Talk:Gothic cathedrals

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Gothic architecture)

Major rewrite[change source]

I am rewriting this architecture using the article that I wrote for wikipedia and simplifying it. There's still quite a long way to go.

--Amandajm 13:23, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Listed as a proposed Good article[change source]

I have listed this as a proposed good article. For this there are (in my opion) still too many redlinks. Ways to proceed:

  • Copyediting, linking all the terms (Probably missed a few Cathedrals, sometimes the articles exist, but under a diffent name).
  • Reduce the number of redlinks to an acceptable level, creating stubs where necessary.

Seriously, once this article is redlink-free it has the potential to be a VGA. --Eptalon (talk) 15:10, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know nothing about the subject but I appreciate fine architecture - I'm more than willing to help out. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:17, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First Line[change source]

First line needs amending because architecture is singular not plural. I won't change straightaway as rest of sentence will have to be restructured with matching description. JDE 92.5.179.254 (talk) 21:45, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gothic Style v Gothic Revival.[change source]

At end of introduction there is a linguistically confusing switch between Gothic & Gothic Revival:

In the 19th century, the Gothic style became popular again, particularly for building churches and universities. This style is called Gothic Revival architecture.

should be something like:

In the 19th century the Gothic style became popular again. This led to many buildings of that time, particularly churches and universities, being built in a style called Gothic Revival architecture.

JDE 92.5.179.254 (talk) 22:08, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I think the system of displaying the illustrations does them no credit, and I would never have used it myself. The tiny postage-stamps have to be enlarged tediously one by one, and then you lose the text that goes with them. It's a horrible system. After a few early attempts I gave it up years ago. But the selection of the examples is fine. Maybe the span of time is too great. IMO if we touch this at all it is not just a tweak here and there. It has an inner consistency, and I can live with its weak spots. The time devoted to polishing buttons might be better spent making more buttons. Macdonald-ross (talk) 15:29, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the page to Gothic cathedrals because that is what it actually covered. Macdonald-ross (talk) 08:57, 23 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Extending to non-church buildings?[change source]

Since this is now only about churches (cathedrals actually), what do we do with all the castles, plalaces, and town halls,that were built in gothic style?- Do we add them to this article, or do we put them into another one? I have added a gallery of examples below.--Eptalon (talk) 11:15, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Castles and palaces[change source]

Town halls, hospitals, etc[change source]

Eptalon (talk) 11:02, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We could call it "Gothic architecture" or General Gothic architecture, and refer to the other page for Gothic church architecture. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:47, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of inline citations[change source]

Reading the proposed demotion discussion, I agree that a vast number of sentences in this article lack inline citations. I can't understand why inline citations aren't required. This makes me question if the many books listed in the bibliography section are actually being used, and if there is original research in this article. Furthermore, the books that are included in the inline citations lack specific page number (such as Banister Fletcher, A History of Architecture on the Comparative Method and Wim Swaan, The Gothic Cathedral). This makes the verification process rather difficult. Wow (talk) 03:27, 13 June 2023 (UTC); edited 00:15, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Last citation[change source]

At the time of this writing, the last citation in this article says Freiburg, Regensburg, Strasbourg, Vienna, Ulm, Cologne, Antwerp. Is this supposed to be a set of examples of the enormously large German towers and spires that are sometimes so big that it was impossible to finish them until modern times? If so, then this article lacks consistently formatted inline citations. Wow (talk) 03:35, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a reference, but a note. It's just formatted using the ref tag; I suppose a separate notelist could be made. Lights and freedom (talk) 03:56, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've adjusted the references. However, if I'm not mistaken, the note is factually incorrect as a few of the cathedrals are not in Germany. Strasbourg is located in France, Vienna in Austria, and Antwerp in Belgium. Wow (talk) 00:13, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not an expert on cathedrals or architecture, but all those cities were in the Holy Roman Empire like the heading says. Lights and freedom (talk) 00:25, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar[change source]

There is bad grammar on the main page. It says "Gothic cathedrals is a style of architecture used for buildings in Western Europe during the Middle Ages." That's kind of embarrassing for the main page of Simple Wikipedia, so can somebody fix it? 2607:FB91:118:C4BB:9576:42C:93E7:B285 (talk) 01:58, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Fix this please! Kk.urban (talk) 00:22, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone wants to change the sentence, they can do so at Wikipedia:Very good articles/Gothic cathedrals. --Wow (talk) 09:58, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oddly, it is correct. The issue is that there are two uses for the term "Gothic cathedrals". One is the obvious one; Cathedrals that are gothic. In this case, they are plural. This use would be GCs are a <thing>. The use here is different. GC is a style. In this use, the term is singular. Even though it is written with an S at the end, the term is still singular. A similar example would be mathematics. While ending in an S, the term Mathematics is singular (in US English) so the singular verb form is used. It may not sound right but it is grammatically correct. Not to say that it would be better to reword it as was done for the actual article.. This is for a VGA after all. As the article itself does not use this form, there is not much of a reason to use it here. Pure Evil (talk) 19:35, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I reworded the opening to better match the actual article. It takes a different angle at the term that tends to sound better. Pure Evil (talk) 19:42, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ii agree. badly grammar i abosokuely despise as well as bad spell 62.253.31.178 (talk) 15:26, 5 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]