Talk:The Tower House

message: Any reason why there's a 'see also' link to 'haunted houses'? Are there any reports of Tower House being haunted? I would have thought that it was more noteworthy that this is/was the London home of Richard Harris and Jimmy Page. 80.176.88.21 (talk) 18:03, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed the text because it was unsourced - make sure that it's reliably sourced if it goes back in. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 22:22, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Haunted?

message: Not sure re. the trivia section.  It's not sourced.  And am puzzled as to when exactly an eight-year old boy would have been buried in the tower, considering the date of construction.  Lastly, I think the house had a nursery in Burges's time, although quite why is puzzling, considering that Burgess was most unlikely to have children.  Would suggest removal of the section.
Further checking shows that Burges built two nurseries, a Day Nusery and a Night Nursery.  So it seems unlikely that Harris would have constructed a third.  Have therefore removed the section. KJP1 (talk) 08:19, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia

message: "its floor-plan being little more than 50 feet square". 
Can anybody check this citation? A very small studio flat would have a floor area of around 200 square foot:- 50 would be a broom cupboard.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imogenpickles (talk • contribs) 09:23, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm.  Have checked the reference and it is right.  The full entry, at the very beginning of page 308, reads "Tower House is not a mansion.  It measures little more than 50 ft square."  Additionally, an illustration I have of the House, from the Building News of 1880, contains a floorplan which shows the front of the house as being 50 feet in length.  Is the issue one of teminology?  Does Crook mean it's 50 ft wide by 50 feet long, i.e. some 2500 square feet?  KJP1 (talk) 19:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: If the front of the building is 50 ft long then 2500 square feet would make much more sense... That would make it about the size of a 6/7 bedroom house rather than the size of a small shed!  --Imogenpickles (talk) 16:18, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Floor Area

message: So how far is the article from FA quality? Randomuser112 (talk) 23:07, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd love to know. I'm going to submit it to GA this week. Do you know any good sources? Gareth E Kegg (talk) 23:14, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I did some work on references. I think the article is pretty complete, but there's one issue - refs 31, 37, 39, 41 and 46 need exact page numbers. Randomuser112 (talk) 23:23, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, the article claims the street is not open to public. I'm fairly sure this is not correct. Randomuser112 (talk) 23:24, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Where does the article claim that? Gareth E Kegg (talk) 23:32, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, misunderstanding on my part. The article claims that the building is not open to public, not the street. Randomuser112 (talk) 23:38, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  FA 

message: If the guitar legend Jimmy Page or anybody else likely to have photographs of the interior read this and are willing to provide free photographs please post here and something can be arranged. The interior looks fantastic and we could really use a set of decent colour images of the rooms and details of the furnishings to do the article justice. The genius of Burges needs to be shown off to the world!! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:11, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  A request for images!! 

message: That authoritative editor User:Eric Corbett has pointed out that there are nine references, viz, 3, 15, 18, 21, 31, 49, 51, 52 and 54, that are not satisfactory, and need to be amended. Tim riley (talk) 20:06, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've cleared a few of these, but some still remain outstanding. 3, 18, 51, 52 and 54 need a brief check of the primary source (probably) to confirm which publishing date is correct - and a subsequent tweak of the date either in the source or the citation. 49 points to an undated publication by "Osband", but there is no indication in the sources who or what this refers to. - SchroCat (talk) 20:17, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

text: *I'll also add that there are no citations using the Minshall source, so if there are no other citations pointing to it, then the ref should be taken out. (I'll leave that all to those who know the subject much better than I!) - SchroCat (talk) 21:37, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

text: Whatever the problem is it needs to be fixed.  Eric Corbett 22:13, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: Hi, I have a sad life so I'm stalking Eric, but is that really "French Gothic Revival style" looks more like some sort of Flemish Revival style to me? I'm sure the reffs say French Gothic, but it doesn't smell like French.  Giano  13:47, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting comment...I love the moniker "Wrenassaince" and "Dutch Revival" similarly applied to nearby Queen Anne houses. Gareth E Kegg (talk) 14:46, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It reminds me very much of Tiffany House, New York. I forget who designed that, but it looks like a cross of Norman Shaw and Henry Hobson Richardson. However, that was built in 1882, whereas Tower House was built in four years earlier - so it is quite interesting.  Giano  17:33, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: *There is no mention of 'French' in the listing details ; I wonder if it might be best to loose that French designation? I expect it came from the design of the tower, but as it doesn't have any tourelles or overtly French features it's really just a 'Gothicuesque' feature.  Giano  09:31, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I've just realised that it's in Stourton, James (2012). Great Houses of London. Francis Lincoln. . a fact which is only briefly alluded to in the article. If anyone wants a ref for anything I have the book so give me a shout; it does contain on P221, the marvellous quote "Tower House is the most colourful and wackily decorated house of the Victorian age." That's a pretty old statemtn, the authors might feel that's worthy of inclusion.  Giano  10:02, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Just wandering in off the street

