Talk:English Gothic architecture

message: So, if we don't have any objections, I'll delete the three that this is made from. 
--Amandajm 14:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Merging the three page histories, of course.--Wetman 03:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: We now have a page on English Gothic architecture

message: The pic of Bath Abbey had in its caption just a single word of description- "restored". 
I've removed it for a couple of reasons. 
1. Every single one of these buildings has been restored/conserved, so it is redundant to mention it in this case. 
2. While the term "conserved" is generally applied to the preservation, superficial repair, cleaning and protection of monuments, the word "restored" is often applied in the most extreme sense of "put back" eg. The spire of Chichester Cathedral which fell in 1860 was "restored". 
:So, in the case of Bath Abbey we are looking at a vault that has been repaired and cleaned. If indeed it has been completely replaced, then the approximate date should be stated. 
Amandajm (talk) 01:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Use of the term restored

message: It is hard to get an idea about the different periods of Engish Gothic architecture (Early English, Decorated (Geometric / Curvilinear), Perpendicular) without a few relevant and enlightening pictures...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cvereb (talk • contribs) 22:45, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good Grief! Amandajm (talk) 04:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  A few pictures would help 

message: No other reference to why Early English nomenclature became Lancet Gothic, little extra online.  All my hard copies call it EE (although most are conservative academically). Any more info? Fremsley (talk) 23:09, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll see what I can find. Amandajm (talk) 03:40, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Lancet Gothic

message: okay?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.5.83.191 (talk) 17:55, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Within a tick of sighting the article, I see the need for info and pic English Gothic building which is not a church or somesuch but something more everyday 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on English Gothic 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/20121130024710/http://www.kings.cam.ac.uk/chapel/ to http://www.kings.cam.ac.uk/chapel/
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) 07:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The designation of styles in English Gothic architecture follow conventional labels given them by the antiquary Thomas Rickman, who coined the terms in his Attempt to Discriminate the Style of Architecture in England (1812–15). Historians sometimes refer to the styles as "periods", e.g. "Perpendicular period" in much the same way as an historical era may be referred to as the "Tudor period". The various styles are seen at their most fully developed in the cathedrals, abbey churches and collegiate buildings. It is, however, a distinctive characteristic of the cathedrals of England that all but one of them, Salisbury Cathedral, show great stylistic diversity and have building dates that typically range over 400 years.
* Early English (c. 1180–1275)
* Decorated (c. 1275–1380)
* Perpendicular (c. 1380–1520) 
I returned this section, having explained exactly why it needs to be in the article, further up this page. 
I have added the word "traditional" as suggested by Johnbod. 
The exact source of these definitions is available to us, and ought to be stated as Thomas Rickman.    Amandajm (talk) 14:45, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I just edited a bit (not realizing it hasd just come back), combining the the bit that was left at the bottom. How's that?  The lead could still be a bit longer. As we don't have an article on Perpendicular Gothic perhaps one of you could do that?  Johnbod (talk) 15:01, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

text: Yeah, that's good. Except the list and dates is dubby-dup. I'll remove that bit. Amandajm (talk) 18:35, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Terms

message: The areches do fall within the time frme. However, nothing about them is of Decorated Gothic design. They are essentially a piece of skilful engineering. 
Re the west front (don't use the French word Facade for something that in England is called a "west front" and is nota facade i.e. west fronts are generally very revealing of the form of the building that lies behind.  It isn't a "mask" stuck on the front. 
:NOTE: when you go to Wikimedia Commons to collect pictures, you will find that some well-meaning and ignorant person has labelled every side of every building as a "facade".  This might encourage you to thik it was done ith real knowledge and is the right term.   They were told about six years ago not to do it, but they did.  So you will find the entire side of a Gothic cathedral, with all its lumps and bumps, labelled as a "facade" -   North facade, instead of simply "north side",  which is correct. 
Picture no 1. York Minster West front.   That is Flowing Decorated.  Picture number 1 should be the east end of Lincoln Cathedral. NOTE: East end of Licoln Cathedral, specifically.Not a sideways view with the tower. 
:It goes 1. East end Lincoln  2. west front Exeter   3 west front York. 
:Amandajm (talk) 13:38, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Wells arches

