Talk:Gothic Revival architecture/Archive 2

Canada-centric?[edit]

Does the article need quite so many (18) mentions of Canada? Even going so far as saying "Here in Canada..." Am I missing an important evolution of the style from there, or has an editor from that country just given full vent to an understandable but possibly overzealous touch of patriotism? 95.93.64.189 (talk) 01:04, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As a non-Canadian (who has not read the article recently) I will state that the Gothic revival in at least southern Ontario is a thing of wonder. Now I'll read what is written and see how it hits me. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 02:44, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Canada is a welcome addition to the article, but, indeed, there are now many problems due to the addtions. These Canadian centric, and other more general additions by Nightkeeper2013 made on Dec. 7, 2013 are too often grand sweeping statements (see second and third paragraphs added in December 2013), but short on citations, and have the feel of something quoted, as well as being Canadian centric. A statement such as "Gothic skyscrapers built in the late 19th and early 20th century, most commonly found in New York City, may be responsible for the style's most common stereotype", needs not only a citation, but is rather questionable. The article is now weakened.

The 18 Canadian sections are now scattered through the article (why is one in the second paragraph of the header?), and should be moved from "Survival and revival" to the section where other national sections are discussed in "Romanticism and nationalism", perhaps just before or after the single paragraphs in United States Gothic revival, as one or two paragraphs, as given to the other national sections. It also explicitly expresses a Canadian POV in several places ("Here in Canada" and "our nation's capital, Ottawa"). Its style is also a bit breezy for an encyclopedia. Citations are needed for just about each sentence that contains a historical assertion (first in 1811, war of 1218, etc.) or tourist assertion that something is the "best known": these may be true, but need to be cited or removed: as each edit page tells us, "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." It also has many grammatical errors, and contains data of questionable general interest. Upper Canada, along with New York and New England, indeed seems to be an early adopter and long term promotor of Gothic revival architecture, but this surely can be expressed with citations, and in the proper place.Harrycroswell (talk) 11:15, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We have Gothic Revival architecture in Canada and any surplus can go there, keeping only proportionate coverage here. Johnbod (talk) 14:58, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

About the canadian centric comments i got the addintions where centered about canada because that was the target of the collage assignment i had to do if it offend anyone or was to grand sweeping sorry about that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nightkeeper2013 (talk • contribs) 05:02, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No offense at all. The information was rebalanced in this article, and some extra moved to the Gothic Revival architecture in Canada. The contribution made both pages better. It was a win win situation. It also turned your college assignment into a useful piece of work. Would that more college teachers did this - assuming they vet their student's work. It is also how we learn to edit Wikipedia. Thank you, Nightkeeper.Harrycroswell (talk) 17:51, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another Canada section to look at[edit]

I moved this here to mull over.

In Canada Gothic revival is not to be confused with the Neo-Gothic movement that was popular in Europe and the United States in the late 20th century. Gothic revival architecture in Canada is from immigrants coming from Europe and other British colonies to the "New World" in order to expand in the 19th century when Gothic Revival was the latest and greatest of architecture styles coming from Britain, with the style lasting in some places until the 1950's.^[1]

First of all "the late 20th Century"? and then I thought that this article was about the "Neo-Gothic movement' and least that is what the article lede says. Then there is the "is from" and "to expand" that (opinion) needs to be clarified. Some of this can be saved but . . .... not by me, Not tonight. Carptrash (talk) 01:31, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Kyles, Shannon.“Gothic Revival (1750-1900)”. OntarioArchitecture.com. http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/gothicrevival.html. Kyles, Shannon. “Gothic Revival (1750-1900)”. OntarioArchitecture.com. http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/gothicrevival.html.

more to talk about[edit]

I clopped this sentence,

Gothic skyscrapers built in the late 19th and early 20th century, most commonly found in New York City such as

because what gothic styled skyscraper was there in the late 19th century? and I don't really feel the the Big Apple needs to be there either. However, tempted as I am to continue, I believe that I'll take a break and allow others to look over these edits. Carptrash (talk) 01:39, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Violett le Duc - So important to Gothic revival he is the only architect who has his own section?[edit]

'Bold text'"Viollet-le-Duc was a leading architect whose genius lay in restoration" So, currently, states Wikipedia, Gothic Revival.

Without any mention that some of these "restorations of genius" have been criticised ever since. Restoration is not the term which should be used for some of the additions to, and modifications of, some buildings on which le Duc imposed his own style and "corrected" the "errors" of the original architects.

