Talk:Palladian architecture

message: I am thinking of making some major edits to this page, probably a complete re-write, if anybody has any views,  objection, or suggestions -  I would love to hear from them Giano 11:59, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Be bold. Be ruthless here! This entry calls for your guiding hand. --Wetman 12:25, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, this page doesn't need a rewrite — it needs a write. :) Doops 18:07, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I am a non native English speaker, I suspect there is a hint of an idiom here please explain Giano 19:58, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it was a joke. I was saying that the page doesn't need to be re-written: it just needs to be written in the first place, since right now it's a very brief stub. Using the word "write" as a noun is neither standard English nor an idiom — it's just something I made up for the sake of the joke. Doops 20:36, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry late at night; will do best to attune sense of humour, normally pretty acute Giano 20:43, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

text: Welcome. Interested editors contribute and monitor changes, but Wikipedia is "the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit". See here for policy on article 'ownership'.  Might I suggest you read Help:Contents/Getting started. William Avery (talk) 12:44, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A Wikipedia page is never complete, and with a million or more editors often never concise as is desrirable (as you will find). However, which part do you feel is innacurate? Then perhaps we can find who contributed which facts and ascertain the accuracy rather than remove information hurriedly. The page has become a little bottom heavy on American Palladianism, but that is only to be expected and tolerated when one bears in mind the nationality of a large proportion of Wikipedia's editors. In my experience, one day a Russian or Welshman is quite likely to pop over and suddenly the balance will change again. Wikipedia is largely a matter of allowing so much and then knowing when to say whoa. If you want to write a "perfect page" that will always be concise and perfect then you will find Wikipedia frustrating in the extreme. However, as I said, innacuracies need sorting and putting right.  Giano  14:10, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Re-write

message: does anyone manage this page? can I re-write it? I study palladian architecture and this article is neither concise, accurate nor complete.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.32.59.100 (talk) 12:19, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Welcome. Interested editors contribute and monitor changes, but Wikipedia is "the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit". See here for policy on article 'ownership'.  Might I suggest you read Help:Contents/Getting started. William Avery (talk) 12:44, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A Wikipedia page is never complete, and with a million or more editors often never concise as is desrirable (as you will find). However, which part do you feel is innacurate? Then perhaps we can find who contributed which facts and ascertain the accuracy rather than remove information hurriedly. The page has become a little bottom heavy on American Palladianism, but that is only to be expected and tolerated when one bears in mind the nationality of a large proportion of Wikipedia's editors. In my experience, one day a Russian or Welshman is quite likely to pop over and suddenly the balance will change again. Wikipedia is largely a matter of allowing so much and then knowing when to say whoa. If you want to write a "perfect page" that will always be concise and perfect then you will find Wikipedia frustrating in the extreme. However, as I said, innacuracies need sorting and putting right.  Giano  14:10, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite 2

message: When I learned my art history, I was taught by the Janson and Janson book that the #1 example of Palladianism outside of those buildings made by Palladio himself was the work of Inigo Jones, and, in particular, the Houses of Parliament in London.  Whether the Jansons were right or not, a whole bunch of folks will have learned the same thing, so it might be good to mention Jones and the Parliament buildings.  The point was that English Palladianism had only about a 10 year run, then the Baroque broke out, and then Palladianism came back around the 30's.  Just a thought. Geogre 01:29, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Any work Jones did on the old Palace of Westminster would have been lost in the fire which necessitated its present rebuilding; his most famous work is the nearby Banqueting House part of the (also now destroyed) Palace of Whitehall. Perhaps that's what you're thinking of? Doops 04:11, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Prime Example of Palladianism in England 

message: It seems a pity to distract this important and handsome article with a minor disambiguation at the head! If the fact that Palladian redirects here is the reason the stub Palladian window needs to be mentioned so conspicuously, I think it better to have Palladian redirect to Palladian window, with the disambiguation at the head of that. I have so edited.--Bishonen 23:41, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Tons and tons of important (and even handsome) articles open with a minor disambiguation. It's just the reality of our encylopedia's un-browsable format; I don't think it really detracts or distracts. To avoid this relatively minor disambig, do you really think it's better for Palladian to redirect to the relatively minor window article? Many people refer to "Palladian architecture" simply as "the Palladian" (as in, "My doghouse is a fine example of the Palladian."); that's why the article was originally located at Palladian even if that is, technically, an adjective. I think Palladian should continue to redirect here. Doops 04:09, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