message: Lincoln Cathedral (1185-1311)
    Nave and transept of Salisbury Cathedral, without tower (1220-1258)
    Transept of Westminster Abbey
    Whitby Abbey
    Rievaulx Abbey
    The Galilee Porch of Ely Cathedral
    Nave and transept of Wells Cathedral (1225-120)
    West front of Peterborough Cathedral
    South transept of York Cathedral 
:1. Canterbury Cathedral - choir and Corona Chapel 
:2. Wells Cathedral-  1175-1260  Now don't stuff around saying saying "nave and transept".  What you are looking at here is an Early English building that was continued as it was first designed. Only the additions are in a later style.  
:3. Salisbury Cathedral-  I have told you this before-   Don't say "nave and transept"  It is an entirely Early Englis building except' for the two additions. 
:4. Peterborough Cathedral- the west front 
:5 York Minster- the transepts (both of them)  
:6 And don't forget Ripon west front
Amandajm (talk) 20:03, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: THis needs to be right

message: Hello! This is to let editors know that the featured picture :File:The Cloisters at Gloucester Cathedral.jpg, which is used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for December 18, 2020. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2020-12-18. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page.  If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:54, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:File:The Cloisters at Gloucester Cathedral.jpg]] scheduled for POTD 

message: I revised the first sentence giving the dates of the period to comply with the Wikipedia manual of style. Technical terms for periods should not be used in place of dates in the first sentence of the lead. The reader should not have to go to two links to understand the very first sentence of the article. Thanks for your understanding. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 16:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Middle Ages" is a perfectly common expression and the manual of style does not preclude usage of this term. The main reason for reverting your incorrect dates is that your dates are incorrect. What source supports the assertion that Gothic architecture in England ceased in the 1550s as your wording ? This is quite wrong, and you should undo your change (again). GPinkerton (talk) 16:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid I don't see what is 'contradictory".  "Middle Ages" is too broad a term.  I'm using Edmund Sharpe's "Seven Periods" as a source, as described in Freeman's "English Church Architecture of the Middle Ages." He puts the periods of English architecture from Lancet in 1190 until the end of Rectilinear, in 1550.  The current text doesn't say that English Gothic "ceased" in 1550, it says it no longer flourished.  This is certainly open to discussion.  What dates do you think would be more accurate and what is your source?  Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 12:51, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: A section on Gothic survival would be useful to cover the conservative twilight. I'm not sure England was so exceptional in having this as the text currently suggests. Johnbod (talk) 13:03, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , the British Isles (more than England) was exceptional, but the text should say "17th century" and not "16th century". The 16th century was the golden age of Gothic all over Europe, so the sentence should definitely change. GPinkerton (talk) 16:02, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: There is very little in the article currently to justify dragging the 17th century into it, apart from some completions of university schemes (which would be one place to add on the Gothic survival).  By the time you get to Wren, it is surely conscious revival, & should be added to in that currently very short section. Johnbod (talk) 02:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , I don't agree; Wren's contributions are paradigmatic survival rather than revival. Revival per se isn't usually considered to come in until the latter 18th century. Convocation House is survival, but its vault is probably revival, at least according to the usual schemes. GPinkerton (talk) 03:52, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Well he certainly did Tom Tower to fit in, but it was not a natural style for him, & he had to work it up.  I see we say "Wren made a case for working in a Late Gothic style—that it "ought to be Gothick to agree with the Founders worke"Wren Society 5 (Oxford: Clarendon Press) 1928:17.—a style that had not been seen in a prominent building for a hundred and fifty years, making Tom Tower a lonely precursor." - perhaps you have something to say on that!  Johnbod (talk) 04:06, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , so what if it's not what he's known for? It's beside the point. Ultimately, the fact remains that people (including but not limited to Wren) were still putting up Gothic buildings in England in the English Gothic tradition well into the 17th century.  GPinkerton (talk) 04:13, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  is just silly. Convocation House was built forty years before and is less than ten minutes' walk away. Trinity Great Court was eighty years before. St John the Evangelist's Church, Leeds was done in the 1630s. St John's College Old Library, Cambridge was built at a similar date. The misericords at Durham Cathedral were made in the 1670s. There was also the archbishop of Canterbury's hospital at Guildford, the Church without dedication, High Ham, Charles Church, Plymouth, the 1620s St Katharine Cree, the church at Staunton Harold, the 1650/60s Chapel of Brasenose College, Oxford, Auckland Castle, Licoln's Inn Chapel, and so on. GPinkerton (talk) 04:55, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought that might get you going. Did I say anything about what Wren "is known for"? RIBA say lasting until the early 17th century, ie well before Wren, but covering numerous college schemes, mostly completing the work of decades, several mentioned in the article. Got any new Gothic big houses after 1600?   Johnbod (talk) 17:22, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , Auckland Castle not big enough? GPinkerton (talk) 22:50, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, but that's a clergy house, if on a grand scale. Anything lay? Johnbod (talk) 12:44, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , Water Eaton or Steane Park big enough? Why does it matter? There were dozens of churches and secular buildings. "Mostly the work of decades" is hardly accurate either. Trinity Great Court was started only in the very late 16th century, Tom Quad was ordered by Wolsey, Wadham College and Lincoln College were mostly built ab initio, with new chapels. The Bodleian Library was built wholly in the 17th century. The prince-bishop of Durham's palace is in any case not exactly a parsonage either. GPinkerton (talk) 18:20, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Only the chapel at Water Eaton seems to be Gothic; I can't see it in the house. Steane park is similar, no?  I'd still like to see a Gothic gentry house after 1600.  You seem to think I'm supporting the passage I threw up for your delectation. Johnbod (talk) 18:30, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

