Talk:Queen Anne style architecture

message: Shouldn't it be Queen Anne style architecture, the capitalization the body of the article uses? NickelShoe 19:18, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No need, the article has been corrected.--12.72.78.39 21:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Move?

message: I added a free use image that I took of a stick style house (according to newspaper articles about its reconstruction). The wording about stick style is about a house that is not pictured. An expert on stick style needs to update the paragraph. I am not qualified. I could easily take a closer image of the house if you'd like. The outside reconstruction is slated to be completed fairly soon, and it would be nice to have a closer image without scaffolding. --Royalbroil 14:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with Phmalo, almost all reference books I come across refer to the styles individually. They are all part of the Victorian design era but Stick, Shingle and Queen Anne are distinct enough to merit their own articles, Eastlake possibly as well. IvoShandor 10:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the above. The Shingle style is more related to Arts and Crafts, not Queen Anne. The Shingle section should be deleted or given its own article
Sardaka (talk) 11:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Inexplicably, the status quo is still held here. Would anyone be opposed to a move splitting off Stick and Shingle style into their own articles, there is certainly enough published on them to warrant it and the coverage here is poor, to say the least. Any thoughts? IvoShandor (talk) 19:18, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Stick style

message: In response to the above comment - absolutely!  I'd also have to point out that none of these photographs are of what we would call "Queen Anne" (she lived 1665 - 1714).  Country Life says that "influenced by the Dutch, this pleasing, elegant style of architecture flourished between 1701 and 1714 "  Could we please have some pictures of proper Queen Anne style?Ferrymansdaughter (talk) 14:14, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Real Queen Anne

message: Hate to tell that your example of a restored Queen Anne house in New Westminster, British Columbia is a new house! It is just over 5 years old. (anon.)
: With some editors casually deleting information as too "arcane for American readers" and other inserting photos of local structures, and no reference in the text to published material on the subject, a perfecty modern house fits right in with the general tenor.   --Wetman 11:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Queen Anne restoration 

message: I've added the intro-rewrite template to this article. The intro dives right into the history of the architectural style without describing what it is. --Joe Sewell (talk) 22:09, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Intro section 

message: A prominent geographic feature and residential neighborhood near downtown Seattle takes its name from QA style: Queen Anne, Seattle, Washington, which is also known as one of Seattle's "Seven Hills" Jeffreykopp (talk) 06:21, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Namesake Seattle district 

message: Joe Sewell was right about the intro. I've cleaned it up now so I trust it's up to scratch.
Sardaka (talk) 11:50, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Intro

message: About time we moved stick etc to an article of its own, if there are no objections.
Sardaka (talk) 09:57, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Stick etc

message: You have no idea how much consternation this article has given us in England!
Here is a beautiful building in the heart of Liverpool, Bluecoat Chambers which we would describe as Queen Anne style, but obviously not Queen Anne Style! I suggest splitting this article into Queen Anne Style (US) and Queen Anne Style (British) RodCrosby (talk) 21:14, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Your link to the webpage at Oldsoger.com has been broken (or never worked) and I can't find the page on the site. I hope you will fix it. -- Also, supply some references for your British style name. Tchao, Charvex (talk) 06:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

text: a recent program on BBC4, where the Bluecoat is described as Queen Anne style. People's Palaces RodCrosby (talk) 02:31, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggest a split

message: Which picture is ideal to be located in the introduction? Norcalal 04:31, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The photo of the Welfare Building is certainly not the best representation of this style. In my opinion, a much better illustration could be found. MarmadukePercy (talk) 18:36, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Nor is it actually "An American example of the English Queen Anne style" - it is Jacobean architecture in revived form. Johnbod (talk) 18:59, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, precisely. Glad it was deleted. (I would actually have called it Dutch revival.) MarmadukePercy (talk) 09:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  We need to discuss the main picture. 

message: Continued from above...
Better be clear about the distinctions before splitting. There is a summary of the American styles here http://www.fredbecker.org/News%20Letter/Vict%20Arch.htm - although lacking decent references the classification seems correct, but please comment. I'm still reading up on the English side of things. ProfDEH (talk) 08:46, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: My understanding is that the Eastlake movement (whatever) started out as a furniture style and then the characteristics or elements were added to Stick or Stick was a launching off point for the Eastlake Victorian architectural style to form using the elements from the furniture. Norcalal (talk) 18:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggest a split (continued)

message: Queen Anne furniture has virtually nothing to do with the architectural style. See http://www.buffaloah.com/f/fstyles/queen/index.html for a brief summary, where it is described as "Colonial: Queen Anne 1725-1750"  i.e. pre-Revolution, not at all the same historical period. Another split coming up. ProfDEH (talk) 10:21, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Furniture 

message: Yes, the Stick and Shingle styles should definitely be put in their own articles. Who has the courage?
Sardaka (talk) 09:48, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And we should also do the Queen Anne Style architecture (British) and Queen Anne Style architecture (US) thing too.  I have seen no one objecting and they really are different styles.  This need not be another American Revolution or War of 1812.  Let's just Balkanize this article and go our sordid separate ways.  Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 00:41, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, something is moving.  Now, where do the Aussies belong?  Looks more American that British to me but . . .......... Carptrash (talk) 01:11, 8 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Split

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: no consensus.
Ignoring non-policy arguments about the proper meaning of "Queen Anne architecture", this is essentially an argument about how to interrogate ngrams.  Ham II produces ngrams which he asserts support a move and Walrasiad produces ngrams which they assert suport the current names.  There are two other editors agreeing on each side, so there is no consensus as to that.  Ham II also fairly produces results from JSTOR and two architectural dictionaries which do not provide clear support for his proposal.  The reference by Doncram to another talk page does not advance matters, as this just shows that Doncram and Ham II agree on the proposed move, as is already apparent.  There is no support for inserting dashes.(non-admin closure)  Havelock Jones (talk) 11:59, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Giano, you cannot dictate the terms that people use; in the U.S. "Queen Anne architecture" refers to, yes, something different than the original pre-1715 architecture.  Please see rational discussion of comprehensive reworking of the series of articles mentioned in my "support" vote here. --Doncram (talk) 17:57, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I can! Queen Anne architecture is an unambiguous definition; it takes its name directly from the monarch who ruled during that architectural era, in exactly the same way as Elizabethan, Carolean, Georgian and Victorian architecture. Anything built anywhere outside the reigns of the naming monarch can only be in the “style” of. Giano (talk) 21:06, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

text: *Well I'd normally oppose this as "King X architecture" plainly means the architecture of that monarch's time. If in Queen Anne's case the term isn't used like that then like Johnbod I'll faintly support but if anyone later finds better evidence I'll vote for them.  Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:06, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 5 September 2021