This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article may not need further development, because it documents the non-existence of a historic district. For info to further develop, however, try Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Try, for National Park Service material: Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL Or develop from the sources already included in the article! Thanks. -- Doncram ( talk) 02:37, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
Tags were added to the article questioning its General notability and asserting there is Original research. I'm gonna remove the tags. Please discuss concerns here. About notability, there is documentation in the article of the existence of this district in the National Register's database (with status as not ultimately listed, as explained). And there are multiple webpages which can be found that refer to the district. I think it helps Wikipedia to have this article. About Original research, what is the specific concern. Not everything needs to be inline-sourced, especially if it is obvious and true. Is there any question about accuracy of anything here? -- do ncr am 20:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC)