Jump to content

Talk:Cottage

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Summer House

[edit]

I was direct here from cottage. I would say these are quite different things - a summer house is usually a small building in the garden of a larger house - The redirect should be removed.AFCR 13:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Chantilly's Cottage Blu?

[edit]

I was going to remove the above but I think it refers to a type of china. Is there a suitable Wiki link to point it to? AFCR 09:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Summer House

[edit]

Redirection from Summer House removed and a new page created. Anosmic 21:30, 29 July 2007 (UTC).[reply]

This re directs to the Summer Palace at St Petersburg. We need an article on summer houses in general i.e. garden buildings used for sleeping in in summer. AFCR (talk) 09:58, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What does this mean?

[edit]

A cot is the root word of it. A small house in the country. "...where on the second (upstairs floor) one has to walk into the eaves in order to look through the windows." Inside looking out or outside looking in? Is this supposed to mean a dormer window? Ewlyahoocom 03:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inside looking out, and no, it doesn't refer to a dormer. In fact a dormer is designed to relieve the problem described. It is a bad description however, and using setences like "walking into the eaves" gives completely the wrong idea. I don't know if you have ever been inside a cottage, but here in Cornwall we have cottages where as much as 1/3rd of the first floor rooms are in the roof space. This effectively means that in order to walk over to the window, you would have to duck down to avoid hitting your head on the cieling which is lower nearer the wall as a result of the roof pitch. Think of it this way: if you had a dormer window, and you removed it and replaced it with a standard pitched roof, you would have a tiny window down on the floor, and you'd have to duck down to look out of it, or even get anywhere near it. However if you had a dormer you wouldn't have to duck to look out the window. ▫Bad▫harlick♠ 00:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'dry robusting in the cottages'

[edit]

gets only one Google hit. A popular expression?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.208.10.36 (talk) 18:43, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bad definition of a UK cottage

[edit]

"In the UK, the term cottage tends to denote a rurally- (sometimes village-) located one and a half storey property, where on the second (upstairs floor) one has to walk into the eaves in order to look through the windows" Many or most houses that people would call cottages in the UK have two stories, not 1 1/2, and no dormer windows. The essential elements of a cottage in the UK are that 1) it is in the countryside (which includes villages), 2) it is old - at least 100 years old for example, 3) it is not big enough to be a farmhouse or Hall. Here is an example of a typical cottage: http://www.tournorfolk.co.uk/winterton/wintertonproperty.jpg. Many houses that are not cottages have dormer windows.

Some googling for images of "English cottage" suggests that the description given in the article is the American "english cottage" architectural style, which has little or no connection with what English people would call a cottage (although it does resemble Scottish cottages). Surely we should not describe the Disney version of the world as fact. 80.2.193.24 (talk) 23:17, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it a bad definition for a US Cottage. I would agree, having lived in Cotswolds, that Cots, being sheep huts of sorts, seems a logical root of the usage. Cottages may, in some areas of the US be refered to in terms of vacation homes, i.e. "a summer cottage", but in the pacific northwest, lots of small homes are called cottages. 184.76.36.97 (talk) 03:48, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Origin of the term

[edit]

The word cottage does not come from Latin 'cotagium' see:

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=cottage&searchmode=none

Dab14763 (talk) 07:07, 22 January 2009 (UTC) A small house in the country/cottage....![reply]

UK versus global view

[edit]

I decided that the introduction to this article was too UK-centric, and also a bit repetitive, so I've amended it accordingly. However I think some more citations would be beneficial, if they can be found. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 00:13, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Introscop (talk) 01:29, 21 April 2012 (UTC) Cottage is just a word for small house, why does it deserve an article that's separate from "House" or "Building"? I'd say it belongs in a dictionary, but not in an encyclopedia.[reply]

Historically a farm labourer, known as a cottier, (or a bordar) lived in a cottage in return for providing menial service, to the lord of the manor. Originally the cottage was actually the term for land plus dwelling, rather like a croft. The amount of land provided was laid down by statute and has varied over the centuries. In modern times the term cottage has somewhat of a different meaning. Not sure that all this can be covered by a simple dictionary definition although if the article is just about what a cottage is today, then that could be covered by a dictionary entry.Wilfridselsey (talk) 16:00, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cottage is a small house

[edit]
The townhouse complex that is called a "cottage complex" because term "townhouse is not known to every Russian yet. Cottage complex "Russkaya Usadba" in Yamnoye village near Voronezh city.

