Talk:Regional planning
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
|
||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | ||
 |
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Castle. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
Contents |
[edit] Tenets?
Er... no they're not. Especially the one about road noise which is of local concern. I'm sure this article is not a popular one anyway, but i'm going to see what i can do with it in the next half hour. I'd have to try to make it any worse :S Bjrobinson 14:12, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
Yeah took a bit more than half an hour.Bjrobinson 15:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Differing Points of View
This article reads like regional planning is completely objective fact, when in fact it's a fairly controversial subject. An "encyclopedic" article should convey the subjectiveness of the subject, particularly how it impacts property rights. DG, 18 Jan 2006
Listed on Wikipedia:Cleanup for October 27, 2004. Needs wikification: style could do with improvement (reads like lecture notes!)
Agreed, these 'tenats' seem highly POV and a recent edit has added alot of very local concerns that few at the regional level would be concerned about, ill have to think about it Bjrobinson 10:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Differing Points of View
This article reads like regional planning is completely objective fact, when in fact it's a fairly controversial subject. An "encyclopedic" article should convey the subjectiveness of the subject, particularly how it impacts property rights.
- DG, 18 Jan 2006
[edit] Common Sense Rules Removal
The reason I removed the text is because it has nothing to do with regional planning; most of this is related to site planning, which is a completely different topic. Unless given a good enough reason to keep the text, I will remove it. Darkcore 06:59, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
-
- I agree the text is poor but for starters it's better than nothing, there would be no point to the article otherwise. We should add back the cleanup tag perhaps. An Encyclopedia is allowed to be a "how to" guide for do it yourselfers? "Common sense rules" as a heading probably should be changed to something more like "Tenets of regional planning" or something more encyclopedic sounding, I agree. Zen Master 19:13, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- But these are not the "tenets" of regional planning. In fact, no such "tenets" really exist. Darkcore 22:50, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
-
- Then lets add the real tenets and/or completely fix the article. The list is at least slightly related to regional planning I believe and does give an overall sense of what regional planning is about even if it is fundamentally flawed as you point out (I wasn't the one that created the list originally, I just minutely reformatted regional planning when I noticed it on the pages needing clean up list). Without the list the article isn't even a stub, do you really prefer that over the current version? Zen Master 23:11, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)
-
- lol that took what? nearly 2 years? Bjrobinson 15:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] what is a high building code?
reword "building codes in these areas should be the highest"
No, in this context i beleive the author was talking about deisgn guidance for tall buildings Bjrobinson 14:12, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
