Talk:Gothic Revival architecture

message: We can see here a detail. I would add a whole image.Xx236 (talk) 10:36, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Palace of Westminster]] 

message: Not at all sure about this section. The article is about Gothic Revival architecture, and I’m not sure tagging in a short section on GR in other arts does actually help the reader. Certainly, as three examples, Renaissance architecture, Baroque architecture, Palladian architecture don’t follow this pattern. Would it not be more helpful to write an article on GR in other arts, and then have a See also? Lesser concerns - it’s placing at the very end messes up the flow, and it would need more citations, in the article’s existing style (sfn). I’d appreciate other thoughts. Haven’t been able to ping the editor who added it, as they appear not to have a user page. KJP1 (talk) 17:04, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gothic Revival in other decorative arts 

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) 05:23, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion 

message: This page is a bit of a magnet for editors adding images of examples of the Gothic Revival of which they are particularly fond. Such images, of themselves, are a good thing, as it really helps readers to have architecture articles with a good range of illustrations. But there is a danger of over-illustrating, in which the article becomes more of a picture book. I wonder if editors wanting to add images could, firstly see whether the "type" is already featured, i.e. do we a have a British town hall, or a Brazilian church, and do we need another? Then, if adding, perhaps editors could consider removing another, perhaps similar, image, in order that the page doesn't become overwhelmed. I appreciate Wikipedia:OWNBEHAVIOR and certainly don't want to appear protective of a particular version of the article, but I have put some effort into trying to make what is a fairly highly-viewed article into something which is of value to readers. KJP1 (talk) 15:29, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: All the main architectural style articles have this problem. Try Indo-Saracenic architecture or Renaissance architecture. Apart from regular lawn mowing, you could try a hidden note saying "no additions without talk page approval", but I doubt much notice will be taken. I think the formatting of the galleries could be improved btw - I was initially dubious of that at Indo-Saracenic architecture, but now think it's better.  One could also try insisting on better captions in the galleries too - at least dates. Johnbod (talk) 16:48, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, had a go with the dates, and reformatted the galleries in line with Indo-Saracenic. I think you're right, will just have to keep trimming. As an aside, what do you think about a Good article nomination? KJP1 (talk) 04:37, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gallery again 

message: This arcticle sets the limit between survival and revival amazingly restrictive, even more restrictive than Britannica.
The term "survival" should be reserved to the perpetuation of Gothic forms, such as in Jacobean architecture, which still used pointed arches and in some cases even perpendicular tracery.
But contemporaneously with the last Gothic Survival, the imitation of older styles began. Sometimes, there was a political motivation. 
The restauration of the British monarchy after the end of the Puritan Commonwealth induced the stylistic choice for at least two buildings: Dromore Cathedral in Northern Ireland, built in 1661, imitates Early English Style. In the Great Hall of Lambeth Palace, London, Baroque and Gothic forms were applied, but the Gothic forms were not Perpendicular, they were not taken from Gothic elements of of Tudor Style, nor Jacobean. They were taken form older variants of Gothic. That way, this was a revitalization, a revival.
Without pointing on a political motivation, teh Collegial Church of St Mary in Warwick has to be mentioned. The Gothic elements applied in the rebuilding of 1707 cite a very late Gothic. But, in relation to the Baroque rebuilding of the churches that had been destroyed by the great fire of London, the decision to rebuild this church applying Gothic forms was a decision for Gothic Revival.--Ulamm (talk) 06:19, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm having difficulty seeing where the "arcticle sets the limit between survival and revival amazingly restrictive", or indeed sets it at all. Johnbod (talk) 03:19, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Too restrictive 

message: * This article could be much better, if it were based on a wider scale of sources.
* If the histories of single buildings are well sourced, they should be accepted. If the well sourced histories of many buildings contradict the presented theory, this theory may be wrong, even if it was constructed by a well reputed author.
* Illustrations should be balanced, showing various aspects of a subject.
--Ulamm (talk) 09:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: When/if you provide some sources, we can have a discussion. KJP1 (talk) 10:08, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources, examples, images