Cottage is a small house! This, in the picture is NOT a cottage, or stuga or hytte or what, this is a residential area, even if "townhouse" is not known to every Russian yet. No, a cottage is a small house. The article is about something the Russian are calling дача (dacha) house, not what the Russian mean about the word Cottage. Please remember that a cottage is a small house not a townhouse complex. The whole Russian section is about what people in Russia think of when they say cottage. That is etymology, not architecture. That explanatiom belongs to the Wictionary, not in this article. The townhouse complex that is called a "cottage complex" because term "townhouse is not known to every Russian yet" (Citation from the Russian section) .

Hafspajen (talk) 17:51, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

[edit]
Vacation cottages (Reed houses) on Vilm near Rugia Island, Germany.
Wrayland Manor. The archetypal chocolate box Devon thatched house in the hamlet of Wrayland. Several old chocolate boxes and postcards depict this particular building, calling it variously the Hall House and an "Old Cottage".

Since the word cottage is Specifically English I can't agree about having that picture illustrating German cottages in the lead. There isn't no section either in the lead German cottag. And this picture is really not showing much of the cottages att all, it is not a very good picture. Unless one wants to illustrate a village. Hafspajen (talk) 16:58, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article is not about the word but about the thing. You can debate about the quality of the picture, but having a picture of a German cottage in the lede is fine. --NeilN talk to me 17:07, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
'Sure, if those German cottage would look like a cottage, it would be just fine. I don't have any problem with Germans, on the contrary, I actually love them very much. But these cottages just dont look like cottages, in the sense: the word comes from the United Kingdom where it is used to mean a house that has one main storey, with a second, lower storey of bedrooms which fit under the roof upstairs. In many places the word cottage is used to mean a small old-fashioned house... And also cottage garden is a term strongly conected with cottage. A cottage without a garden is like a clean shaved Santa. In English there is a special term for this too, chocolate box cottages. The archetypal chocolate box cottage is an old thatched house with a cottage garden around it, where people live, all year round, in villages and hamlets. The German term for cottage is slightly different: Unter einem Ferienhaus versteht man im Allgemeinen ein Haus, in dem Gäste gegen Bezahlung für einen bestimmten Zeitraum ihren Urlaub verbringen können. Teilweise wird ein solches Haus ausschließlich für die temporäre Vermietung an Gäste betrieben, häufig wird es auch alleine zu diesem Zweck gebaut. Manche Familien besitzen aber auch ein Ferienhaus zur Selbstnutzung, zum Beispiel in landschaftlich reizvollen Gegenden.

' That would be in translated in English: cottage generally means A holiday house, where guests for a fee spend a certain period off their holiday . Such a house is operated solely for temporary for use, for example in scenic areas. Hafspajen (talk) 17:11, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't feel like argueing about the very word "cottage" here. The English-speaking Wiki is not an English Wiki (perhaps finally someone establish a Brit Wiki, US Wiki etc.?). There's no "specific look" for cottages in general. That'd be a very anglocentric view of the subject. So either we go for the actual meaning in the global English use or we'll create separate articles, while I don't see too much sense in doing that. A section for British cottages should be sufficient here. Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 14:30, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The English-speaking Wiki is not an English Wiki? I always thougt that it was. And still, I was trying to explain, that cottage is not the same house in English then in German, since in German the word means a place to rent, (that would be weekend cottage, in English) while Cottage in Enlish is a rural, often thatched old house, where people live and lived for generations, - a Cottage. And of course there is a "specific look" for cottages! Well, at least for English cottages. Hafspajen (talk) 20:02, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sure. That's why I said it's apt to have a section on British/English cottages and dedicate main elements of the article to weekend cottages, that are usually referred to in global use of the English language. Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 12:10, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
An encyclopedia should have articles about specific subjects, not specific words. The word "bluebell" for instance refers to different plants in different parts of the world, but an encyclopedia shouldn't encompass them all within one article - that's the job of a dictionary. Instead an encyclopedia should have several articles on each different definition, and my view is that this should also happen here. Perhaps something like Cottage (small house) and Cottage (holiday house) would be a start? PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:33, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good idea. But the difference is that those cottages the rest of the world (sorry - we do that in Sweden too) use is a rental little house, a weekend cottage - while the English cottage is the cottage where people live and what own, with the specific cottage garden. The cottage garden is also a very different garden from any other garden that just happen to be around ant little house, if you get me on that? Roses, clematis, a thatched roof: a cottage garden in Brittany. The cottage garden is a distinct style of garden that uses an informal design, traditional materials, dense plantings, and a mixture of ornamental and edible plants. English in origin, the cottage garden depends on grace and charm rather than grandeur and formal structure. Homely and functional gardens connected to working-class cottages go back several centuries, but their reinvention in stylised versions grew in 1870s England, in reaction to the more structured and rigorously maintained English estate gardens that used formal designs and mass plantings of brilliant greenhouse annuals. Very English, and very nice.