message: I'm not sure it is really high importance broadly speaking. The Ritz Hotel, London for instance is rated low importance!♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:48, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Hum - I looked at the descriptions for High and they read "Subject contributes a depth of knowledge" and "Very important buildings and architects".  I do think that describes The Tower House, particularly given it scores both for architect and for building.  Perhaps your Ritz is too low, although its feeble Grade II listing hardly places it on a par with The Tower House!  I shall ask on the Architecture Portal. KJP1 (talk) 07:06, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I've reassessed the Ritz to mid for architecture and top for hotels. Perhaps you're right though that Grade I listed buildings by default are high importance!♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:09, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I've raised the question.  But the Importance ratings do seem a bit arbitrary.  To take just a few examples, Belton House, Holkham Hall and Little Moreton Hall are all Mid Importance whilst Bramall Hall is High Importance.  I'd struggle to justify that, either in terms of architectural merit or historical significance. KJP1 (talk) 07:23, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, a lot of them are disputable. I think I can agree on the Tower House being low importance for London but high importance for architecture, being a Grade I listed building and notable work of William Burges. But my initial thought was it's a relatively small house and not quite as prominent as something like Cardiff Castle for instance.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:30, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Size isn't everything! KJP1 (talk) 07:36, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  High importance 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on The Tower House. 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/20131110130129/http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/pdf/EA_submission_case_4_2010_11.ashx.pdf to http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/pdf/EA_submission_case_4_2010_11.ashx.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150423174214/http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/pdf/2010-11_Annual_Report_Export_of_Objects_of_Cultural_Interest.pdf to http://www.artscouncil.org.uk/media/uploads/pdf/2010-11_Annual_Report_Export_of_Objects_of_Cultural_Interest.pdf
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) 13:46, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Given that this, , is an almost complete lift, you’d think that Mr Kingsley would have given us a credit. KJP1 (talk) 13:08, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: One would think so, but it seldom happens. People like to make snide comments about Wikipedia, but seldom admit to quoting it. It’s amazing how when a country house or well known building appears in a newspaper I often get a sense of déjà vu before realising it’s because I wrote it word for word. Recently I had an unsolicited brochure for a cultural trip to St Petersburg and realised I had written the Winter Palace blurb completely. If only they paid us! Giano   (talk) 16:22, 23 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Very dispiriting. I often think the public think these articles magic themselves out of thin air - such is the incredulity that I've experienced on their faces when I tell people I write them! I've dreamt so much of this house and hope we've played a little part in its reuniting with the furniture in Bedford and its appearance on a thousand future hidden London Insta posts. No Swan So Fine (talk) 09:44, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  - What I’d really like to see is the house in the hands of the NT/HE and opened as a Burges museum, with the furniture from the Higgins etc. reinstated. Whether that will ever happen however… it’s a very valuable piece of real estate. KJP1 (talk) 12:33, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I quite concur. The recent opening of the Thematic House is hopeful. So many secret stunners though, I'm not sure Debenham House has ever been open to the public. Interesting discussion here , our article is still a little thin. No Swan So Fine (talk) 14:57, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:07, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Mirror 

message: , - I’ve never liked what you rightly describe as “Danny’s nonsense”, and wonder if we should just take it out? There is the oddity of why Burges built himself Day and Night nurseries at the house, but that’s not connected to D L-R’s burbling, or Harris’ musings. That said, I know Dr. B and I differ on historic house hauntings, and I did go through the considerable pain of buying and part-reading Danny La Rue’s autobiography to ensure it was properly sourced!!! KJP1 (talk) 16:42, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a great read isn't it! I think it adds colour to the - admittedly celeb heavy - house and is the primary source for that uncertain period. I wouldn't mind if it comes out and is moved to Danny's page however. Talking of celebrity interviews... No Swan So Fine (talk) 16:50, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Danny La Rue