "Internet Explorer". Sometimes the way "we" see the internet is different from everyone else. All I'm saying is that there seem to be issues. Don't forget, it's
1198:
So, to be clear for one example, the Indiana World War Memorial Plaza HD description mentions" it is 210 feet (64 m) tall" and that is not in the NHL summary webpage which is footnoted. I personally do not feel that the height is a controversial assertion requiring a separate footnote to the NRHP
1171:
About sourcing: the issue on sourcing opened in the first FLC, mostly in comments by Nev1, seems still open. There are facts stated in many of the descriptions which do not appear in the NHL summary webpages that are given as the sources. For example, specifics in the Indiana World War Memorial
448:
who focussed on detailed referencing in earlier review seems receptive about this. If a fact is surprising or controversial, I agree it should be explicitly sourced, as in any article. Non-surprising/non-important/non-controversial facts do not require in-line citations in wikipedia articles,
1059:
are linked, although maybe with one extra step required to get to that (not sure if my linking here will work, either). The statements all seem accurate to me, except maybe there is a little bit of over-emphasis on the National Park Service staff making the recommendations. The guidelines
1148:
apply just NRHP blue color to every one, we have used different colors to indicate NHLs and NHLDs and NHSs etc amongst the mere NRHPs. For consistency with use of the colors in all other NRHP lists and all other NHL lists, this one should show the relatively rare NMEM color.
1063:
Indiana is different than many other states in that none of its NHLs are also National Historic Sites, National Historical Parks, or other types of National Park Service units covering sites of historical importance. Indiana does have two non-NHL, NRHP-listed NPS units, the
95: 90: 914:
Which brings up a question. Is there an easy way to see how a page renders with different browsers? I know with Firefox and IE tab, I can easily look at those two browsers. But I don't know how to check Safari short of downloading it, which I am not inclined to
358:
And I do apologize for not providing a more thorough review; work has been a bit more hectic since the beginning of the year and I'm generally not very active on weekends. Here are some more (and I don't feel it is my duty to verify each and every source):
1272:
I find the first paragraph of the lead to be slightly overlinked, in particular the battle, circus and education links back-to-back-to-back. These are common terms and don't require the links, especially when there are so many valuable links later in the
883:
You don't have to be rude about it. I would expect the sorting to be more of a Knowledge (XXG) thing. Could you please play with it? Obviously I would have no idea if it works for you unless I strip it down to just the numbers, which shouldn't be done.
1375:- in the top paragraph in brackets you list National Historic Landmarks as NHLs but throughout the lead you list it without the s, as trivial as it may seem I could see this confusing some readers, just wondering if it would be better to change this. 1473: 409:
where the text does not reconcile with the source attributed to it? I have now raised this issue multiple times and have provided nearly half a dozen examples. Frankly, if I look again and find another, my final vote will be
1109:
the most important nationally-recognized historic sites in the state, but there's at least one other roughly equivalent site). I'll try making an edit to add some mention somewhere, to have something specific to discuss.
1124:
I see in the first FLC, Reywas92, your view was "I wouldn't oppose a see also or a mention in the lead, but these do not belong in an NHL list". I tried adding a mention of the one NHP into the text. Is that okay?
697:
I don't like the split off table of one former landmark. Perhaps this is the format used elsewhere but it looks odd to have a single-row sortable table. I would add it with a note in the descriptions column.\
584:
You use light-blue only for designating National Historic Landmark. Is this because you're assuming you don't need a symbol (per WP:ACCESS) by virtue of the fact you have only two categories and the other
1136:
Looks fine to me. Thanks! But for Lincoln, it is both an NHLD and NMEM. How should that be marked with the colors? I think it should use the NHLD color because that is what the list is describing.
370:
Citation 31: Doesn't say anything about this being the last building designed by the architect before his death. Also doesn't say anything about being an oculus allowing light into the sanctuary.
