Talk:Shaker Heights, Ohio

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

Contents

[edit] Category:Utopian communites

"Category:Utopian communities" refers to the history of Shaker Heights as a settlement with utopian goals. The category was initiated to group this type of community for research in planning and social movements. Dystopos 21:14, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

Do you mean the North Union family (Shakers), which was utopian, or Shaker Heights, which is the suburban development? If so, Shaker Heights wasn't established by the Van Swearington's to be anything utopian. It was established to be a highly restricted community by design (property size, architectural style); its racial make up was pretty much white through the 1940s with the exception on the first black family that settled in the community in the 1930s and promptly burned out of their home. Shaker's socially progressive outlook on race an diversity was an outgrowth of early 1960s in Ludlow, not a planned model of the Vans' in the 19-teens.Stude62 01:15, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Both the 1822 Shaker settlement and the 1905 Garden City suburb would qualify as "Utopian communities" because they were both parts of wider movements that were idealistic in nature. The particular foibles of the Russells or Van Sweringen's, or the communities they established, belong to the specific history of the place, not to the category. Failed examples are still examples - and for utopian planning, failures are the only examples we've ever had. Dystopos 03:31, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I can certainly see the argument for terming the Shaker settlement of Union Village a utopian community, although it's not exactly cut and dry. But there's no basis to apply the label to Shaker Heights. It was originally planned as a pleasant place to live with easy access by streetcar to the city. There may have been idealism as well as the profit motive here on the part of the Van Sweringens, but that alone does not make Shaker Heights a Utopian Community or even a failed Utopian Community.

Even if you were able to substantiate your claim with some kind of source saying the town was envisioned as a utopian community, it still wouldn't really belong in the category. Failed Utopian Community, planned originally utopian community, what have you. The current category gives the impression that Shaker Heights is, right now, some kind of Utopian Community, and that's just plain silly.

Right now I'm removing the category. If you can find something to substantiate the claim, then maybe it might be worth putting up with a qualifier. Theotherkg 19:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Section Idea

history and notable facts section is becoming crammed with all of the residents info. consider adding a "Notable Residents" section.

[edit] Un-Discussed Page Move

Please note that this article is about the city located in Ohio. Just because there is only one Shaker Heights does not merit dropping the ",Ohio." In addition, there are other articles with "Shaker Heights" in the title. Moving page back to the original and appropriate title. --HBot3 20:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Relative Location Map

In the Portuguese and Volpak languages, there was an intresting target map showing SH's relative location Sseballos (talk) 12:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Banner home logo about.gif

Image:Banner home logo about.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:06, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:GreenlakeShaker-crop.jpg

Image:GreenlakeShaker-crop.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:21, 8 March 2008 (UTC)