Talk:National Trust for Historic Preservation

Removed text
I removed the following text because it seemed very tendentious. I'm not quite sure how to fix it, but maybe someone more familiar with the National Trust can salvage it. It's more about preservation in general than the National Trust. PR IIS 09:39, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)


 * "As the preeminent nonprofit organization in the American preservation movement, the National Trust is highly controversial. Although it borrows the rhetorical style of the Left to agitate on behalf of preservation and against the conservative attitude that property rights are paramount, the Trust's positions have often divided it from other left-wing and progressive movements such as environmentalism and public education.


 * "The divide arises from the fact that preservation of old buildings is expensive, since it is hard to make them safe and bring them up to modern code without totally destroying their historic nature. In turn, preservation draws down scarce public resources which could have been allocated to other needs like hiring more teachers and buying textbooks, and preserved buildings occupy land that becomes unavailable for other higher-density uses, thus pushing people out of urban cores and encouraging sprawl.  And most professional historians do not support preservation because much of their work is done by analyzing old documents and interviewing surviving participants of historic events.  Buildings rarely play a key role in history except for certain rare events like assassinations and the signing of treaties."


 * uhhh, huh? I'd like to meet these "historians" who don't think the built environment affects history. J. Crocker 20:10, August 10, 2005 (UTC)

Demolition controversy
Should mention be made of the controversy surrounding the demolition of the St. Louis Century Building? Ajacksb 19:46, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Historic Paint Colors
I bought Valspar paint at Lowe's that is marked National Trust For Historic Preservation. The Wikipedia article makes no mention of why paint would have this marking but the NTHP site does if you know to look for it: http://www.preservationnation.org/about-us/partners/corporate-partners/valspar/. Since the paint generates income for NTHP, is it worthwhile to mention it in the Wikipedia entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.251.45 (talk) 06:44, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Personally, I don't find it signifcant enough to mention. Multiple organizations or businesses do the same thing with various products. →Wordbuilder (talk) 14:02, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Edits to National Trust Logo and Website
Hello! I'm an editorial assistant for the National Trust, and I was looking to make a factual update to our organization's logo and website. I understand that organizations and companies are discouraged from editing their own pages, so I was wondering if anyone would be interested in making these updates for me? This is our updated website: https://savingplaces.org/ and I can send you assets for our logo if you'd like to fix it. If you have any other recommendations for the page, you are more than welcome to edit it! We were thinking of removing our 11 Most Endangered Historic Places list, since that changes yearly and could be difficult to keep up with. Thanks for your time!

Carson Bear at National Trust (talk) 14:59, 3 May 2017 (UTC)Carson


 * Done. DS (talk) 22:30, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Motto
Is anyone sure about the motto because I can not find any source on that and it is not mentioned on their website — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMajora12 (talk • contribs) 05:30, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:37, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Restored Mansion at James Madison's Montpelier.jpg