text: No, this definitely should not be combined with Palladio. It's not just a matter of page length: that page is a bio of a specific individual; this page is a description of an architectural style — and, indeed, when you hear the word "Palladian" it's more likely than not that the reference is to the 18th-century style whose connection to Palladio himself is at best removed by time and interpreters. As for Irish & American Palladianism — well, those are without doubts offshoots of English Palladianism, and could pretty well be treated along with it. (By the way, although I know that Irish Palladianism is very famous, I would have to say that here in America, on the other hand, you actually don't hear the term very often at all.) Doops 16:54, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well Doops, now is your opportunity to change that sad fact Giano 17:01, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Palladian window

message: I have never heard the term 'The Palladian' without a qualifying noun following it, in fact 'The Palladian' sounds rather like a nightclub, gaming house or bidet.  Perhaps this is not the case in USA, but in Europe (home of palladianism) it is always qualified by a noun.  I have mentioned to Doops that I thought the window page should perhaps be incorporated, but he felt this important feature should remain seperate, which I am happy for that page to be, if he feels so.  I have, however, written a few words on the main page on this important subject, and those few words contain a link to Doops page, for people seeking further information.  I think perhaps palladian should link to Palladian Architecture as in many many articles 'palladian' as an adjective followed by a noun (eg Church, mansion or whatever)refers to palladian architecture.
Perhaps the page needs to be moved to Palladianism, ideally perhaps it wants to be part of a larger page with Palladio, but Wikepedia frowns on long and informative pages!  Which Palladio would become if this page were added; especially as there is a long way to go yet, the page has only mentioned Italian and English Palladianism, barely touched on American and Irish, and we half of europe left. Giano 15:01, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: No, this definitely should not be combined with Palladio. It's not just a matter of page length: that page is a bio of a specific individual; this page is a description of an architectural style — and, indeed, when you hear the word "Palladian" it's more likely than not that the reference is to the 18th-century style whose connection to Palladio himself is at best removed by time and interpreters. As for Irish & American Palladianism — well, those are without doubts offshoots of English Palladianism, and could pretty well be treated along with it. (By the way, although I know that Irish Palladianism is very famous, I would have to say that here in America, on the other hand, you actually don't hear the term very often at all.) Doops 16:54, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Well Doops, now is your opportunity to change that sad fact Giano 17:01, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken Windows and Links 

message: I am trying to put together a short article on "Tutte l'opere d'architettura et prospetiva" so that we do not have that ugly broken link in the middle of this article. So far I have found very little on it, either on Wikipedia or Google. If anyone has any information on it, so that it is not just an unnattractive little stub, then do pop on over to the new article page that I am setting up. Polocrunch 16:41, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope, though, you'll a) make it a subsection at Sebastiano Serlio where context offers extra strength, or b) condense your final entry to a brief paragraph and insert it at "Serlio's treatise" which is waiting wistfully just for this moment! --Wetman 20:09, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Sebastiano Serlio]]

message: I eliminated the assertion that Palladio's buildings are "rare". Actually, they've survived pretty well. I substituted "Venice and the Veneto" for "Italy" which seemed unnecessarily broad. --Wetman 13:51, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: "Rare"

message: Not understanding the difference between Classical and Neoclassiocal produces text like this:
:"[Palladian architecture] is a sub-genre of neoclassical architecture. Usually distinguished chronologically from "neoclassical" proper rather than spoken of as an eary version of the same, the original designs by Palladio nevertheless closely follow the casual style of Roman country villas, as opposed to the later style that superceded Palladian, which has an aesthetic more commonly associated with the ancient form because it imitates the clean/severe lines of Roman monuments and government buildings. This distinct emphasis on different classical elements leads to a natural division between these two equally "neoclassical" aesthetics."
 
