Jump to content

Talk:Pitzhanger Manor

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

Name

[edit]

I used Google to find "Pitshanger Manor" and found 674 matches. I also checked "Pitzhanger Manor" and found 640 matches. Both spellings are in use, but Pitshanger is more common, so this article has the wrong name. Ogg 12:02, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LB Ealing website:

PM Gallery & House, Ealing's flagship cultural venue, comprises of the Grade I listed Pitzhanger Manor-House, designed by the architect John Soane in 1800 and PM Gallery, West London's premier professional contemporary arts venue.

There are redirects in place for most combinations. Kbthompson 09:35, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A check of the search facility on LB Ealing website at www.ealing.gov.uk, gives 1342 matches for "Pitshanger Manor" and 1131 matches for "Pitzhanger Manor". So Kbthompson is incorrect in his assertion that Ealing Council tend to use the former spelling. The name should be changed to the current predominant spelling, Pitshanger Manor. User:JM Rackowe 11:28, 02 April 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.85.67.241 (talk) [reply]

This has been researched already

[edit]

This has been fully and thoughly researched already and explained in the article. So just as Liza Minnelli sings -it's with a Z

With two places and several organizations having similarly spelt names it would be expected that 'some' people would get confused but more than 50%? I thought this seems highly improbable. So here are my search result performed on 2010-04-26.

Search engine term result
Ealing Council site
search box 		“Pitzhanger Manor” 213
Ealing Council site
search box 		“Pitshanger Manor” 61
Google “Pitzhanger Manor” 26,200
Google “Pitshanger Manor” 10,800
Ealing Council site
search box 		“Pitzhanger Manor House” 110
Ealing Council site
search box 		“Pitshanger Manor House” 2
Google “Pitzhanger Manor House” 161,000
Google “Pitshanger Manor House” 30,200

Well, the council planing office has made a few typo errors (which is not unfair to the typists as they would be dealing with the area of Pitshanger most of the time) and advertising agents appear to have erred by checked their clients submission against the gazetteer. The remaining occurrences appear to be few and far between and could also be proof readers errors rather than those of the writers. Buried in those results could also be people referring to the actual 'sub-manor' of Pitshanger which had a farm house rather than a Manor house. From now on any attempts to maintain and spread this confusion will be seen as being against the spirit of WP and so will be removed as vandalism.--Aspro (talk) 11:30, 26 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Reading room

[edit]

The line which reads: In 1940 a reading room was added, sympathetically designed on the site of the servant wing. suggests that in 1940 the councils attitude was:- “Street Shelter? Oh how passé, all the urburn district councils are building them -by the dozen! I know, why don't we build a nice new reading room for the library. After working sixteen-hour shifts in the factories, our ratepayers might like to relax with a few chapters of Ulysses... or perhaps a little Proust. We could ask that nice Mr Morrison to send over some of his special tables so they can safely sit under them instead -if the Luftwaffe do come.”
This info in this line really needs to be checked at some time.--Aspro 12:47, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The official site says

The 1940 lending library building on the site of Soane's mock Roman ruins is now the PM Gallery. Soane's ornamental gardens and parkland, including his bridge, entrance arch and lodge, became Walpole Park, today on the Register of Historic Parks and Gardens.