The Wikipedia biography of le Duc is more accurate, and critical.

But even if this was not the case the Gothic Revival was mainly concerned with NEW buildings. The current Gothic Revival article is silent about le Duc's new buildings in this style. AnnaComnemna (talk) 14:51, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just removed[edit]

this phrase because it is not needed.

" which serves as a "national church"^{[citation needed]}, if there could be one in the United States^{[clarification needed]}

I'm also starting a discussion as to whether or not Collegiate Gothic belongs here. Nikolaus Pevsner, for example, has Gothic Revival in the 18th and 19th centuries, with only churches making it to the 20th century. However before I do anything drastic I will re-rerad our article and chat more here. Carptrash (talk) 15:44, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Gothic Revival architecture. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 13:07, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gothic Revival architecture. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 15:41, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Church in Yongning, Beijing[edit]

It's not a great picture, but I thought it might be worth including in the gallery to showcase the different places where the architecture is found. This church is in a rural part of China. I'll leave it up to other editors to consider including it. Muzzleflash (talk) 13:00, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Caspar David Friedrich Friedrich pained Gothic ruines[edit]

German Romanticists (such as philosopher and writer Goethe and architect Karl Friedrich Schinkel), began to appreciate the picturesque character of ruins Category:Kloster Eldena by Caspar David Friedrich in Commons Xx236 (talk) 12:33, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

St. Vitus Cathedral[edit]

The Cathedral was finished after hundreds of years like the Cologne one. The Western part is new, but I don't see any picture of it. Mucha's stained glss. Xx236 (talk) 13:01, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note to self - sourcing[edit]

~~Still to do: KJP1 (talk) 15:55, 4 May 2020 (UTC)~~ [reply]

~~Vernacular~~

~~20th century~~

Gallery[edit]

Fond though I am of galleries for architecture articles, I think this one has become a little overblown. In addition to the 25 images in the body of the article, we've currently got 57 in the gallery. It's becoming more like an album, than an way of illustrating specific features of the Gothic Revival, although I appreciate having images from the four corners of the world does illustrate GR's global reach. I'm therefore planning to trim it. Any thoughts/suggestions/comments before I do so are most welcome. KJP1 (talk) 08:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am also fond of galleries, but the use of images here is oppressive, to the extent that its hard to distinguish the good from the bad and randomly placed. Would be in favour of a trim. Ceoil (talk) 08:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ceoil - My thoughts exactly, there are just too many. Talking of images, I've had to lose that beautiful piece of stained glass you kindly left on my Talkpage. I loved it - many thanks - but for reasons I couldn't work out, it was covering over subsequent messages, making them illegible. Glad to see Cork is proving useful at Honan. KJP1 (talk) 10:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

KJP1, I'm sure you will appreciate the several layers of irony here, but yes Got Cork, my friend. Ceoil (talk) 02:05, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

After reading this, and turning to the article, I expected to agree with you both. But I didn't, quite. I think the global spread is an important feature, & galleries at the end, with one row per continent, plus 2 (I got it down to that, on my screen) for Europe, is not unreasonable - plus they are at the end. I removed a couple of photos, and more could be replaced with better ones, or moved. There are still white spaces, and it is often better to move strongly vertical images (all those spires) into galleries, moving out horizontal ones to text. There are too many photos of restored/completed/exemplar actual medieval buildings, that don't illustrate much, imo. The dark photo of Cologne Cathedral could go. I think several have been here for over a decade, and there are much better images now available of the same buildings. In general the captions could and should be more informative. Johnbod (talk) 12:25, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Johnbod - Very helpful. I'll finish the sourcing - there are only a couple more sections that need attention, and then turn to the images. Perhaps pruning, replacing, and restructuring will address the oppressiveness Ceoil and I feel - rather than the wholesale massacre I'd originally planned! KJP1 (talk) 12:56, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. Any thoughts, either of you, on a suitable opening image. This guy, User:Diliff, takes the most gorgeous photos and I'm sure he's done some Gothic Revival. I'm not sure that Belgian cathedral is the ne plus ultra of the GR? KJP1 (talk) 13:01, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