Hafspajen (talk) 20:52, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cottage (small house) is just a suggestion, and I realise it isn't perfect. However, bear in mind that UK cottages do not all conform to the 'chocolate box' stereotype, and they don't have to have a cottage garden, so it's possible a more restrictive disambiguation might not be appropriate. Can you think of some different suggestions for disambiguating the 'UK version' of cottage? PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:07, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, yes. But we didn't solved the problem yet. I strongly support a splitting up, but we need a title. Hafspajen (talk) 21:58, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My English dictionary defines "cottage" as "a small simple house, especially in a rural area ... (from Old English cot; related to Old Norse kot little hut, Middle Low German cot)". That doesn't leave many options. What about Cottage (simple house) or a variation thereof? PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 22:24, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Would you search on cottage, the simpe house? I would probably try the words cottage, of course, and than I would hope to come to some page that will give me some options. English Country Cottages, hopefully, http://www.pinterest.com/candygwa/english-cottage-style/ - see here for ex. That is what I would do. And considering how many people were putting those files on common with the title 'chocolate box' cottage, it would be wise to make a redirect on that too. Gareth Griffith-Jones‎ said that this is not an idiom, but there used to be chocolate boxes like that. Here is the cottage garden with this kind of house, but not a word on the house. http://www.pfaf.org/user/cmspage.aspx?pageid=162Hafspajen (talk) 22:30, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I like the new direction of this discussion, as it adds encyclopedic value if performed thoroughly. I suggest to go for the simplest and most obvious option: Create a lemma British cottage or English cottage. That should work perfectly well. Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 18:07, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Very good then. Now the only question to resolve is the title, and what we should chose: British cottage or English cottage. Some Brittish editor please? ( PaleCloudedWhite, or Gareth Griffith-Jones‎ ?) Any oppinions? (And I still think that some redirects should be made, like 'chocolate box' cottage, and 'old thatched roof cottage', or something like this, and a Cottage disambiguation page as well.) Hafspajen (talk) 12:28, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I am ready to respond (after days of badgering by my good friend, Hafspajen]
#1 What does "lemma" mean Horst-schlaemma?
#2 I do not consider either British cottage or English cottage suitable.
#3 The connection to the rural as opposed to urban needs to be addressed.
I shall give this more thought. — | Gareth Griffith-Jones |The WelshBuzzard| — 13:06, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gosh. (Euphemism or minced oath for God. First seen in 1757 as by gosh, probably from by gosse in Udall's Ralph Roister Doister circa 1553). Here we go again. What is lemma, indeed? Hafspajen (talk) 13:18, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Frankly, the article is a mess. Is it about cottages in England, or small rural houses more generally? Until that is agreed, it's hard to know where to start improving it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:27, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that this is your oppinion, but there is a stong reason to separete the cottages where people live and dwell all year round, from te rental ones, as the word "cottage" is understand in the rest of the world. The cottage garden is just one of the signs of people living in the house. Cottage, in the English meaning of the world is fundamentally different from the meaning of the word cottage like the rest of the world uses. The word cottage for all othe coutries has not the same meaning as in English. Thached or not. Hafspajen (talk) 16:04, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I'm beginning to understand you. You are talking about what we in Britain call a holiday cottage (which already has a separate, poor quality, article). Not all cottages are holiday cottages. Indeed, not all holiday cottages are what we would call cottages - for example here - though they often are. Perhaps it would be more clear if this page became more of a disambiguation page, with separate articles. Or would that be going too far? Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:29, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
PS: It seems to me that much of what you want to include in this article should in fact be at Holiday cottage, which is an article in dire need of improvement. Also, the redirect from Second-home (is that a term, with hyphen, that is ever actually used?) should go to that article, not to this article, though I won't make that change until the holiday cottage article is improved. Merging that article with this one would be an alternative course of action, but seems to go against the discussion here so far. Ghmyrtle (talk) 16:37, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agree merging Second-home and Holiday cottage under the "Cottage" flag, that most of this article already covers here (and all other language versions talk about, the holiday homes). Perhaps the article intro could contain a link pointing to English cottages then. Let's clear this mess. :) Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 17:34, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have thought more about this problem. As it stands there is tension within the article because different cultures and individuals have different ideas on what a "cottage" is. To a certain extent, a "cottage" is a psychological concept: there is no one single concrete definition. My dictionary describes a cottage as a "small simple house", yet many buildings which are called "cottages" are not especially small, nor simple. Look at Thomas Hardy's Cottage or Anne Hathaway's Cottage. If they are defined as cottages because they are "small" and "simple", then the modern (1980s) suburban London house which I live in is also a "cottage". Yet no-one would call it such, presumably because it is not in a rural location and could never represent any kind of dream. Funnily, I studied this whole subject area for my final-year thesis at university: it was titled "With Roses Round The Door. A study of perception and reality with regard to the English 'rural idyll'". My conclusion was quite interesting, though of course it's all original research... It seems to me that we have 2 choices: to cover all these definitions and perceptions within one article but make this very clear and explicit, or create/expand several articles and have "cottage" as a sort of disambiguation page. I think I favour the latter, because then we have articles about subjects rather than a word, though it depends how much material can be found. But at the moment the article is a bit confused and confusing. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 09:53, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus and How to do