330:, and the citation given says nothing of him being a Governor, nothing about being a minister, nothing about being designed by Lew Wallace and nothing about being a Ben-Hur museum (just says 111: 289:
Again, a previous review mentioned that ref 7 for Angel Mounds doesn't define it as a regional center. I suggest you take another look at Nev1's comments in the previous FLC.
681:
Since this list is sortable, I would have thought we should link things like Italianate in every instance as there's no guarantee which one appears first after a re-sort.
1529: 1497: 1463: 1424: 1413: 1388: 1367: 1348: 1328: 1302: 1291: 1253: 1229: 1208: 1193: 1181: 1157: 1142: 1119: 1096: 1081: 1027: 1005: 994: 941: 927: 909: 890: 878: 860: 849: 832: 790: 769: 747: 713: 519: 490: 479: 463:
Well, the sourcing is my only concern for this article. I don't completely disagree with you and as long as the FL directors are aware of this, then this list has my
458: 422: 400: 346: 320: 300: 172: 157: 139: 81: 932:
Well, since it's free and if you really wanted to address the cross-browser issues, then downloading it seems the easiest and most comprehensive way of doing it.
64: 270: 444:
is the 210 foot height of the memorial in "Indiana World War Memorial Plaza HD" and the fact that is not in the NHL summary webpage which is footnoted. Note
1065: 1101:
I just did notice the Lincoln Boyhood Home is both an NHL and NMEM too, and I added NMEM color and a symbol to the Key and changed its entry to show that.
813:
Ordering of first column is odd, despite the note, and means you cannot (as far as I can tell) restore the list back to numerical order. Can you do it?
1086:
I believe this was discussed in the previous FLC. With all due respect, I think that only NHLs should be listed on this List of NHLs. And, in fact, the
689:
Blank image cell for the quilter house, would be better off as an en-dash so it doesn't just look as if something's gone missing. Same for any others.
40: 116: 1502:
Thanks for being specific with your reference to Dabomb's previous comment. I went and looked at what he said, and he did say it that way, but the
1056: 673:"It is a fine example of Greek Revival style from architect Francis Costigan amd is now a museum" fine in whose opinion? And fix the "amd" typo. 854:
I'm not sure it would make a difference just by browser. It works for me, so I wouldn't how to fix it without taking out the important symbols.
837:
I don't see what you mean. If I play with the sorting of the other columns and then go back to the number it's in the original numerical order.
735:
Not directly relevant but the templates are different shades of blue. Why not make them the same, at least for the NHL/NHL in Indiana template?
30: 17: 1438:- I was just wondering why isn't the Light blue accompanied by a symbol?, since I've been told a color should be accompanied by a symbol. 1269:"There are 37 National Historic Landmarks in the state, which are located in 22 of the its 92 counties." Excess "the" in this sentence. 1457:= National Memorial and NHl, and Light blue = NHL. It would be unnecessary for everything to have a symbol; we just like the colors. 1087: 1069: 131:
Since the last FLC, I have added alt text, removed information not covered in the references, and improved the related articles.
281:
It was mentioned in a previous review that ref 14 doesn't specifically mention the construction date. This has not been fixed.
1011: 975: 661:"place for both Indians and whites " just a quick check, 'cos I'm a dumb European, do you still use "Indians" in this sense? 701:
I think it would be inapproprate to include inde it with the others, and other states have this. I removed the sortability.
1220:
promotion to FL. I've reviewed the article again, think it is very good, and I have no remaining concerns. Nice job!
308:
I will continue my review when I feel the issues above as well as the issues from the previous FLC have been resolved.—
937: 905: 874: 845: 828: 786: 743: 709: 515: 200: 1187:
Thank you. I had removed excess information not in the references so nearly everything should be covered by them.
327: 755:
Well the NHLs in IN one should be the same as the general NRHP one. I reordered to put the same colors together.
781:
Well I would say 1,687 as of X. Because 1,687 simply isn't approximate, it's exact. Very precise indeed.
1055:
The article seems well developed on explaining the NHL designation process. For example the guidelines at
823:
sort numerically so once you've sorted per something, you can never get the list back in numerical order.
