Talk:Queen Anne style architecture

Architecture Top‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Home Living High‑importance

	Housing portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Home Living, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of home-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Home LivingWikipedia:WikiProject Home LivingTemplate:WikiProject Home Livinghome articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Move?

Shouldn't it be Queen Anne style architecture, the capitalization the body of the article uses? NickelShoe 19:18, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No need, the article has been corrected.--12.72.78.39 21:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[[:Image:Z-5371.jpg|thumb|left|Confusingly captioned "A view of the railroad depot at Disneyland amusement park in Anaheim, California. The building is in the Queen Anne style with mansard roofs, widow's walks, dormers, and a clock tower."]] In the illustration at left Walt Disney's design team has reinterpreted, c. 1955, at three-fifths scale, an already generic impression of a "Second Empire" commercial structure without a single feature of the "Queen Anne Style". This image does not help clarify Queen Anne Style architecture, the "free Renaissance" style introduced by British architects like Norman Shaw and taken up by American speculative builders by c. 1880 as an alternative to Second Empire. --Wetman 22:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This was an erudite discussion, but from a singularly British point of view and perhaps over scholarly (historiographical). Some of the more arcane (for American readers) discussion as been removed, but may still be accessed by use of the "history" tab, above. The article is now broken into three ariticles, devoted to "Queen Anne," "Stick Style," and "Shingle Style."

Stick style

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)[reply]

It doesn't seem to be standard practice in the US to consider "Stick" and "Shingle" as types of "Queen Anne" style. They are more generally seen as three differnt design languages. The three sections should be separated into three independent articles--cross referenced, of course. This user would never look for "Shingle Style" under "Queen Anne." In the US, the Shingle Style seems to be the more hightly regarded, being identified with the work of some master architects such as H. H. Richardson and McKim, Mead & White. Queen Anne is rather regarded as more commonly vernacular building of the period. Phmalo 22:59, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

United Kingdom

This article needs more information about the united kingdom, especially since I assume that tha=e style originated there.

Real Queen Anne

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)[reply]

Queen Anne restoration

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)[reply]

some editors casually deleting information as too "arcane for American readers"

What about non Americans? This is supposed to be a worldwide site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ferrymansdaughter (talk • contribs) 14:18, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Intro section

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)[reply]

Namesake Seattle district

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)[reply]

I have never written here but the "Shingle Style" house accross from Queens park has few shingles on it, is a new building and is owned by former NHL goalie Bill Ranford. A charming old couple from Germany, used to own the property before that with a briuck bungalow and a big side yard pool. When I was a kid, they let me use the pool in the summer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.180.248.235 (talk) 04:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Intro

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)[reply]

Stick etc

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)[reply]

Suggest a split

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Yes, the current article covers only the different US use of the term (assuming it does this correctly). Johnbod (talk) 00:25, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is confused and definitely needs some drastic pruning / splitting.

The US styles are completely different from the English Queen Anne even if the early inspiration was the same.
The stick style and shingle style are not classified as Queen Anne and should not be in here.
The article is about architecture, Queen Anne furniture needs to be reinstated even if only as a stub, it is not the same style and not even the same period.
For now I've removed the images of US and Turkish examples from the section dealing with the UK, and put in a modest but highly typical house by Norman Shaw. Put those removed images somewhere else if you want to reinstate, but there are far too many images already, most of that gallery should be removed. ProfDEH (talk) 10:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. The article is a mess. Some of the details of American have English overtones that are not correct in the US and the Stick, Eastlake, and Shingle Styles have always been studied separately from where I come from. Stick and Eastlake are often grouped together. Norcalal (talk) 10:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

We need to discuss the main picture.

Which picture is ideal to be located in the introduction? Norcalal 04:31, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Yes, precisely. Glad it was deleted. (I would actually have called it Dutch revival.) MarmadukePercy (talk) 09:21, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest a split (continued)

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)[reply]

There is already an article about the Eastlake Movement although why movement not style I don't know. This is a style of decoration, not an architectural style at all. ProfDEH (talk) 08:22, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Furniture

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)[reply]

Split

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Good, a split is probably the best approach and certainly starts to unravel the subject. There is a certain justification in the name of the article, since it originated in England, but I think given the popular use of the term in America, it wolud make things clearer (and fairer) if there was a disambiguation page, and this became Queen Anne Style architecture (British). The Australian section doesn't belong here any more than the American section did. Another stub is the answer I suppose. ProfDEH (talk) 13:48, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 5 September 2021

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)[reply]

