Wade Park 

The whole point is that the park is much more than the museum (it's more than 10% of a square mile), so it's a significantly different entity from the museum itself.  Because there's no article on the HD, we shouldn't have its infobox anywhere at all.  Granted, we shouldn't have a stub for the sole purpose of filling a hole, but we also shouldn't pretend that another article fills that hole either.    

You are partially correct in your assertion made in the edit summary for the Wade Park article - the park isn't the entire district, but you are also partially incorrect. You're saying: The park itself is not the district, and the National Register database indicates that the park isn't even part of the district  where that I underlined is where you're erring.  The NRHP website lists this: Roughly bounded by E. 105 St., East Blvd., Chester and Euclid Aves. , Cleveland'' (650 acres, 7 buildings, 1 structure)'http://nrhp.focus.nps.gov/natregsearchresult.do?fullresult=true&recordid;=339http://www.nationalregisterofhistoricplaces.com/oh/Cuyahoga/districts.html Unless we are looking at different NRHP websites, and you haven't either spent time in Cleveland or ,at the very least, looked at trhe area in question on the map, then you're not taking into account two three things: 1) the 650 acres includes Wade Park (Google Map it). 2) The name Wade Park District explicitly (and even implicitly if you're familiar firsthand with the history of Cleveland). 3) (and this is related to my second point regarding a familiarity with the history of Cleveland) Jeptha Wade's property, which is where Wade Park is and the heart of the district in question, was the seed from where all the buildings in the district sprung from. The CMA, Botanical Gardens, Natural History Museum and Severance Hall, which all are part of the district, would not be there if Wade Park wasn't set aside to be the cultural epicenter that garnered it's NRHP entry.

Lastly, given that any one of the buildings listed on the registry are technically part of the WPHD, there would be no false information by including the NRHP infobox on any of those articles  which was my entire point of putting it on the CMA article in the first place. The infobox being clearly labelled as Wade Park District''' is not misleading by including it on a building that is part of the district. We could argue about this ad nauseam. But what's the point?

Of course I can make an entire article that covers the district specifically. But why just regurgitate the same stuff found in each individual Wikipedia article that exists for every building that is in the HD (including the Wade Park itself)? Bandwdith pollution notwithstanding, it is simply redundant. Or we could make it less redundant by simply putting the infobox in one of the articles already out there... and the Wade Park article being the namesake for the HD would make the most sense (the article is hardly complete, and could be expanded to include an entire section specifically about the HD and relationship bewteen the two)... and if not that article than the CMA which is the largest building in the HD, and the reason I put it there in the first. Either way, the underlying question in this argument that I have for you is this: how is it productive in our task as Wikipedians, and moreover as members of Ohio-specific Wikprojects, to keep adding and removing factual info from articles with direct relationships to the subject of our debate? Are we trying to make Wikpedia a more informative user-based encyclopedia, or are we nitpicking over how to make a piece of factual information, that is an important part of a large US City, available to those who are looking at Wikipedia for information?