KJP1, Colin is about the best photographer on commons with interest in this subject that I am aware of, and no doubt he knows others with the same eye, so pinging. I think maybe 5-6 images per Continent in the footer gallery is about right. They are atm numbering around 20 and growing; would be great to see thoughtful curatorship...so...am still leaning towards massacre :) Ceoil (talk) 15:00, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear; I was surpised that you took this on a few years back KJP1, if I remember correctly, on request from Amanada, when all before had thrown their hands up precisely because of the random "also in place X..." and image loading nature of previous "editing". Ceoil (talk) 16:54, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was actually Johnbod who asked me to have a look - back in 2018! The great advantage I have is that I do have many of the sources, Victorian architecture being my particular hobby. Underneath all the - I’ve got a Gothic Revival building at the end of my road, let me just take a photo - cruft, there is a good, well-written article, but like others of its age, it was desperately short of citations. Times were different then. And, as Johnbod mentioned, at 800 hits per day, it’s much more widely read then the niche stuff I normally churn out! I’ll play around with the images when I’ve finished the cites. Let me know what you think. KJP1 (talk) 17:37, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dunno, but imo, the more images the weaker the validity of the form appears. If we have 10s and 10s of images, and accept them all as equal, because they come from different countries, then what reader can separate the wheat from the chaff. I say this as someone who also likes the form very much, but at times over the years, the page was tending towards kitsch and many of the images, even 2-3 years ago, looked like follies. I say tight and selective curatorship. ps, you have done a lot more than add cites. Ceoil (talk) 18:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ceoil, Johnbod - Well, I think I'm about done playing around. I've trimmed, but by no means obliterated the galleries, and tried to make them a bit more representative, and up-to-date, with better quality images. Any suggestions much appreciated. Still not sure that the lead image of the Belgian church is the "best" lead for Gothic Revival? One other thing: the opening para. of the 20th/21st Century section is completely uncited. The problem is it's more "opinion" than "fact", although it's accurate. Not easy to find a direct cite? All the best. KJP1 (talk) 06:54, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - I'll take a look over the next few days. Johnbod (talk) 11:44, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks User:Ceoil for your kind words. There are many great photographers of architecture on Commons. I'm really no expert on architecture, though, so can't make an educated comment about what aspects of Gothic Revival to include in pictures. There are many Featured Pictures on Commons where one could select images from. Another technique is to follow a picture from Wikipedia to Commons and then to the category for that building, and click on the "Good pictures" button. My preference would be to try to avoid pictures with sloping verticals (where the camera has been pointed up to try to get the whole building in the frame), so for example, prefer File:Oostende Sint-Petrus-en-Pauluskerk R02.jpg to the current lead. Also, if all things are equal, I'd prefer an image that was sharper and more detailed than one that was only good in thumb -- people do use Wikipedia as a way of getting hold of images, and they get a little "no higher resolution available" disappointment. If you want to focus on some aspect of the architecture, it may be useful to create a crop of an image, with the lossless crop tool on Commons. -- Colin°^Talk 17:10, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Colin - Many thanks indeed for taking a look. And yes, I like your suggested lead a lot. A better picture, more arresting, and shows more of the building's architectural features. And I didn't know that nifty means of searching for "Good pictures". I shall follow that interesting trail and see where it leads. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 17:37, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

p.s. Just tried a couple of "Good picture" searches, with superb results! KJP1 (talk) 17:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

KJP1, just be careful that sometimes Commons category system can be a bit weird and confuse the Good Picture tool into including images that aren't really appropriate. So double check that what you find really is the building you wanted. -- Colin°^Talk 08:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I hadn't been aware of the lossless crop tool; very often crop pics in paint, but with huge drops in resolution when it is compressed again. Ceoil (talk) 19:06, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's very good, I use it all the time. Almost all US museum "donated" images of ceramics etc need a good crop. Johnbod (talk) 23:57, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify a not well though out edit summary earlier, I would order the gallery chronologically rather than alphabetically, ie started in Britain, and then spread out. However, dont know what sub headers would serve this. Ceoil (talk) 00:23, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My only worry about a chronological approach is that we may end up having to use this, [1]. About as McGothic as you could get! KJP1 (talk) 09:19, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is an amazing accompaniment to that warehouse. But that was my worry before you got involved...some were verging on follies. Ceoil (talk) 12:57, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Kyles, Shannon.“Gothic Revival (1750-1900)”. OntarioArchitecture.com. http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/gothicrevival.html. Kyles, Shannon. “Gothic Revival (1750-1900)”. OntarioArchitecture.com. http://www.ontarioarchitecture.com/gothicrevival.html.

[1]