This passage doesn't characterize the subject in terms that make the reader see Palladian architecture ("casual style"), and it seems to be innocent of any basic art history reading. Even a careful reading of the relevant Wikipedia articles and links would help here, though Classical architecture badly needs overhauling. --Wetman 11:05, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: "Classical" and "Neoclassical"

message: I have removed this from the main article:
"Another excellent North American example of Palladian architecture is the Saunders-Hall-Goode Mansion. This impressive structure is located just north of Town Creek, Alabama.  The mansion was placed on the National Registry of Historic Places in 1974. The home was built by Rev. Turner Saunders (Sanders) on property purchased in 1833"
Because it is not a very good example of American palladianism, the central entrance is offset, the wings are given too much prominence by ostentatious pediments, if they are to have pediments they should be linked to the house by colonnades or lower segmented wings in short it is a pastiche by an unaccomplished architect, or it has been drastically altered.  America has far better examples.
Secondly,  the page is about  Palladianism in general, and cannot become too orientated on one particular country.  Perhaps the time has come for a separate page on  the  Palladian architecture of North America Giano | talk 21:51, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  North American Palladianism 

message: has sort of messed with the later statement that there are only two Pre-American Revolution Palladian building.  However I am reluctent to mess with that paragraph yet because   .   .  .  . . . . .....  it's so well written.  However both Reed (who I added to the References) and and Roth [in A Concise History of American Architecture - which i did not add] mention the Four Books origins of Harrison's library.  So . . . .....  ? Carptrash 00:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  My adding [[Peter Harrison]] in 1749 

message: Though these websites are not up to the standards demanded by some Wikipedians, they offer official capsule history of the two houses and their occupants. Part of judging the high quality of this article is in comparing it to relevant official sites. One deletes a reference and the next comes along and demands it. --Wetman 00:56, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Official websites of Woburn Abbey and of Holkham Hall

message: and since my time on wikipedia is now very limited, I won't, but the Philip Johnson quote from the Lewis, O'Connor book is on page 170.  Carptrash 14:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I have not yet figured out footnotes 

message: One editor removed two paragraphs about Palladianism in N America, after another flagged them as lacking citations. The prose in these paras could also have been better. Please reinstate any parts for which you can provide citations. --Philcha (talk) 05:27, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: This kind of blanking is called vandalism when un-logged-in IPs do it. The blanked text was perfectly mainstream and sensible: blanking text does not genuinely serve the Wikipedia reader. Personally, I render my edits foolproof by providing citations for even the most obvious observations, to satisfy our architectural critics in Buffalo Jump or wherever.--Wetman (talk) 10:14, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it's vandalism when people remove content that conflicts with WP:V and / or WP:NPOV. Vandals also don't usually post diffs and a rationale on the Talk page. Note the request "Please reinstate any parts for which you can provide citations." --Philcha (talk) 10:38, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

text: *I removed the content, after it was tagged as uncited by Mattisse, An editor-en passent who wants to nominate the page for FARC. I very much suspect Mattisse's motives here, but frankly, I am too tired of her to be bothered to explore them. Perhaps one of her probabtionary mentors, more interested in her than I, would care to deal with this. Giano (talk) 20:36, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Two paras on Palladianism in N America removed

message: Does the Isaac Meason House get coverage in general sources?  Historic preservation documentation that I've seen, including the sources currently in the article, speak of it as a premier example of American Palladianism, but I'm loth to mention it in this general article unless it should be considered highly representative of the style as a whole.  Nyttend (talk) 04:28, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: *It is a good example, but the problem is that this is a general article and we have to be careful that it does not begin to read like a list or inventory. I think the Hammond-Harwood House (which is there at the moment) is probably the better example. I have always been surprised that Mount Vernon is not more written up, but that does not even give Palldianism a mention on its own page. I find early American architecture a minefield of personal opinion and things hung on the wrong hook, so am loathe to get involved. As far as I'm concerned Wikipedia's American architectural experts can decide what is in and out of this page, just so long as each countries length is kept in proportion. Not counting Italy which has the real thing, England probably has the most examples of Palladianism, but even that section has to be kept concise to maintain interest and attention.  Giano  13:46, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isaac Meason House 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Palladian 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061003100510/http://www.cisapalladio.org/index.php?lingua=e to http://www.cisapalladio.org/index.php?lingua=e
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080107020022/http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-vh/w-visits/w-findaplace/w-wallington/ to http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/main/w-vh/w-visits/w-findaplace/w-wallington
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:54, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Johnbod, I think the article should probably have a section on Palladianism in Russia. This would need to cover Giacomo Quarenghi and Charles Cameron and their relationship with Catherine the Great as well as Nikolay Lvov's translation into Russian of Palladio's first book (1798). There was an exhibit at the Correr back in 2014.Venicescapes (talk) 05:08, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't they normally get classed as "Neoclassical"? No doubt there was Palladian influence, and we could say so. Johnbod (talk) 13:39, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Johnbod, There were a number of major museums and institutions involved in the exhibit which made a fairly strong case that the buildings in Russia are part of Neo-Palladianism. There may be some ethnocentricity at play that considers Neo-Palladianism as a strictly Anglo-Saxon phenomenon. The work in Russia seems to have been animated by the same ideas and interests. With the translation of the First Book into Russian, there's also a documented desire to seek out authentic Palladian forms and concepts. The problem here is that the article has already been recorded and reached FA. Is this something that you would be interested in exploring/working on? Venicescapes (talk) 14:44, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Not personally, but I think cautious high-quality additions would not be objected to. Johnbod (talk) 16:30, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The subject is touched on in the Neoclassical architecture in Russia article. Carptrash (talk) 18:02, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