933: 901: 870: 841: 824: 782: 739: 705: 511: 999:
I've changed all to the NHRPlegend template. I'll keep testing the template to see if I get anywhere.
326:
I'm still not convinced all sourcing issues have been resolved. I picked one random citation, #39 for
1484:." so unless I'm unaware of a change, I don't know why it shouldn't also be accompanied by a symbol. 1285: 1247: 968: 665: 1481: 1477: 979: 215: 1363: 974:
templates with something that sorts correctly. I'm also not a fan of how the latter links you to
767: 298: 170: 153: 137: 79: 532:
Four "Indiana"s in the opening two sentences - this could use some variation, e.g. "the state"?
1323: 1225: 1204: 1177: 1153: 1130: 1115: 1077: 1023: 989: 922: 474: 454: 417: 395: 341: 315: 664:
Yes, both Indians and Native Americans are acceptable terms, though the latter is considered
1523: 1491: 1445: 1407: 1382: 378:
Citation 40: Doesn't say anything about Walker being the first self-made female millionare.
1278: 1240: 840:
Not in Safari. It sorts four ways. I would guess it's down to the symbols you're using.
608:
Yes, but that depends on your computer size and it would take away from the other columns.
568:
Don't think you need (a ship) in parentheses, you could just have ", a ship that was ..."
1469: 1344: 958: 1458: 1419: 1418:
National Historic Landmarks is plural so the abbreviation will also be plural: NHLs.
1359: 1297: 1188: 1137: 1091: 1000: 885: 855: 762: 563:
Well I wouldn't say we have a battle or education heritage. I'm not sure what to say.
485: 293: 165: 149: 132: 74: 53: 704:
Okay, but at least make the column sizes the same widths as the previous table...!
629:
You don't link modern architecture but you do link modern-style (to neoclassicism).
1319: 1221: 1200: 1173: 1149: 1126: 1111: 1073: 1019: 983: 916: 468: 450: 411: 389: 335: 309: 206:
That was fixed above, but the tool hasn't updated it, unless it's hiding somewhere.
183: 645:"The 500 is the largest single-day sporting event in the world" in what context? 1517: 1485: 1439: 1401: 1376: 96:
Featured list candidates/List of National Historic Landmarks in Indiana/archive2
91:
Featured list candidates/List of National Historic Landmarks in Indiana/archive1
1454: 978:, which is just another key/legend. Seems like that whole thing would violate 388:
I'm sure there are more given how I was again 3/3 on the sources I inspected.—
1340: 540:
Weren't natives "early settlers" or do you settlers to mean Europeans here?
445: 592:
Yes. Symbol (+dark blue) is NHLD and no symbol (+light blue) is just NHL.
576:
Are the NHL criteria the same as the predetermined criteria you mention?
1516:- Well I guess I have no outstanding or minor issues with the article. 727:
See also has History of Indiana which you already link to the in lead.
549: 865:
I'm surprised you think all browsers work the same way! (for instance
605:
Why abbreviate the date? The column is wide enough for a full month.
1453:
Having no symbol is the symbol. Teal + dagger = NHL District, Grey +
39:
Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in
148:; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox. 1480:, colored cells should have accompanying symbols (e.g. * ^ †) for 405:
To the nominator, are you sure you have identified and corrected
1090:
is both a NMEM and NHL, but it is called Lincoln Boyhood Home.
1468:
Well early last year someone in a project I'm associated with
866: 653:"and influenced future bank" - subsequent instead of future. 362:
Citation 28: Doesn't say anything about the 1982 conversion.
276:
It's not required to. That is standard to all NRHP articles.
778:
That is the total number, but more are always being added.
775:"approximately 1,687 " very precise for an approximation. 1358:
Please address the sourcing issue brought up by NMajdan.
121: 1010:
I'm not sure whether NMajdan refers to some link to the
637:"He would later be" could just be "He later became..." 57: 1393:
What do you mean? NHLs is plural and NHL is singular.
1276:
All caps should be removed from references 2 and 15.
