Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Architecture

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Chiswick House

[edit]

SilkTork, Chivalrick1, Dr. Blofeld, Chiswick Chap, Johnbod / anyone else with an interest/view

I've been thinking about how we might approach improving the Chiswick House / Architecture of Chiswick House / Chiswick House Gardens articles. While there is a lot of quality content, all three articles suffer from a lack of sourcing, many sections in each of the articles being completely uncited. That being said, the History section of Chiswick House is in a reasonable state, it's the Villa building and Gardens sections which are rather cite-lite. There may also be an issue with personal opinion as the main author of much of it, User:Chivalrick1 was connected to the house, but I haven't gone over it closely enough yet to take a firm view. On that point, they haven't edited for seven years so I doubt they will respond.
As to sourcing, I have many of the books, although not all, so I think that can be mostly addressed. My initial question is: is there a consensus that we want three articles? The Architecture of Chiswick House was a 2013 split-off, when at least some editors felt that Chiswick House had become too long. I can see the logic of two articles for House and for Garden, a la Stowe House / Stowe Gardens, but the first of those seems to cover both the history and the architecture pretty well in one article. Do we need the third, on Architecture, as a stand-alone? Responses to that, and any other initial concerns would be much appreciated. I've copied in editors I know have participated in earlier discussions on this, but views from other editors are obviously also very welcome. KJP1 (talk) 09:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm ok with 3 articles. For the gardens, Jacques, David (2022). Chiswick House Gardens. Swindon: Liverpool University Press on behalf of Historic England. ISBN 978-1-80085-621-9 is listed at "Sources", but not cited afaics. User:1948dlj will (ahem) certainly have a copy. Johnbod (talk) 14:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Go for it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:55, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good thinking KJP, I say it would be well worth the effort! I have no problems with a separate article on the architecture as long as it is much more comprehensive than the main article without being bloated. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:16, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy with there being three articles to cover those subjects - they look appropriate at the moment, especially the Architecture one, which is very detailed, and would likely either bloat the main article if merged, or some useful information might be lost. Just at a glance the main article looks well cited, though I note that Chiswick Chap has done some recent edits, so they likely have improved the situation. I agree that there are large chunks of the other two articles that require citing, and a good examination of the quality of the existing content - especially the unsourced stuff - would be very useful. All encouragement and positive thoughts to those who get stuck in to improve these articles, especially the two sub-articles. SilkTork (talk) 10:08, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I have nominated List of works by Francisco Salamone for featured list. He was an Argentine architect inspired by Metropolis and Italian futurism.

If you think it passes the Featured list criteria show your support for the nomination! Yilku1 (talk) 00:57, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Village lock-ups in the United Kingdom

[edit]

I'm working on creating a List of village lock-ups in the United Kingdom in my sandbox, with the intention that when it's complete it will combine and replace the "Surviving lock-ups in England and Wales" and "Gallery" sections at Village lock-up. I'd welcome comments on the (incomplete) draft and my approach.

  • Is this a sensible approach?
  • Should I include a Location column?
  • I've included a Wikidata column. I don't recall seeing links to Wikidata in other Wikipedia link articles. Is this controversial? It's useful, particularly during construction, to keep track of existing Wikidata entities relating to lock-ups (I'm also attempting to update them and add images where available).

Comments welcome. Dave.Dunford (talk) 16:45, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Old National Library Building

[edit]

Old National Library Building has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 15:47, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Newton Ferrers House

[edit]

Does anyone happen to know of any sources which cover Newton Ferrers House, Cornwall and its terraced gardens? For a Grade I listed building, with a slew of other Grade Is attached, it seems surprisingly undocumented. Beyond the Historic England listings and two pages in Pevsner, I can find practically nothing, either on or off-line. Any suggestions as to RS which do cover it would be gratefully received. KJP1 (talk) 07:15, 27 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:Superstack#Requested move 23 October 2024

[edit]

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Superstack#Requested move 23 October 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 🎃 ASUKITE🎃 17:30, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Chester Rows

[edit]

Chester Rows has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 13:09, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Architecture of the medieval cathedrals of England

[edit]

Architecture of the medieval cathedrals of England has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 15:23, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Subterranea

[edit]

I've made a list of the sites from https://www.subbrit.org.uk/categories/places-to-visit/ at User:The Anome/Sub-brit sites. It's clear that we have poor coverage in this area. In some cases, only redirects need to be created, in others the subject is dealt with in a section of another article, but for most Wikipedia has no entry at all.

Would anyone be interested in reviewing the list to see if we have some of these listed under other article titles, or in other languages? — The Anome (talk) 14:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images for never-built skyscrapers

[edit]

Could someone from this take a look at the images newly added to the infoboxes of Houston Tower and Dubai Towers Istanbul? In addition to there being issues due to each file lacking any source or copyright information, there also may encyclopedic issues as well since it's not clear where the images are "official" renditions of some type or just the uploader's opinion on what each building would've looked like if completed. I'm sure they were added in good faith, they just don't seem very encyclopedic. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the images should be removed. As you say, they appear to be someone's unofficial "drawing". Rublamb (talk) 06:37, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Louvre

[edit]

Louvre has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 02:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for Forbes Field

[edit]

Forbes Field has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Z1720 (talk) 03:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

[edit]

Hello,
Please note that Architect, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of the Articles for improvement. The article is scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing!
Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC) on behalf of the AFI team[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Architecture&oldid=1264681309"