[edit]
If this is a cottage, it looks pretty much like Wrayland Manor
Helen Allingham watercolor showing elite peonies and modern delphiniums in an idealised cottage garden.
  • Right. Let's do a "cottage" disambiguation page and create/expand several articles. We just need to agree who is going to do it so not everybody starts doing everything in the same time. I suggest PaleCloudedWhite with his special study on "With Roses Round The Door. A study of perception and reality with regard to the English 'rural idyll'". I will be happy to fix the pictures, if is OK with you. Hafspajen (talk) 11:07, 3 December 2013 (UTC)But if nobody will do anything in a week, you have to take the chance of me doing that[reply]
  • Agree To create/expand several articles and have "cottage" as a sort of disambiguation page. Sounds really reasonable to me, I'm glad we have someone among us who's actually entitled to aspects of these topics! :) Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 11:12, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind having been volunteered to make structural changes, although I am not an expert on this subject matter - I undertook a study on one aspect 24 years ago - and anyway there still needs to be consensus on which articles are covering which topics, and what they are to be called. I've just found the Vacation property article, which at first glance seems to cover similar territory to the 'non-UK' definition of "cottage". I think Holiday cottage could be subsumed into it and perhaps Second-home redirected there? It's possible we may not need a disambig page, just better redirects and connections. I'm still thinking about all this... Any comments? PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 10:32, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is probably not as complicated as it might appear at first sight, and I think my views are similar to User:PaleCloudedWhite. Certainly I think that the content of Holiday cottage and Vacation property should be merged, as they cover basically the same concept. The best (=least confusing) article title, I think, would be "holiday cottage". I also think that the Scandinavia, Russia, North America and Hong Kong sections of this article should be relocated into that merged article, as those sections discuss, specifically, vacation (or holiday) accommodation. This article should then be not so much a disambiguation page, but a page covering the origins of the cottage and its etymology - specifically, cottages in Britain (because that is where cottages, and the word, were originated). It should cover all sorts of cottages in Britain, whether rural or urban (e.g. coalminers' cottages), thatched or otherwise, having gardens or otherwise, etc.. That is where PCW's research (or its sources!) will come in. Obviously there should be very good explanations (e.g. noting that most cottages in Britain are for all-year residence, not holidays) and links to other articles. Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:56, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
PS: We also have another separate article, Vacation rental. Should that be included in the merger, or kept as a freestanding article? I'm undecided at the moment. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:46, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I tend to have the articles Vacation property and British cottage only. "Vacation rental" and "Holiday cottage" redirect to "Vacation Property" then, with "Holiday Cottages" having a section therein. After all, that's where we can cover the topic in a logical way. "Cottage" should become a disambiguation page, listing links to British Cottages and the section Holiday Cottages inside Vacation Property. Hope you're completely confused now! :D All the best, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 16:51, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We seem to have agreement that the 'non-UK' definition of "cottage" can be taken care of by the Vacation property article, and Holiday cottage can also be subsumed into it. I favour the title "Vacation property" over "Holiday cottage" simply because, in a Venn diagram sense, the former is a larger circle containing all of the smaller circle of the latter. So, as Horst-schlaemma states, "Holiday cottages" can have a section within Vacation property. I agree with Ghmyrtle that the Scandinavia, Russia, North America and Hong Kong sections should be hived off and merged with Vacation property.
Having thought a bit more about the whole disambiguation question, I agree with Horst-schlaemma that "Cottage" should become a disambiguation page, because otherwise we might continually be fighting the trend for editors to bring the article back to where we are now. I also agree that Vacation property (or a section of it) should be the destination of one link. However I disagree that "British cottage" should be the title of the other destination, partially because I'm not convinced it is an exclusively British concept (there's the Republic of Ireland for a start), but also because I don't think the 'UK definition' of "cottage" is location-specific with regard to the building - it is instead location-specific with regard to the viewer's origin. In other words, a British person may be inclined to call a particular type of building "a cottage" wherever it is. Hence I think the article title should refer to the type of building, but then make it clear within the text that it is a British (or UK and Irish?) definition. (Though finding sources for this statement might be hard). My ideas for the title of this 'UK definition' of "cottage" are: Cottage (building), Cottage (architecture), Cottage (vernacular architecture) and Cottage (structure). These all focus on the building form, rather than its use or location, though obviously etymology and history would be important aspects of the article. I currently slightly favour Cottage (structure), as that might most discourage additions about holiday cottages.
Finally, there are other potential links from a disambiguation page: we have the "cottages" which are the subject in Cottaging, and it might be possible - if reliable sources can be collated - to hive off Hafspajen's beloved "chocolate-box cottages" into something like Cottage (idealised), which could look at the romanticisation of the English country cottage (this was more the area of my own study - though I can't say I still have the sources!). Any comments? (Am I disappearing up my own (cottage) chimney?) PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:40, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(P.S. Second home is already a disambiguation page, with one link going to Vacation property. I've already redirected Second-home (with a hyphen) to Second home, as that seemed uncontroversial...) PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:40, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with pretty much all of that, though I think I prefer Cottage (building) to Cottage (structure), and I wonder whether - given the historic (?) legal definition (here) as "a small house without land" - we also ought to consider Cottage (property)? So far as the idealised "chocolate box cottage" is concerned, my suggestion would be to start that off as a section in the Cottage (...) article, and then see whether there is enough good quality material to justify a freestanding article. Ghmyrtle (talk) 23:19, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The term “cottage” appears to have entered English around the 13th century, and it probably comes from either Old French or a Germanic language. The term may also have been used to describe the dwelling of a cotter, a type of serf in the Middle Ages. By all accounts, the term originally referred to a small dwelling structure, a barn, and an enclosed yard, with the concept of one as a small residence in the country emerging around the 1700s. Early cottages were probably small, dark, and quite unpleasant, and the term carried definite connotations of poverty and hard times for centuries. In the Romantic Era, when country life began to acquire an intrinsic value in the eyes of many people, the structure experienced a change of fortunes, and people began actively building and seeking out cottages to use as vacation homes and sometimes as permanent residences. In order to be considered a cottage, a structure must typically be quite small; in some countries, specific legislation actually dictates the size of such a house. Ideally, it has one story, although it may have a second half-story for the purpose of storage. Cottages can be built from a wide range of materials including stone, wattle and daub, or wood, and they may be tiled, thatched, or roofed with shingles, depending on the region. Typical cottages are detached, and most people do not use the term to refer to a modest home in an urban area, even if it meets the definition. Many people think of such houses as cozy, and they associate them with comfort and minimalistic living. Others may think of them as vacation homes, although plenty of people around the world live in these homes by choice or necessity. Although modern cottages need not be surrounded by the trappings of a working farm, many have at least a small garden. Depending on how one is used, it may have a range of amenities that are designed to make it extremely comfortable, or it may be more simplistic. Many are also deliberately designed to be rustic, with features like plank floors, exposed beams, and hand-carved woodwork. Hafspajen (talk) 23:28, 5 December 2013 (UTC)some kind of definition[reply]

