Timeline for Where is the smallest park by area?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
20 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 28, 2020 at 21:34 | comment | added | Jasper | @Valorum That link actually brings up an interesting point: this park is in the Guiness Book of World records, which explains a lot. It probably means that it was named a park for the sake of being the smallest park. It also means that it's not unlikely a decent amount of money went to the Book for the honor of them recognizing the park. Definitely leaves a sour taste on what is otherwise a beautiful answer for me. | |
| Jan 28, 2020 at 20:21 | comment | added | Valorum | The operators of the world's actual smallest park (in the UK) have pointed out that this "park" meets none of the defining features of an actual park, dubbing it a "glorified flowerpot"; prolandscapermagazine.com/… | |
| Jan 28, 2020 at 19:45 | comment | added | The Photon | @rackandboneman, I don't think discouraging people from loitering to keep them from being run over by cars is as bad as discouraging people from loitering to keep from having to see there are poor people in your city. In both cases the immediate intent is to keep people away from some particular area. But the ultimate intent can be very different. | |
| Jan 28, 2020 at 19:24 | comment | added | rackandboneman | @ThePhoton divided on that. If that is the intent, the intent stands no matter how we judge it. | |
| Jan 28, 2020 at 19:00 | comment | added | The Photon | @rackandboneman, Do you think it's a bad thing to deny loitering in the middle of the road? | |
| Jan 28, 2020 at 5:58 | comment | added | Panzercrisis | It is nice though - every square foot gets put to good use! | |
| Jan 27, 2020 at 22:54 | comment | added | dotancohen | 0.6 m across works out to 0.28 m², or less than 5 sheets of A4 paper. | |
| Jan 27, 2020 at 22:28 | comment | added | Jim L. | Sadly, this park (dating from the 1940s and made official in 1976) was recently vandalized. However, this picture shows there is indeed grass beneath the (former) tree, @bdsl. This link also suggests the park has been reforested: koin.com/local/multnomah-county/… | |
| Jan 27, 2020 at 21:07 | vote | accept | Boolean | ||
| Jan 27, 2020 at 20:15 | comment | added | rackandboneman | Aren't such micro parks considered well camouflaged pieces of hostile architecture (deny loitering while appearing friendly)? | |
| Jan 27, 2020 at 17:24 | comment | added | user77454 | @Spudley It's likely just to be odd/quirky. Because, you know, it's fun. | |
| Jan 27, 2020 at 4:25 | comment | added | Kat | @Spudley I can think of a few other "parks" in the area that aren't much bigger. I don't get it either. It's especially silly because there's an actual park clearly visible in the picture. | |
| Jan 27, 2020 at 3:40 | comment | added | candied_orange | @bdsl quiet! You're encouraging theologians to train angles to plant grass on the head of a pin. | |
| Jan 27, 2020 at 2:27 | comment | added | chrylis -cautiouslyoptimistic- | @Spudley This is Portland. | |
| Jan 26, 2020 at 23:10 | comment | added | bdsl | But going with that definition this question seems to become essentially the paradox of the heap. How many blades of grass make the smallest possible 'patch'? That seems impossible to usefully answer, which makes the question impossible to answer. | |
| Jan 26, 2020 at 23:08 | comment | added | bdsl | This isn't a park according to the definition accepted in comments by the OP: " it just needs to be a patch of grass and maybe a tree". | |
| Jan 26, 2020 at 21:53 | comment | added | Spudley | What? Why? Okay, that's just odd. | |
| Jan 26, 2020 at 20:58 | history | edited | gerrit | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Added SI units
|
| Jan 25, 2020 at 20:41 | comment | added | DavidRecallsMonica | Bingo! This is really small, and here's its official Portland Parks webpage: portlandoregon.gov/parks/finder/… | |
| Jan 25, 2020 at 19:44 | history | answered | Matthew FitzGerald-Chamberlain | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
