Talk:American Craftsman

message: Frankly, I am surprised that this page is so carefully and adamantly set off from the Arts & Crafts movement overall. Certainly the major architects of the American movement were very honest that their style was primarily influenced by both the philosophy and architectural style of the British movement, and I've never heard a single architectural historian or curator even suggest that they were separate or significantly different. Certainly the American movement is an evolutionary aspect OF the Arts & Crafts movement overall, and the Craftsman home is one example of many of its popular architectural styles, but to suggest that it is unique and not a child of A & C overall is ridiculous. 
Thus, and I hope this does not offend anyone, I am making slight changes - not to most of the page, just to the discussion of its relation to the British movement (which needed a bit of clarification anyway regarding the British movement's relation to Victorianism, which is resembled only on the surface). Moehong 21:12, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the comments above and have deleted the comment at the beginning of the article that said "This subject should not be confused with the British Arts and Crafts Movement."  I did so for two reasons:  The American movement was clearly influenced by the British movement, especially by Ruskin's thinking and Morris' work.  Secondly, the linked article on the Arts and Crafts movement makes it clear that this was a movement in many countries, including the U.S.  That being said, this article and the other one needs lots of work to better represent the subject, in my opinion.  Cullen328 (talk) 22:09, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The corresponding Commons category is woefully underpopulated. I'd like to add to it, but I am not sure completely what is and is not considered American Craftsman style. Here are some examples from Seattle; which of these qualify?
Image:Seattle - 1241 18th Ave E.jpg|I'd hope we can all agree this is Craftsman
Image:Seattle - 4764 Beach Dr. SW 01.jpg|Ditto this
Image:Seattle -2622 Franklin E 04.jpg|And this, despite some just slightly more fanciful elements.
Image:Seattle - 627 13th E.jpg|Here's an example that pays conscious tribute to the Japanese influences.
Image:Seattle - 4866 Beach Dr. SW 02.jpg|I classified this in the category. Does anyone disagree?
Image:Seattle - Cotterill House 04.jpg|Now we get into the range where I think we begin to press the borders.
Image:Seattle - 1383 Lake Washington Blvd S.jpg|Is this also Craftsman?
Image:Seattle - 1633 17th E 01.jpg|I think of this as Craftsman, but is the curved area at the corner too revivalist?
Image:Seattle - Pantages House 01.jpg|Because this also has a similar corner, but differently deployed with the broad porch, and strikes me as emphatically Craftsman.
Image:Seattle - 153 Highland Drive 03.jpg|Again, basically Craftsman to my eye, but some Tudor Revivalist influences in the overall layout.
Image:Seattle - 170 Prospect St 01.jpg|Craftsman, Mission Revival, or a bit of each?
Image:Seattle - 1729 17th E 03.jpg|Do those classical columns disqualify this as Craftsman?
Image:Seattle - 5218 16th NE 01.jpg|How about these columns on an otherwise very standard box-style Craftsman?
Comments here would provide very useful guidance for anyone attempting to populate the category. - Jmabel | Talk 00:02, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's fun to compare stylistic features of different houses, but we're just Wikipedia editors, not judges of whether or not a given house adheres sufficiently to a particular style to be given that label. Images chosen should be of houses that our cited sources agree are exemplars of Craftsman style.  WCCasey (talk) 05:38, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Setting bounds around the style

message: I would think we would want some discussion in the article of how, in the early 20th century, the American Craftsman style was the main alternative to various forms of architectural revivalism in North American residential architecture. Obviously it didn't have quite the assertive modernism of Cubist architecture in Czechoslovakia or of the Bauhaus, but it was a specifically contemporary architecture. But I don't offhand have a citation for that. - Jmabel | Talk 23:50, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Craftsman as a modernist movement 

message: I had tagged this article with  to have the draft merged into this article.  This tag was reverted by User:WCCasey with the edit summary that there was no merge discussion.  The merge recommendation was based on my review of the draft, which is on the same subject as this article but has some information that appears not to be in this article, so that a review is in order to determine whether information in the draft can be added to this article.  I will not be retagging this article, so as to avoid a tag war, but I am restating the recommendation here that the draft be reviewed.  I declined the draft, not because anything is wrong with it, but because this article exists.  Robert McClenon (talk) 02:49, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with declining the draft article. A merge is not the normal way to add information to an article. And why does a nearly-but-not-quite-identical version of this article even exist? WCCasey (talk) 05:22, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Draft:American Craftsman]] 

message: This article has been co-opted by Anglophiles who claim that the American Craftsman stlye is an "offshoot of the British Arts and Crafts movement", which way overstates that movement's influence. The next paragraph is an irrelevant discussion of the British movement that should be deleted or moved to a relevant article. If American Craftsman was an "offshoot" of anything, it was Shingle style architecture - another American style. WCCasey (talk) 17:36, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Revisionist architecture history