text: *While neoclassical Russian architecture is obviously derived from Renaissance architecture, I’m less sure it evolved via Palladio. There are, of course, obvious Palladian buildings in Russia and the former USSR (although many are in ruins), but when one thinks of neoclassical Russian buildings, one tends to think of long, low buildings, often without pediments, or any of the distinctive features which Palladio used. Often the scale and mass isn’t Palladian either. So I think it important to proceed with great caution, remembering that while all Palladianism is neoclassical, all neoclassical isn’t Palladian. Giano   (talk) 21:10, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: At this point, I'm merely raising questions. It might be a good idea for me to take another look at the catalogue of the exhibit. Several years have passed, but as I recall the initial part was focused primarily on Peter the Great's embassy to the West, the first translation of Palladio's work in 1699 by Prince Dolgorukov (part of Peter's retinue), and the country homes of the Russian aristocracy (greatly indebted to Palladio). It then moved on to Catherine, Querenghi, Cameron, and Lvov. Disentangling Neoclassical from Neo-Palladian is nuanced, and various arguments could be made. Beyond the end result, I think another factor is the intellectual underpinnings. In the case of Russia, I see a greater influence from the Italian Renaissance than classical Greek and Roman prototypes.  My impression is that the article here makes Palladianism appear to be almost a unique Anglo-Saxon phenomenon, although Venice is mentioned.Venicescapes (talk) 07:07, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Russian Palladianism 

message: I'm reviewing this one for WP:URFA/2020.  It's a holdover from the days before inline citations were as common, and needs a touchup to add inline citations per WP:WTC.  Things like "The term "Palladian" today is often misused, and tends to describe a building with any classical pretensions" or "It is perhaps the only Palladian house in Ireland to have been built with Palladio's mathematical ratios, and one of the three Irish mansions which claim to have inspired the design of the White House in Washington." and quite a few other passages don't really fall under subject-specific common knowledge, or are making claims that certain things are possible, and need cited inline.  Hopefully a featured article review can be avoided. Hog Farm  Talk 01:38, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: *”hopefully” Hog Farm, you will be finding the cites then, or are you just one dull little drive-by, glory seeking editor, who knows zilch, but thinks you can sound clever by turning up and pointing out what you imagine are faults? “Hopefully,” I’m wrong about you. Giano   (talk) 20:18, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: * I can try, but I know very little about this, have no access to online sources on this topic, and am currently busy with three other articles I'm working on: CSS Arkansas, Battle of Little Blue River, and Battle of Marais des Cygnes. Hog Farm  Talk 20:25, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: *Well, I’m not editing any content until RexxS receives a full apology from the so called Arbcom for their total disrespect. So you had better start reading up on the Veneto. Giano   (talk) 20:35, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: *Unfortunately, this article hasn't had significant improvements since  brought up concerns last year. I agree with HF about the inline citation concerns, and I see there are multiple paragraphs that require inline citations. If no one addresses the above soon, it might be submitted to WP:FAR. Is anyone willing to fix up this article? Z1720 (talk) 13:48, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  FA sweeps 

message: As per Johnbod’s suggestion:
* Adaptation of Palladian style for northern European climates;
* Considerable amount on Rowe in the concluding para. Giano suggested this could probably go. KJP1 (talk) 09:35, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Material removed 

message: - Good to see that Country Life is following our lead with a front cover article on Palladianism!  KJP1 (talk) 16:56, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice :) SandyGeorgia (Talk)  17:09, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Country Life follows our lead