529:- nice illustrated list, but a few things for me... 1537:The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 1400:) in the state", shouldn't that have no s on it? 1014:other than the one in a footnote phrase "defined 613:Our Beaux-Arts on Knowledge (XXG) is hyphenated. 819:Yes, that's what I mean, the number column does 869:seems to imply there could be various issues). 484:Thanks. There shouldn't be any other problems. 43:. No further edits should be made to this page. 65:List of National Historic Landmarks in Indiana 1543:No further edits should be made to this page. 271:Template:National Register of Historic Places 164:Got it, thanks. It was in the templated map. 41:Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates 29:The following is an archived discussion of a 8: 1066:George Rogers Clark National Historical Park 621:"Classical Revival" or "Classical revival"? 1396:"here are 37 National Historic Landmarks ( 1233: 505: 365:Fixed. See the name of the linked article. 214:I don't like the word "unsual". A bit too 177: 100: 212:...Courthouse is an unusual combination.. 1236: 508: 180: 18:Knowledge (XXG):Featured list candidates 103: 88: 1318:. Well written and well sourced list. 1266:The main map image requires alt text. 795:I'll check with Doncram about a date. 273:doesn't have a link to this article. 254:No, again, it's used as an adjective. 7: 816:The number column is also sortable. 954:Looks like you need to replace the 579:Yes, I think so. Where do you mean? 1012:Knowledge (XXG):NRHP colors legend 976:Knowledge (XXG):NRHP colors legend 265:No, it's not used as an adjective. 24: 1088:Lincoln Boyhood National Memorial 1070:Lincoln Boyhood National Memorial 552:a little later than you could. 227:Classocal revivial architecture 597:Why is Landmark name in bold? 262:Hyphenate like you did above. 243:No, it's used as an adjective. 1: 1329:22:03, 31 December 2009 (UTC) 1303:23:20, 21 December 2009 (UTC) 1292:18:20, 21 December 2009 (UTC) 1209:03:26, 28 December 2009 (UTC) 1194:23:20, 21 December 2009 (UTC) 1182:07:06, 21 December 2009 (UTC) 1158:03:17, 28 December 2009 (UTC) 1143:23:20, 21 December 2009 (UTC) 1120:06:39, 21 December 2009 (UTC) 1097:23:01, 20 December 2009 (UTC) 1082:18:39, 20 December 2009 (UTC) 1028:18:39, 20 December 2009 (UTC) 1006:21:39, 17 December 2009 (UTC) 995:21:28, 17 December 2009 (UTC) 942:11:12, 18 December 2009 (UTC) 928:01:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC) 910:22:59, 17 December 2009 (UTC) 891:21:31, 17 December 2009 (UTC) 879:21:16, 17 December 2009 (UTC) 861:20:56, 17 December 2009 (UTC) 520:19:02, 17 December 2009 (UTC) 140:22:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC) 82:22:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC) 1530:09:01, 20 January 2010 (UTC) 1498:19:49, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 1464:19:36, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 1425:22:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 1414:20:01, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 1389:17:17, 19 January 2010 (UTC) 1368:21:35, 12 January 2010 (UTC) 850:03:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC) 833:19:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC) 798:Updated as of December 2009. 