I think my only sin was to link this in with the Ealing template. This may not be the aforesaid reading room, it wouldn't surprise me if that were an attitude of the time, but its source should be referenced. Wasn't Ulysses (novel) still banned then? Kbthompson 13:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
WP being so USA-centric doesn't say but it was about 36-37 it was lifted in England and the British Commonwealth. On refection - I used to get so many 'requests for reservation' returned with NOT SUITABLE FOR LIBRARY STOCK stamped across them, I guess it failed to get on to the librarie's catalog even then. Can remember people recounting the halcyon day's of their youth saying that if the customs officer spied just the one copy on their return from France, he would comment: “Oh, I too enjoy Homer and the Greek classics; welcome back to Blighty Sir.” and give a knowing wink. My computer seems to have logged out before I made my edit on the article. drat!--Aspro 18:42, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See:
The house was adapted as a library by extending Dance's wing westward, and by additions on the north side which were replaced by the modern wing in 1938. (fn. 77)
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.asp?compid=22577&strquery=Pitzhanger
Perhaps young princes Liz dropped by in her ambulance to perform the official opening in 1940. She had to practice her ribbon cutting technique somewhere. Something like that might account for the date. Also, according to Emmeline Leary (1991). Pitshanger Manor, an introduction. ISBN 086192 090 2, page 27, the Eating Room (wonder what they called the loo ?) had been given its extention (the reading room) by the time of the library's opening in April 1902. The 1938 addition is now the Gallery. Oh, never have I seen such a concatenation of history since I read a school essay which said Pilot flew Jesus up to Egypt in Buckinghamshire ;-) --Aspro 20:17, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I shall endeavour to visit and unravel the mystery, they will look askance when I retrieve the trowel from my pocket, but askew when I pull out the mechanical digger. BritHist tends to be a reliable reference, but its brevity is to be commended when talking about individual buildings, there's nothing like grilling the curator over a slow fire - fuelled, perhaps by banned copies of Ulysses the novel ... and so, to bed. Kbthompson 23:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like a worthy escapade, but remember -you have just three days to do it in.
At the same time: you may care to venture to ask the staff to add their own info to WP. Impress upon their duty to the tax payer to make the museum and gallery as successful as possible (and make the WP article better in the process). Point out: that as staff, they have more opportunity to compose good photographs when the light is right, and perhaps take photos from advantage points that the public have no access to. Show them the 'carrot' which is that in return, the ' whole world', 'maximus mundi', 'pan orbis,' will see their creative efforts; for the article will always come to the top of any Google search for Pitzhanger. Moreover, point out: they are well versed at what questions visitors ask, one imagines therefore, that they are well placed to know what the article lacks and make due amends. Good luck. (If s/he tastes good, bring me back a roasted hock please.)--Aspro 12:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Almost looks like an article now, thanks to recent additions by yourself and anon. I took the liberty of reorganising to a timeline; abolishing Ealing District Council (it was a muni-boro), and adding some nonsense about Gunell's generosity to the poor. As you say, we should all be employed by the boro'. The official site, though, having a few nuggets of detail is hardly encyclopaedic! Kbthompson 17:48, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's a lot better! Was only think earlier today that it was getting bitty and could do with a Table of contents to bring some order to it. It desperately needs some photos though. Will have to think about raiding piggy bank for a new SLR.
Ealing Local History Centre is now a bit disrupted with a refurbishment but I suppose I should email them at sometime and solicit their views on letting me upload some of their old photos of the house and perhaps a floor plan. Have been holding off because I would rather have a decently presented article to show. Today, I think we're getting there! --Aspro 19:07, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes & References Etc.

[edit]

As I'm getting confused as to exactly where and/or on what page a reference originally came from, I am going over to having:

1) A separate Reference section at the 'very' bottom of this article. This will list the references once alphabetical. (no <reference /> or {reflist} codes in it.>
2) Have the tabs in the text link to a new Footnote section. Here the page number and/or the original fn number in the original text will be included.

This will look slightly more professional, save time and also aid others who wish to consult the sources; so save them ploughing through umpteen pages of text looking for the exact place. See:Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Maintaining_a_separate_.22References.22_section_in_addition_to_.22Notes.22 --Aspro 11:00, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Further: For the this subject matter [Pitzhanger] which is of interest due to its history as much as its aesthetic value I think it is a very good idea to make use of the Cnote template. This will make adding footnotes to explain the context etc., so much easier.
i.e., {{cnote | enter name of content note here | enter text of content note here}}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cnote

[note to self: check size of text in these sections and if too big make 'small'] --Aspro 12:59, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Double Columns in Notes and References:
If the is any problem with YOUR web browers' not rendering these properly please say and I will remove the double column formating --Aspro 14:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC) --Aspro 11:03, 17 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan Gurnell

[edit]

Both Jonathan Gurnells it appears, used the same spelling, so it is the source used for note 1 (EBCC History) that was wrong to add an 'h'. There is a slight possibility of course, that this is another Gurnell, although I can not (readily at this moment) find any reference to another one.--Aspro (talk) 12:22, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spelling was a bit of a moveable feast at that time. They are probably alternates, and each source will depend on the spelling used in the primary source - or, it could just be a transcription error. Probably best to adopt one spelling and stick to it. cheers Kbthompson (talk) 14:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The lead

[edit]

"an extensive restoration returned much of the building back to Soane's design". Not a native English-speaker, I do not feal as the right person to correct language but isn't "return...back" a pelonasm and should it not be changed simply to #returned" ot #took...back"? Just a thought.Ramblersen (talk) 21:49, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Pitzhanger Manor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:31, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:52, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

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) 16:08, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:42, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pitzhanger_Manor&oldid=1205104632"