Talk:Tudor style (architecture)

message: The image of the house displayed in this article is not Tudor style, if anything it is more Lutyensesque, arts and crafts, early 20th century. Giano | talk 06:45, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed the image and made some alterations to the page. to define more clearly the style. Giano | talk 07:57, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

message: This page since its creation has always been solely concerned with architecture.  The title is in fact misleading, as Tudor style, could be concerned with dress, or in fact anything generating from that era.  I propose that the content here is moved and incorporated at the Tudorbethan  page, which is the more common name for pseudo-Tudor architecture.  This page could then be left a a redirect until some one wishes to write a page about complete Tudor style.  Does anyone have a comment, objection or better idea. Giano | talk 12:14, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I must say I haven't come across the expression "Tudorbethan".  Is it an American usage? Deb 21:47, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: No sadly, it's English, and becoming estate agent jargonese. How do you feel about Neo-Tudor Giano | talk 21:49, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

text: Personally, I think Neo-Tudor's better.  But it really depends whether it's recognised by the kind of people (don't mean to sound snobbish) who are attracted by that style! Deb 22:14, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

text: "Tudorbethan" is modelled on John Betjeman's 1933 coinage "Jacobethan" which he used to describe the mixed revival style that had been called things like "Free English Renaissance". "Tudorbethan" takes it a step further. We do have a serious article on Googie, after all. Whatever is decided, "Tudor style" should redirect to it, until someone finds a unity in the styles of Henry VII and Elizabeth I. --Wetman 22:21, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't "Tudor style" be a disambiguation page in this case? Deb 22:39, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea Deb, and .....umm yes that did sound a just a tiny bit snobbish - take it you don't live surrounded by lacquered horse brasses and  "olde worlde" charm, under a roof of luxuriant "plasti-thatch". Giano | talk 07:01, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

text: Actually, there are one or two genuine Tudor properties near me.  It puts things in perspective. Deb 08:47, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I hate to disagree with my old friend Wetman,  but I also think Neo-Tudor is better, but in spite of that I think we should stick with Tudorbethan, as it seems daft creating even more pages on the same subject.  You're right Debs real Tudor puts the imitations in their place so it's very hard to write these pages without letting the POV creep in. Giano | talk 13:02, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: There are quite a number of "Tudorbethan" houses, in fact a whole street of them, in our neck of the wood, every one with a nicely painted-on "half-timbered" look, which covers ordinary brickwork underneath. The owners regularly repaint the "timbers" black every few years or so and the "infills" white. No wonder, architects call it pastiche. Dieter Simon 23:32, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Does anyone actualy like Tudorbethan? Giano | talk 10:02, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

text: Tudorbethan is the actual term used by the Oxford Dictionary of Architecture for "a style of domestic architecture involving revival of Elizabethan, Jacobean and Tudor architectural elements..." They also carry  entries on Tudor architecture for the actual period style, and one on Tudor Revival, but none on Tudor style. I think we might be justified to keep Tudorbethan. It is a bona fide term, although it uses a critical vocabulary. Dieter Simon 00:08, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

text: *The consensus seems to be to retain Tudorbethan make this a disambig page. I've just re-read Tudorbethan, it seems to me to cover the subject quite succinctly, perhaps the images from here could go there, but most of the info here is already there, what little is not can easily be put there.  Concerning the redirect, I think this page should first be moved to Tudor style (architecture) then made a redirect. I'll wait a few days to see if anyone else who contributed to Tudor style has a view and then get on with it. Giano | talk 06:40, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you here, if there is anything Ican do, let me know. Dieter Simon 23:20, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've incorporated much of the information here to Tudorbethan.  It reads a little clumsily at the moments so all help welcome!  Tudor style is now moved to Tudor style (architecture) and all are redirects. So if anyone wants to start a mammoth gargantuan page on all aspects of Tudor style they now can. Giano | talk 13:58, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move/merge 

message: Would this page, now of the 2nd creation,  now not be better at Tudor architecture? This currently (probably wrongly) now links to Tudorbethan  Giano | talk 13:08, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  And again