"Typical cottages are detached, and most people do not use the term to refer to a modest home in an urban area, even if it meets the definition." Sorry, but that is partly untrue and misleading - you are projecting your own view of the "idealised" country cottage. Many cottages were and are built in towns and cities for industrial workers, and are still called cottages. Many people may well now think of cottages in the idealised way that you outline, but we are an encyclopedia, and we should cover all varieties of cottage, not only those that meet those idealised standards. See gallery below, as examples. Vernacular architecture is a huge subject covering many different examples globally - it would be a serious mistake to attempt to merge any of the cottage articles within that article. As a corollary, it is a mistake in my view to try to define a cottage as a type of building, or as architecture - a cottage is essentially defined by its size and property status, i.e. a small house without surrounding land. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:17, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with Ghmyrtle that the Scandinavia, Russia, North America and Hong Kong sections should be hived off and merged with Vacation property, too. Now those above were NOT my own words ( the definition). I think what you have show above will not be included into the article we are talking about now, those are urban dwellings, and what more they are called terrace(d) house, terrace, row house, linked house or townhouse.
PaleCloudedWhite, about the exclusively British concept, you mentioned there's the Republic of Ireland for a start, and my university studies at the landscape architecture, I studied this whole subject area too, for my final-year thesis at university: it was titled "Informal planting schemes in English gardens" and gave me the information that the Irish were slightly different, the Irish didn’t really had a cottage garden culture, not with regard to the English 'rural idyll' .. or the cottage garden style, nor the Gertrude Jekyll style, nor the English garden ... Hafspajen (talk) 17:17, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with your opinion is that the houses in the gallery above are cottages. They are called cottages in the UK. They are small terraced houses - but, they are also called cottages. Look at the names of the image files. You cannot exclude them from an article about cottages, just because you feel that they do not match what you consider to be the traditional "pretty" cottage. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:28, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is [1] Encyclopaedia of Cottage, Farm, and Villa Architecture (1833).Hafspajen (talk) 18:21, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Many but not all terraced houses in the UK are cottages. Many cottages are terraced houses. There is a big overlap between the two. Many properties (such as the one I live in) can equally well be called either a terraced house or cottage. A terraced house is simply a house with adjoining houses on either side (or, in the case of an end-terrace house, on one side) - it is a description of the physical structure. The term "cottage" is both a historical legal term, and a description by someone (such as a property agent) who wishes to emphasise the property's traditional character and small size, or cosiness. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:05, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So the lede should be called Cottage (structure), right? "Cottage" will be a disambig. page. "Vacation property" another lede. I think we should really come to an end with this now and find a proper solution, before main editors are losing interest to do it. ;) -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 18:24, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think so too. I would be happy with Cottage (structure), even happier Cottage (vernacular architecture) because of the Vernacular architecture definition and what that means, (+ garden and everything)It tends to evolve over time to reflect the environmental, cultural, technological, and historical context in which it exists.. I agree that we chew to this much, and something must happen soon. And we make the rest up as we go.Hafspajen (talk) 18:30, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
There is no rush, and apparently no consensus yet. In my view there is no need to change the title of this article. The existing introduction, and the section currently called "Origin of the term", are basically OK, but need expansion and better sourcing. They should essentially cover the position in the UK, including the idea of the traditional country cottage as well as other types of cottages including urban industrial cottages. And, the sections on Scandinavia, Russia, North America and Hong Kong need to be hived off to the merged article called Holiday cottage or Vacation property. Please note that the OED definition here uses the italicised words as examples of usage, not as part of the definition itself. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:05, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Does that mean that you see no need for a disambig page then Ghm? PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:15, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really see a need, but could be persuaded given my three SOED definitions below. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:45, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Then you are alone with the no rush, no consensus. You are the only one who does not agree. How about Wikipedia:Compromise? You made me look up the cottage in the Oxford dictionary. 1a small house, typically one in the country: a holiday cottage a simple house forming part of a farm, used by a worker: farm cottages. THIS the definition, and your arguments on town houses, terraced houses all fall on this. Hafspajen (talk) 20:22, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, you are wrong. The words a holiday cottage and farm cottages in the OED are not part of the definition. They are examples of usage. I understand how this may have misled you. My Shorter OED gives:
  1. A small or humble dwelling-house
  2. A small erection for shelter; a cot, hut, shed, etc.
  3. A small country or suburban residence; in US specifically, a summer residence (often large and sumptuous) at a watering-place.
Now, this article should be primarily about definition #1. The "summer residence" definition of cottage should be the subject of the separate merged article. I don't think there's a need for a dab page; a hatnote in this article explaining that vacation "cottages" are dealt with in the other article should be enough. If we all agree that the four sections of this article on non-UK usage are hived off to the merged article, that can be done straight away, and then both this article and that article can be improved. Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:45, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Will we not also need a hatnote regarding the cottages in Cottaging then? Also, if "cottage" is being defined primarily as a small or humble dwelling house, what is to be done with "cottages" such as Anne Hathaway's Cottage, which is neither small nor especially humble? PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:56, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • An extensive definition. But I don't feel like discussing this much to further, I do have to think about my work also, I have to write a research paper and is has to be done this weekend. Hafspajen (talk) 20:57, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We already have Cottage (disambiguation). I meant that this article does not need to become another dab page, it just needs to cover the ground covered by definition #1. I was thinking along the lines of a hatnote saying something like: "This article covers small dwellings typically found in Great Britain. For seasonal or vacation residences, see Holiday cottage. For other uses of "cottage", see Cottage (disambiguation)." So far as Anne Hathaway's Cottage is concerned, I think it was so called to distinguish it from a House (which is what the gentry lived in), and because of the legal definition that it lacked surrounding land of any significance. Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:29, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