791:19:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC) 770:18:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC) 748:18:20, 6 December 2009 (UTC) 714:19:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC) 491:00:31, 16 January 2010 (UTC) 480:20:36, 15 January 2010 (UTC) 459:19:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC) 423:16:20, 13 January 2010 (UTC) 401:22:34, 12 January 2010 (UTC) 347:19:56, 12 January 2010 (UTC) 321:16:19, 4 December 2009 (UTC) 301:01:39, 5 December 2009 (UTC) 173:00:26, 3 December 2009 (UTC) 158:00:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC) 1349:21:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC) 1254:15:05, 4 January 2010 (UTC) 1230:05:47, 3 January 2010 (UTC) 1560: 240:Shouldn't this be plural? 201:James Whitcomb Riley House 328:General Lew Wallace Study 1540:Please do not modify it. 36:Please do not modify it. 31:featured list nomination 1238:Resolved comments from 510:Resolved comments from 182:Resolved comments from 56:22:57, 20 January 2010 1482:accessibility reasons 761:Thanks for the help! 203:links to a disambig. 1525:Not a Terrible Joke 1493:Not a Terrible Joke 1472:was told by Dabomb 1447:Not a Terrible Joke 1409:Not a Terrible Joke 1384:Not a Terrible Joke 666:politically correct 221:Changed to "unique" 1296:All done. Thanks! 1312: 1311: 1057:Title 36, Part 65 810: 809: 434: 433: 129: 128: 85: 1551: 1542: 1526: 1520: 1504: 1503: 1494: 1488: 1461: 1448: 1442: 1422: 1410: 1404: 1385: 1379: 1326: 1300: 1288: 1281: 1250: 1243: 1237: 1234: 1191: 1140: 1094: 1003: 992: 986: 973: 967: 963: 957: 934:The Rambling Man 925: 919: 902:The Rambling Man 888: 871:The Rambling Man 858: 842:The Rambling Man 825:The Rambling Man 783:The Rambling Man 765: 740:The Rambling Man 706:The Rambling Man 512:The Rambling Man 509: 506: 488: 477: 471: 420: 414: 398: 392: 344: 338: 318: 312: 296: 261: 250: 239: 228: 213: 188: 186: 181: 178: 168: 135: 101: 77: 71: 38: 1559: 1558: 1554: 1553: 1552: 1550: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1538: 1524: 1518: 1492: 1486: 1459: 1446: 1440: 1420: 1408: 1402: 1383: 1377: 1324: 1298: 1287:27 and counting 1286: 1279: 1249:27 and counting 1248: 1241: 1216:To conclude, I 1189: 1138: 1092: 1001: 990: 984: 971: 965: 961: 955: 923: 917: 886: 856: 763: 589:have a symbol? 486: 475: 469: 418: 412: 396: 390: 342: 336: 316: 310: 294: 259: 251:Again, plural? 248: 237: 226: 211: 184: 166: 133: 75: 68: 34: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 1557: 1555: 1546: 1545: 1533: 1532: 1511: 1510: 1509: 1508: 1507: 1506: 1505: 1436:Quick Comment2 1433: 1432: 1431: 1430: 1429: 1428: 1427: 1370: 1352: 1351: 1332: 1331: 1310: 1309: 1308: 1307: 1306: 1305: 1274: 1270: 1267: 1261:Quick comments 1257: 1256: 1214: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1169: 1168: 1167: 1166: 1165: 1164: 1163: 1162: 1161: 1160: 1122: 1102: 1061: 1050:Other Comments 1047: 1046: 1045: 1044: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1038: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1031: 1030: 952: 951: 950: 949: 948: 947: 946: 945: 944: 808: 807: 806: 805: 804: 803: 802: 801: 800: 799: 796: 759: 758: 757: 756: 737: 736: 733: 732: 731: 725: 724: 723: 722: 721: 720: 719: 695: 694: 