Talk:Infill

Urban studies and planning Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Urban studies and planningWikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planningTemplate:WikiProject Urban studies and planningUrban studies and planning articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Suburban Infill/Infill Merger

These topics cover pretty much the same thing, and it seems an article on suburban infill should be part of one on the broader topic of infill. Signed - Joshua Davis (articnomad) 20:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We would then ~~use~~ loose the "building technique" (wattle and daub) sense. At least one of the "what links here" links is to this meaning. --Old Moonraker 18:54, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 05:55, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to start. 199.200.243.253 17:01, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Urban consolidation

The urban consolidation article seems to describe the idea of infill development, but using United Kingdom terms and perspective. Maybe that article should be merged into this one? Michael Patrick (talk) 21:33, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems sensible, but may I repeat my request (absent-minded typo now corrected) that the fate of the "building technique wattle and daub" be considered in disambiguation? It obviously doesn't belong. --Old Moonraker (talk) 06:08, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't look that is happening, so I added "Urban consolidation" as a "see also" reference, and removed "Infiltrate" as a "see also" reference, since nothing there currently pertains. Kortoso (talk) 17:58, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

New User

I am working on this site as part of the public policy initiative and could use some help making the language wikipedia-appropriate. I would appreciate any editing help! Irishmeadow (talk) 17:06, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For example, I reference the same journal article several times. What is the appropriate format for this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irishmeadow (talk • contribs) 17:08, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At the first use, put something like <ref name= Farris2001> instead of <ref>. For subsequent uses just write <ref name= Farris2001/>. Official version here. --Old Moonraker (talk) 20:14, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Irishmeadow (talk) 04:18, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This page could also benefit from a more in depth discussion of the motivations for infill-economic development, solving spatial mismatch, attracting the creative class (see Florida(2002)). AND the social implications for infill development, like gentrification and relocation of the poor. Irishmeadow (talk) 04:18, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Examples: avoid advertising and promotion

Examples that illustrate the concept are useful. However, this article seems to have attracted a couple of adverts posing as examples. The key element being that the sources cited are promotional and do not really discuss infill. Please, if you are going to provide examples please only cite ones that have discussion in reliable secondary sources. Citing blog postings, real estate promotional web cites and the like is not appropriate. See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. On this basis, I have removed the examples of Chatham Square, in Alexandria, Virginia, added by IP editor 35.14.209.162 on 29 March 2012 and the Village of Ponderosa, West Des Moines, Iowa, added to the original Suburban infill article by UrbanMaster on 27 January 2007 (which was UrbanMaster's sole addition to Wikipedia). There should be plenty of examples in published non-promotional reviews of infill projects that could be used. --Bejnar (talk) 19:18, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Infill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120320023034/http://www.sedev.org/downloads/GreenInfrastructureHandbook.pdf to http://www.sedev.org/downloads/GreenInfrastructureHandbook.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:57, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]