All this time I hadn't realised we already had a dab page. Sometimes I think I may as well just watch TV all night, it'd probably be no less productive... PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I usually find being here more.... entertaining (is that the right word?). Ghmyrtle (talk) 21:57, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Anne Hathaways Cottage and gardens The archetypal chocolate box thatched house AND GARDEN.
"Ah, that poor Anne, she must have been so disabled, bless her... look at all these ropes everywhere" Dame Edna Evans (talk) 23:49, 6 December 2013 (UTC) [2] Martinevans123 (talk) 23:51, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I fully accept that there is such a thing as an archetypal English thatched country cottage, with garden, and that this article should reflect that. But, it is also true that there are many other sorts of cottage in Britain, and the article should cover those as well. So far as the article title is concerned, the question is whether the content of this article is the primary topic of the terms listed at Cottage (disambiguation). I think it is - almost self-evidently - and if that is so this article title should remain the same. But, that is an issue that can be addressed separately, later, through proper processes. In the meantime the priority is to merge the articles that need merging, and improve their content and sourcing. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:02, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I also wish to emphasize that the archetypal English thatched country cottage, with garden, is only a part of what might comprise a "cottage" in the UK. If this article is not to be split roughly into two (the "basic" cottage and the "idealised" cottage), then it should retain a balance and not become a smörgåsbord of pictures of cutesy estate agents' dream homes. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 09:24, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree. If there is good reliable sourcing for a section on the romantic idealisation of the thatched cottage with garden - and I'm quite sure there is, but it doesn't seem to have been used so far - that should be part of this article, not a separate article. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:32, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • It looks like my intentions are kinda overruled, so I stop participating in this disscusion. I denote both irony and sarcasm in your remarks about my proposals, and I am not sure I like them, like the "idealised" English 'rural idyll' off Hafspajen's beloved "chocolate-box cottages" the romanticisation of the English country cottage. You do whaterwer you want, I don't care any more. Hafspajen (talk) 11:35, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No irony, no sarcasm, just statements which accurately refer to your partial view of what constitutes a cottage. In this edit you removed several images of cottages which either were not in England, or which illustrated a particular feature or notable owner - such as a cottage made from cruck beams, or George Stephenson's cottage. In their place you put up a load of images of English thatched cottages - including 2 actually labelled as "chocolate box cottages" - which in your view was "better". This is despite the fact that I had previously advised you to select images which illustrate particular features, plus I had chosen some of the images that you removed, so don't complain to me about being "overruled". Also it's rather rude to refer to other people's views here as "trivial objections" and to insist - as you have done - that decisions are made within a timeframe which suits your own particular conveniences ("I am totally fine with Cottage (humble dwelling-house). But I want that on the disambig page. Now." and "I don't feel like discussing this much to further, I do have to think about my work also"). Many of us have other responsibilities which leave little time for editing Wikipedia, and rushed decisions are rarely good ones in my experience. Rather than blaming others for your feelings, I suggest you instead analyse your own conduct. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 19:41, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, sorry about my conduct. But It was not meant to hurt anyone. And I feel that you didn't really listen to what I was trying to say, in spite of the study on "With Roses Round The Door. A study of perception and reality with regard to the English 'rural idyll'", which was obviously good enough for a university paper topic, but not good enough for Wikipedia. And I prefer doing things and get on with them, and adjust, modify on the way, because a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step, - and - Horst-schlaemma said, "we should really come to an end with this now and find a proper solution as before main editors are losing interest to do it". Sometimes too much details and particularities and technicalities just keeps people from moving on. This discussion is long enough as it is. Hafspajen (talk) 01:11, 8 December 2013 (UTC). And this WAs actually a joke.But I want that on the disambig page. Now[reply]
The problem here is that there are several people involved in the discussion, so some form of consensus has to be built otherwise the result can be edit wars. And this discussion is part of the process of adjusting and modifying on the way - it's just happening on a talk page rather than the article page. As regards to me not listening to what you're trying to say, you'll have to give an example. As regards to my study on the English rural idyll, that was written while at university 24 years ago. I still have the paper, but not the sources, which were in the university and college libraries. However, I'll list them here (there's actually not that many):
  • Howard Newby, Green and Pleasant Land? Social change in rural England (1979) and Country Life. A social history of rural England. (1987)
  • Raymond Williams, The Country and The City (1973)
  • Martin J. Wiener, English Culture and the Decline of the Industrial Spirit 1850-1980 (1981)
  • Lash & Urry, Disorganised Capitalism (1987) (I think that's this, despite the title difference)
  • Meadows et al, Limits to Growth (1973) (I think that's this)
These may or may not be worth hunting down. In my study I only used them as support for my own research (which included lots of interviews with residents in 3 villages in Warwickshire), and ultimately my study did not confine itself to cottages, but to the rather more amorphous concept of the "rural idyll", the changing perceptions of which were linked to large-scale concepts such as the restructuring of capitalism. That's why I haven't leaped up with loads of info from my study and its sources. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 02:32, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, now I see your point. Hafspajen (talk) 14:32, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

The gallery was headed "Cottages" - but, it by no means shows a typical selection of cottages. Firstly, they are all in England. Secondly, they are all thatched. There are many cottages in other countries - not shown in the gallery. Many English cottages are not thatched - also not shown in the gallery. And, one of those shown was called Wrayland Manor (at Lustleigh in Devon). It's thatched - but it is not a cottage. The clue is in the name - it's a manor house - so it's not an appropriate illustration for this article. I've removed it. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:21, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how that complicates things - it gives a more specific title. As I say above, it is unclear at the moment whether the article is specifically about cottages in the UK (I assume not), or cottages more widely. Whoever placed the images in the gallery seemed to think that the defining feature of a cottage is a thatched roof. That is untrue. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:34, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
PS: This gives many more images of cottages in England - most of which are not thatched, are not "chocolate box cottages", and do not have cottage gardens. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:42, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Right. This is why we will start a new article on the cottage with cottage garden. Hafspajen (talk) 15:16, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you think that "the cottage with cottage garden" is an encyclopedic topic? We already have cottage garden, which is a type of garden typically but not necessarily associated with a small rural dwelling. Do you mean to start a separate article on Cottages in England? If so, that will include some "pretty" thatched cottages with gardens, but many other types of cottage as well. It seems to me that you have a firm idea of what you believe a "typical" cottage (in England?) to be, but that view may not match the reality as it is perceived in Britain. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:31, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
PS: The bottom line is that there is no single word, or term, for what you perceive to be the typical English thatched cottage with a cottage garden. Of course, those do exist, but the only encyclopedic terms I can think of that would describe them are thatched cottage or English cottage (which would also include many other types of cottage) - and I remain to be convinced that either is an encyclopedia-worthy topic. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:53, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The name thatched cottage looks like it ends up att Thatching, so that would probably include topics like: River houses on the River Kwai. Hafspajen (talk) 15:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If the defining feature of a thatched cottage is its thatching, that is a logical redirect. Some cottages are thatched, as are many other buildings. Most cottages are not thatched. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:05, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus

[edit]

Hi, seems like the holidays sort of killed the dynamics here. We were about to split this article. Could someone please repeat what the last consensus was? Thanks. Cheers Horst-schlaemma (talk) 23:15, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion (and recollection) is that this article should focus on the architecture, materials and historic legal standing of the cottage, as it exists in England (or Britain) - covering all sorts of cottages, including industrial cottages as well as rural thatched ones, etc.. Personally, I think that's the primary use, so it doesn't need a qualifier in the article title - but that's another issue. The material on holiday cottages in Scandinavia, Russia, etc. - should be removed from this article, merged with the article on holiday cottages, and then that article merged with the article on vacation property, with links from this article. And, Cottage (disambiguation) should be clarified as appropriate. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:01, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We were trying to sort out things. Do the holiday cottages, English or so, File:Circular Cottage, Blaise Hamlet.jpg. And let this be international. Hafspajen (talk) 02:51, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction

[edit]

"The word is probably a blend of Old English cot, cote "hut" and Old French cot "hut, cottage", from Old Norse kot "hut" and related to Middle Low German kotten (cottage, hut) ." So the word "cottage" is a blend of Old English cot and Old French cot? How do you know it's a blend when both words are identical? That doesn't make any sense. Where does the "age" part come from? How does "hut" have anything to do with it? Anyway, the text of the article says that it's a "cottage" because it's the residence of a cotter, but this etymology seems to suggest that it comes from the same Old English word as "hut". Is "hut" also related to cotter? Is cotter a modern word, were they actually called "cots" or "huts" back then? How does Old English cot or hut relate to the cotter? Maybe it's just me but this seems confusing. 64.222.152.115 (talk) 23:01, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, those sections are a bit of a mess - confusing, and with lots of unsourced statements. I've attempted some clarification, but more sources are clearly needed. Ghmyrtle (talk) 09:08, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Teachín?

[edit]

I’ve never seen this word before. It is in the Irish dictionary at teanglann.ie but isn’t bothán the more widely used name for a “modest” Irish cottage? Gortaleen (talk) 07:28, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no citation for "teachín" in the article. A quick Google search found several sites translating "cottage" as "teachín". "Bothán" or "bothán scoir" is variously given as a "laborer's cottage", "mud cottage", "one-room cottage", or "shed". Both could be used, but I would want to see decent sources cited. - Donald Albury 14:59, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cottage&oldid=1246701329"