Talk:Richardsonian Romanesque

message: ----
Just to toss in a vote on Confidence, yes, it IS "Richardsonian Romanesque."  All the way.  Carptrash 21:37, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

message: or are there enough RR influence on the building in the gallery from Brooklyn to include it?  I think it should go- or better, be replaced by a better RR example.  Carptrash 00:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is it just me 

message: I believe that this school is also an example of Richardsonian Romanesque, but it was constructed so long ago, not sure who the architect was.
See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_High_School_(Springfield,_Missouri)#/media/File:CentralHighPostcard.jpg  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.110.106.90 (talk) 03:12, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Central High School, Springfield Missouri 

message: There's 24 images on an article containing less than two whole paragraphs. Does anyone else think it's overkill? A Commons link is available if readers want to see a gallery. Unless someone reasonably objects, I'll be removing some of the images. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 16:05, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I sort of like the gallery - but then again I love photos in general.--Marcbela (talk) 16:26, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Not just because I posted the first ever photo here (opinion), but also because I actually believe that a picture IS worth a thousand words, that this is the sort of article that lots of shots are good in.  I suppose that they could be canvassed as to what they are actually adding to the understanding of what Richardson Romanesque architecture looks like, but unlike many in modern architecture, I feel that More is more.  Carptrash (talk) 18:23, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I love photos as well, but 24 on such a small article? I think it would improve the overall quality if we only keep the most high-quality and useful images. I've noticed several stub/start-class articles containing large galleries that seem to be an attempt at making the page look "fuller". If someone wants to team up and improve/expand the article, I'd be more than willing to help. But as I mentioned before, the Commons link gives access to a gallery. Keeping only a few high-quality images that demonstrate important aspects of RR would be necessary if GA is a future goal. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 18:51, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

text: Okay.  As a gesture of good will, I removed one of the pictures, my own, so that I don't upset anyone, but we need (opinion) a picture of a RR residence to replace it.  However that's for another day.  I shall also try to pitch in a bit of text so thqt perhaps pictures can be used to illustrate what ever point gets made.  Now you (eeek's rules)  get to remove one. Carptrash (talk) 23:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Nice. Now I can replace your photo with mine. I kid, I kid. It's headed for another article(s). (side note: I'm not 100% sure the homes in my photo are RR; maybe a mixture of Queen Anne and RR? Anyone have a guess? It's rather confusing at times to identify architectural styles in Dupont Circle and Sheridan-Kalorama.) I looked at each photo and have an opinion on which ones could be removed. I choose door image number 21. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 01:28, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

text: (sigh) I'll say it again: 1) It's more than "a few" photos that are currently displayed in the article. 2) I'm not suggesting the removal of all photos. 3) The Commons link provides an image gallery. 4) I love architectural photography as well. I take uber amounts of photos related to that very subject. What I'm trying to explain is that we shouldn't add images to a gallery just because we can. Good & Featured articles don't contain a lopsided amount of photos (unless they were promoted before stricter GA & FA criteria was added). All I'm suggesting is that we improve the overall look, even if that means changing the layout certain editors prefer. The photo I removed last night had a prominently displayed time stamp. That kind of unedited image doesn't belong on articles. APK is ready for the tourists to leave 18:31, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: QUALITY over quantity, indeed!--Marcbela (talk) 19:33, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gallerypalooza 

message: from here:
:Romanesque Revival architecture named after architect Henry Hobson Richardson, whose masterpiece is Trinity Church, Boston . (1872–77)
iI is (opinion) like insisting that, In 1492 Columbus sailed the the ocean blue, needs to be cited.  This is Am Arch Hist 101 material. It does not need to be footnoted.  Carptrash (talk) 18:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: On the contrary, it does require citation. As an Australian High School student, I studied the Marshall Field Warehouse as a a prime example of Richardson's architecture. I did not hear of Trinity Church until much much later. Given that a number of Richardson's commissions were large and significant, his "masterpiece" might be open to debate. Amandajm (talk) 11:44, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  I just removed a '''citation needed''' 

message: Wouldn't it be good to have the first example of this style?  I thought I had put the image in there at one point, but saw the discussion about trimming pictures down.  If a free image is needed, I can get one no problem. Paranormal Skeptic (talk) 13:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Buffalo Insane Asylum Image 

message: has several very fine examples of Richardson Romanesque, most notable the Queen Victoria Building and the much smaller Australian Mutual Providence Society Building. It might be interesting to consider these in the study that you mention. Amandajm (talk) 00:30, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Sydney

message: ::" most importantly the Old City Hall in Toronto. Being almost mirrored replica of itself, the symmetry between the east and west facades evokes a strong sense of even proportion and steadiness, something necessary in representing a municipal building. Following that of the earlier based Romanesque style of Europe, the Hall contains a central courtyard and stands as four rectangular buildings arranged in a square form, giving a feeling of fortitude and security. The buildings were ended by square towers topped with conical roofs, whilst the detail work followed that of a face (caricatures/lions/beasts) surrounded by leaves, and entablature.''
Do we really want this much detail on one building here?  I say "No." This is fine in the article about E.J. Lennox or Old City Hall (Toronto) but is not useful here.  Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 15:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  I removed this material 

message: I reverted to BMK's version because it looks better, but I think Filetime's concept of spreading the images out is a good one.  Can't you guys compromise? Viriditas (talk) 22:21, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image placement discussion