– Google Ngram Viewer shows that Queen Anne architecture and Queen Anne furniture are more frequently used than the alternative forms using the word "style". The current titles don't follow MOS:SUFFIXDASH; "Queen Anne style" as a compound modifier would be "Queen Anne–style [X]" – but that should be avoided as less common than "Queen Anne [X]". Ham II (talk) 07:36, 5 September 2021 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 18:24, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose (for now). The common term of art is "Queen Anne style", to which we have appended "architecture" in one article, and "furniture" in another, leaving us with an relatively long title. I am not sure removing "style" is really an improvement. In ngrams, "Queen Anne style" dominates both "Queen Anne architecture" and "Queen Anne furniture" added together. Walrasiad (talk) 11:18, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Given that "Queen Anne architecture" and "Queen Anne furniture" themselves predominate over the phrases in the current titles, what would the best article titles that keep the words "Queen Anne style" be? (And given also that the current ones don't follow the MOS.) Queen Anne style (architecture), Queen Anne style (American architecture) and Queen Anne style (furniture)? "Queen Anne style of [X]"? "Queen Anne style in [X]"? Ham II (talk) 07:50, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per Walrasiad's ngram, which I think provides a more relevant and realistic comparison than Ham II's ngram. Also, I think the term "Queen Anne architecture", when it is used, generally refers to the actual early C18 style of Queen Anne's reign, and not to one of the revival styles also covered by this article – those are almost invariably termed "Queen Anne style" or "Queen Anne revival". GrindtXX (talk) 13:19, 5 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In answer to this and Giano's comments below, of the 27 results for "Queen Anne architecture" on JSTOR none refer to the style from Anne's reign except for one footnote (glossing a reference to "the furniture of Annish days" being in vogue in Oscar Wilde's time, so even that one's partly about the period of revivalism); the other 26 are references to either the American or the British 19th-century styles, with slightly more of the former. (I do concede that there are 654 results for "Queen Anne style", which at a glance seem to be overwhelmingly for the later styles, to those 27 for "Queen Anne architecture".) Google Books brings up some book titles such as Domestic Queen Anne Architecture in Los Angeles County and Stanford White at Cornwall: A Shavian Connection to American Queen Anne Architecture, which use "Queen Anne architecture" for the later American style.

It's true that my 1999 edition of the Penguin Dictionary of Architecture and Landscape Architecture does have separate entries for "Queen Anne architecture" ("Period of English architecture typified by the sensible, plain brick domesticity of Queen Anne's reign (1707–14)") and "Queen Anne Revival Style" ("see Shaw, Richard Norman; Nesfield, William [Eden]" – i.e., what we cover at Queen Anne Revival architecture in the United Kingdom), but it makes no mention of the style in the US or elsewhere. The Oxford Dictionary of Architecture is similar in that it divides "Queen Anne" into two sub-topics, but again the second part of the entry ("The Queen Anne style or Revival") is mainly concerned with the style in Victorian Britain, though it notes that this "affected domestic architecture in the USA as well, often merging with the Colonial Revival". In actual usage in reliable sources outside these architectural dictionaries, however, I don't see any evidence for the term "Queen Anne architecture" being restricted to the original style. Ham II (talk) 07:50, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly not. Queen Anne architecture refers only to buildings in the UK or one of its colonies built between 1665 and 1714. While Queen Anne style can refer to the real thing, it also includes numerous hybrids of the style, some of which, in the USA especially, bear little resemblance to QA architecture. Giano (talk) 17:21, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Support. This RM is a good step toward rationalizing coverage of the multiple "Queen Anne" styles of architecture, part of good discussion and development going on at Talk:New_World_Queen_Anne_Revival_architecture#Proposal_for_a_new_naming_scheme. Please see that for context. The opposing editors above are apparently not aware of that (and that discussion was not referenced in the move nomination); please see that and then change your !vote. --Doncram (talk) 17:57, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support, a tad weakly. Johnbod (talk) 15:50, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Architecture. Ham II (talk) 09:59, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Chiswick Chap, the one remaining user who has contributed to the discussion at Talk:New World Queen Anne Revival architecture § rename/move needed? but not here. Ham II (talk) 08:24, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]
@Chiswick Chap: Just to be clear, are you thinking of the likes of Jacobean, Georgian and Edwardian architecture? It seems that the term "Queen Anne" has been used more loosely than those (and the name doesn't quite follow the same pattern). Would the naming convention I suggested to Walrasiad – Queen Anne style (architecture), Queen Anne style (American architecture), Queen Anne style (furniture) – help to convey that, as well as reflect the (apparent) fact that "Queen Anne style" is more often used than "Queen Anne [name of artform]"? There would be a precedent of sorts in the way styles named after French monarchs are treated: Henry II style, Henry IV style, Louis XIII style, Style Louis XIV (OK, that article title is an outlier), Style Louis XV (so is that one), Louis XVI style. This would follow the pattern of those examples, just with added disambiguation. Note that, considered purely as a phrase, "Queen Anne style" is already closer to that pattern than to the other English and British examples. Ham II (talk) 10:22, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.