text: , the dates cited in the article, surely. Surely you can see that Edmund Sharpe, having lived and died more than 150 years ago, and his quaint, amateur, and long-superseded classification of "periods", is very far from the best source. Architectural history has progressed since its first early 19th-century beginnings. Already, up-to-date sources in the article describe a longer span, and the lead of the article already explains that Sharpe arbitrarily and wrongly excluded buildings built after the beginning of the reign of Henry VIII.  Before the latest wave of changes, the lead sentence said "in the Late Middle Ages and Early Modern Period", which, as you'll agree, is more accurate than "Middle Ages" and does not incorrectly exclude several centuries of Gothic architecture for no good reason. GPinkerton (talk) 15:59, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

text: I'm sorry, but I don't agree.  "Late Middle Ages" and "Early Modern Period" don't mean anything at all to me or most people. You need to give a more specific dates.  The beginning is clear, but what would you want to put for the end? Mid 17th century? 
You could put end of the 17th, but that's really, really late.  The examples given in the article are much earlier, and the lead is supposed to be a summary of the article. SiefkinDR (talk) 18:16, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

text: , what makes you say it's really really late? Many more specific dates are given in the next sentences of the leads. Indeed, dates are far from the most important point, since the page's subject is about English Gothic architecture, which is a geographic style and not a chronology. GPinkerton (talk) 01:24, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, but again I don't agree with you. The lead, especially the first paragraph, is a concise summary of the contents of the article, "Middle Ages" is too vague.  According to the article, the origin of the style was the late 12th century, and the end was the completion of King's College, finished in 1539, so "mid-sixteenth century" is being generous but accurately summarizes the article.SiefkinDR (talk) 10:53, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , . Where are you reading this? The article doesn't seem to say anything of that kind. Neither should it, since it is not at all correct. GPinkerton (talk) 22:52, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

text: The last work mentioned in the artlcle is Kings College, Oxford. The lead is a summary of the article. If that needs correcting, please correct it. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 08:50, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , I'm sorry I don't understand. No such place is mentioned in the article and there is no such thing as "Kings College, Oxford"! GPinkerton (talk) 11:18, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry, I was writing in haste. I meant King's College, Cambridge, finished in 1544. SiefkinDR (talk) 15:45, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well it's certainly not true that it's the latest building in the article. GPinkerton (talk) 18:20, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

text: It's also not true that the building was completed in 1544, I'm not sure you're getting that from. GPinkerton (talk) 19:57, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

text: The first two sentences are just awful now - it says the style "flourished" until the mid-17th century, which is downright misleading, as is the bit about church architecture - it needs to be rephrased to say this is what has survived best,  not what the style was "used most prominently" for.  Johnbod (talk) 11:05, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , go ahead and remove the "flourished", but I don't think we need to adopt the language of "survived". Survived what? Buildings just continued to be built; there's no death, survival, and resurrection needed in the first sentence; that's all aestheticist anachronism. There does need to be a verb though, so pick one. GPinkerton (talk) 12:27, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You mistake my point - it says "The style was most prominently used in the construction of cathedrals and churches" - this is misleading because almost all the 10,000s of secular buildings in the style have vanished, whereas most cathedrals and churches (and a good deal of clerical or semi-clerical architecture that is not actually churches) has survived. So survived destruction, that's what. Johnbod (talk) 12:55, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , I agree. I have long argued that such a focus is improper. GPinkerton (talk) 04:32, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