693: 687: 686: 685: 679: 678: 677: 671: 670: 669: 659: 658: 657: 651: 650: 649: 643: 642: 641: 635: 634: 633: 627: 626: 625: 619: 618: 617: 611: 610: 609: 603: 602: 601: 595: 594: 593: 582: 581: 580: 574: 573: 572: 566: 565: 564: 558: 557: 556: 546: 545: 544: 538: 537: 536: 523: 522: 504: 503: 502: 501: 500: 499: 498: 497: 496: 495: 494: 493: 432: 431: 430: 429: 428: 427: 426: 425: 386: 385: 384: 383: 382: 376: 375: 374: 368: 367: 366: 356: 355: 354: 306: 305: 304: 303: 287: 286: 285: 279: 278: 277: 268: 267: 266: 257: 256: 255: 246: 245: 244: 235: 234: 233: 224: 223: 222: 209: 208: 207: 197: 196: 190: 189: 176: 175: 161: 160: 127: 126: 125: 124: 122:External links 119: 114: 106: 105: 99: 98: 93: 87: 86: 73:Nominator(s): 67: 62: 61: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1556: 1544: 1541: 1535: 1534: 1531: 1527: 1521: 1515: 1512: 1501: 1500: 1499: 1495: 1489: 1483: 1479: 1475: 1471: 1467: 1466: 1465: 1462: 1456: 1452: 1451: 1449: 1443: 1437: 1434: 1426: 1423: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1411: 1405: 1399: 1395: 1394: 1392: 1391: 1390: 1386: 1380: 1374: 1373:Quick Comment 1371: 1369: 1365: 1361: 1357: 1354: 1353: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1337: 1334: 1333: 1330: 1327: 1321: 1317: 1314: 1313: 1304: 1301: 1295: 1294: 1293: 1289: 1283: 1282: 1275: 1271: 1268: 1265: 1264: 1262: 1259: 1258: 1255: 1251: 1245: 1244: 1235: 1232: 1231: 1227: 1223: 1219: 1210: 1206: 1202: 1197: 1196: 1195: 1192: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1183: 1179: 1175: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1146: 1145: 1144: 1141: 1135: 1134: 1132: 1128: 1123: 1121: 1117: 1113: 1108: 1103: 1100: 1099: 1098: 1095: 1089: 1085: 1084: 1083: 1079: 1075: 1071: 1067: 1062: 1058: 1054: 1053: 1052: 1051: 1029: 1025: 1021: 1017: 1013: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1004: 998: 997: 996: 993: 987: 981: 977: 970: 960: 953: 943: 939: 935: 931: 930: 929: 926: 920: 913: 912: 911: 907: 903: 899: 894: 893: 892: 889: 882: 881: 880: 876: 872: 868: 864: 863: 862: 859: 853: 852: 851: 847: 843: 839: 838: 836: 835: 834: 830: 826: 822: 818: 817: 815: 814: 812: 811: 797: 794: 793: 792: 788: 784: 780: 779: 777: 776: 774: 773: 772: 771: 768: 766: 754: 753: 752: 751: 750: 749: 745: 741: 734: 729: 728: 726: 717: 716: 715: 711: 707: 703: 702: 700: 699: 696: 691: 690: 688: 683: 682: 680: 675: 674: 672: 667: 663: 662: 660: 655: 654: 652: 647: 646: 644: 639: 638: 636: 631: 630: 628: 623: 622: 620: 615: 614: 612: 607: 606: 604: 599: 598: 596: 591: 590: 588: 583: 578: 577: 575: 570: 569: 567: 562: 561: 559: 554: 553: 551: 547: 542: 541: 539: 534: 533: 531: 530: 528: 525: 524: 521: 517: 513: 507: 492: 489: 483: 482: 481: 478: 472: 466: 462: 461: 460: 456: 452: 447: 442: 441: 440: 439: 438: 437: 436: 435: 424: 421: 415: 408: 407:all instances 404: 403: 402: 399: 393: 387: 380: 379: 377: 372: 371: 369: 364: 363: 361: 360: 357: 352: 351: 350: 349: 348: 345: 339: 333: 329: 325: 324: 323: 322: 319: 313: 302: 299: 297: 291: 290: 288: 283: 282: 280: 275: 274: 272: 269: 264: 263: 258: 253: 252: 247: 242: 241: 236: 231: 230: 225: 220: 219: 217: 210: 205: 204: 202: 199: 198: 194: 193: 192: 191: 187: 179: 174: 171: 169: 163: 162: 159: 155: 151: 147: 144: 143: 142: 141: 138: 136: 123: 120: 118: 115: 113: 110: 109: 108: 107: 102: 97: 94: 92: 89: 84: 83: 80: 78: 70: 69: 66: 63: 60: 58: 55: 51: 48:The list was 44: 42: 37: 32: 27: 26: 19: 1539: 1536: 1513: 1435: 1397: 1372: 1355: 1335: 1315: 1277: 1260: 1239: 1217: 1215: 1170: 1106: 1049: 1048: 1015: 897: 820: 760: 738: 586: 526: 464: 406: 331: 307: 145: 130: 117:Citation bot 72: 49: 47: 35: 28: 632:Both linked 1455:lemniscate 1280:Giants2008 1242:Giants2008 969:NRHPlegend 900:opinion. 648:Attendance 229:Spelling. 1478:WP:COLORS 980:WP:ACCESS 867:this site 548:You link 446:User:Nev1 292:Changed. 1460:Reywas92 1421:Reywas92 1360:Dabomb87 1299:Reywas92 1190:Reywas92 1139:Reywas92 1093:Reywas92 1068:and the 1002:Reywas92 887:Reywas92 857:Reywas92 764:Reywas92 527:Comments 487:Reywas92 410:oppose.— 295:Reywas92 284:Changed. 260:210 feet 249:192-foot 238:200-foot 195:Comments 167:Reywas92 150:Dabomb87 134:Reywas92 112:Analysis 76:Reywas92 54:Dabomb87 50:promoted 1514:Support 1336:Support 1316:Support 1222:doncram 1218:support 1201:doncram 1174:doncram 1150:doncram 1127:doncram 1112:doncram 1074:doncram 1020:doncram 985:NMajdan 918:NMajdan 624:Revival 600:Removed 550:Indiana 470:NMajdan 465:support 451:doncram 413:NMajdan 391:NMajdan 337:NMajdan 311:NMajdan 216:weasely 185:NMajdan 104:Toolbox 1320:Ruslik 381:Fixed. 373:Fixed. 353:Fixed. 332:museum 1476:"per 1470:WP:PW 1273:lead. 1107:among 959:NHLsm 896:just 232:Fixed 16:< 1519:Afro 1487:Afro 1474:here 1441:Afro 1403:Afro 1398:NHLs 1378:Afro 1364:talk 1356:Note 1345:talk 1341:Nev1 1325:Zero 1226:talk 1205:talk 1178:talk 1154:talk 1131:talk 1116:talk 1078:talk 1024:talk 1016:here 991:talk 964:and 938:talk 924:talk 915:do.— 906:talk 875:talk 846:talk 829:talk 787:talk 744:talk 730:Done 718:Done 710:talk 692:Done 684:Done 676:Done 656:Done 640:Done 616:Done 587:does 571:Done 555:Done 543:Done 535:Done 516:talk 476:talk 455:talk 419:talk 397:talk 343:talk 317:talk 154:talk 146:Dabs 1528:) 1496:) 1450:) 1412:) 1387:) 821:not 334:).— 52:by 1366:) 1347:) 1290:) 1263:– 1252:) 1228:) 1207:) 1180:) 1156:) 1133:) 1118:) 1080:) 1026:) 982:.— 972:}} 966:{{ 962:}} 956:{{ 940:) 908:) 898:my 877:) 848:) 831:) 789:) 746:) 712:) 518:) 467:.— 457:) 218:. 156:) 59:. 33:. 1522:( 1490:( 1444:( 1406:( 1381:( 1362:( 1343:( 1322:_ 1284:( 1246:( 1224:( 1203:( 1176:( 1152:( 1129:( 1114:( 1076:( 1022:( 988:• 936:( 921:• 904:( 873:( 844:( 827:( 785:( 742:( 708:( 668:. 514:( 473:• 453:( 416:• 394:• 340:• 314:• 152:(

Index

Knowledge (XXG):Featured list candidates
featured list nomination
Knowledge (XXG) talk:Featured list candidates
Dabomb87

List of National Historic Landmarks in Indiana
Reywas92

22:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Featured list candidates/List of National Historic Landmarks in Indiana/archive1
Featured list candidates/List of National Historic Landmarks in Indiana/archive2
Analysis
Citation bot
External links
Reywas92

22:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Dabomb87
talk
00:17, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Reywas92

00:26, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
NMajdan
James Whitcomb Riley House
weasely
Template:National Register of Historic Places
Reywas92

01:39, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.