text: , It does already. GPinkerton (talk) 12:29, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Johnbod. Survived is more appropriate. I think there are more notable examples of Renaissance than new Gothic construction in the 17th century. Another possibility is "endured", which might be even more appropriate. Cordially SiefkinDR (talk) 10:07, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening sentence with dates of the period 

message: According to the Wikipedia article on King's College Chapel, Cambridge "The Chapel was built in phases by a succession of kings of England from 1446 to 1515, a period which spanned the Wars of the Roses and three subsequent decades. The Chapel's large stained glass windows were not completed until 1531, and its early Renaissance rood screen was erected in 1532–36." 
Since the article now says that English Gothic lasted through the mid-17th century, the section of the article on perpendicular needs to give some examples to illustrate that, and there probably should be at least one an example mentioned in the lead. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 10:36, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The first two sentences are just awful now - it says the style "flourished" until the mid-17th century, which is downright misleading, as is the bit about church architecture - it needs to be rephrased to say this is what has survived best,  not what the style was "used most prominently" for.  Johnbod (talk) 11:05, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , go ahead and remove the "flourished", but I don't think we need to adopt the language of "survived". Survived what? Buildings just continued to be built; there's no death, survival, and resurrection needed in the first sentence; that's all aestheticist anachronism. There does need to be a verb though, so pick one. GPinkerton (talk) 12:27, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: You mistake my point - it says "The style was most prominently used in the construction of cathedrals and churches" - this is misleading because almost all the 10,000s of secular buildings in the style have vanished, whereas most cathedrals and churches (and a good deal of clerical or semi-clerical architecture that is not actually churches) has survived. So survived destruction, that's what. Johnbod (talk) 12:55, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , I agree. I have long argued that such a focus is improper. GPinkerton (talk) 04:32, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

text: , It does already. GPinkerton (talk) 12:29, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Johnbod. Survived is more appropriate. I think there are more notable examples of Renaissance than new Gothic construction in the 17th century. Another possibility is "endured", which might be even more appropriate. Cordially SiefkinDR (talk) 10:07, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Examples needed of 17th century English Gothic

message: Is this article restricted in scope to buildings in modern England, the medieval Kingdom of England, ones built by English architects, or ones built in "English" Gothic style? The article is not clear and appears to included various definitions and incorporates buildings not in either modern England or mediaeval England. GPinkerton (talk) 12:37, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is about Gothic architecture in England, as the title says.SiefkinDR (talk) 12:53, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: England and Wales, I'd say. There's a mention of Melrose in Scotland, which should probably come out, and a pic of Wrexham, which is ok. Anything else? Johnbod (talk) 13:14, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , I was thinking of, say, Londonderry Cathedral. Gothic, English architect. (17th century.) I stopped myself putting in an image of Tintagel. I wonder if this page even has the right title. GPinkerton (talk) 14:12, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Scope 

message: Did you all see that the article received almost five thousand page views on December 18, thanks to the featured picture of the Gloucester Cathedral cloister on the Wikipedia main page? (It didn't hurt that the caption mentioned that three of the Harry Potter films used the cloister as a backdrop). Good work, Gothic architectural team! SiefkinDR (talk) 13:22, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: And just after I added all those illustrations too; it was rather dry beforehand. Now all that's needed is some more text on the architects and buildings themselves, and fewer lists. GPinkerton (talk) 14:17, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, though the picture that was selected has been there since March.  You recently reduced it in size.  But I agree with you that now we need more about architecture and fewer lists. We can't include every Gothic building in England. Cordially, SiefkinDR (talk) 21:18, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: , there's no danger of that. GPinkerton (talk) 00:25, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Five thousand views in one day!!! 

message: The images in the new galleries are too small and hard to see, with too much wasted white space between them. You shouldn’t have to enlarge every image to really see it. we can do better than this.SiefkinDR (talk) 07:05, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image size 

message: The article's sub-section on Decorated Gothic juxtaposes the "geometric" and the "curvilinear" styles. Here it might be helpful to clarify if "curvilinear" is - in this context - synonymous to "flowing", as the term "Flowing Decorated Gothic" also seems to be in use, e.g. in the introductory section of the article on Carlisle Cathedral.92.79.101.164 (talk) 11:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of "Flowing Decorated Gothic" 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:21, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion