Talk:Rampisham

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dorset Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dorset, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics connected with Dorset. If you would like to participate, you can visit the WikiProject Dorset project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.DorsetWikipedia:WikiProject DorsetTemplate:WikiProject DorsetDorset articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

School by Pugin?

I cannot find any other sources confirming that the school was designed by Pugin. The Dorset Life article does not give its sources for the information that the school was by Pugin. I think this should be removed from the article until it can be unambiguously sourced.

Pugin Society list of institutional buildings with no Rampisham school entry

Rampisham buildings by Pugin with no Rampisham school entry

If the school were by Pugin, surely it would have been listed? No such listing according to Historic England.

Stronach (talk) 10:30, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be bold and remove it until it can be conclusively proven. Dorset Life alone is not a good enough source, in the face of the lack of evidence where it would be expected. Stronach (talk) 10:43, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can see your point, though that then begs the question of why the Dorset Life author should have made such a specific claim, particularly as the article follows descriptions by Frederick Treves, but picks this information out for extra mention (I have Treves' book and he doesn't mention a school). PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 11:11, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article ends with "Many thanks to Lord Wynford and Michael Nisbet for their invaluable help in researching this article." I wonder if local legend/history has been accepted at face value by the author? Stronach (talk) 15:45, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Talking to local residents is one method of research for articles on local history. Often such conversations reveal knowledge unknown by distant academics/experts, so shouldn't necessarily be dismissed. I'm guessing that Lord Wynford is/was landowner at Wynford Eagle, a nearby village...? PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 16:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a picture of the former school. The style is very similar to Pugin Hall. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:45, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This source also states that Pugin designed the school, but strangely fails to mention the rectory. Of course it isn't possible to know the source of this information, though it's possibly not Wikipedia, seeing as the photos (and therefore maybe the text) on the OPC page date from 2011 i.e. before any Pugin info was added to our article. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:00, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I had wondered if the school was listed by Historic England under a new name, seeing as it's not a school anymore, but I've just had a look at the Historic England parish map showing all the listed structures, and the former school definitely isn't listed. Would it be expected that a school built by a notable architect in the mid 19th-century would be listed? Obviously the rectory is, though that looks a grander structure (not that looking impressive is any guide to listing status.....) PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 21:22, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I fully realise talking to locals is a valid way of doing local history research. But - if I had a pound for every time I have been told during my fieldwork that either a) a house has beams from a warship that fought at Trafalgar or b) there is a tunnel from the house in question to the church/pub etc, I'd have enough for a weekend in Bognor. Often such fanciful beliefs with no basis in fact get repeated, amplified, and then in time accepted as truth as they have become part of the local lore. Other times I am told things that have a kernel of truth, that research will tease out from the myth.

I think the school looking Puginesque could just as easily be because his style was very influential and much-copied, as because it was by him. If a house/building was designed by him, I'm sure the Pugin Society would be aware of the fact. I really think we need to keep the information stated as fact out of the article, as Wikipedia can then become the accepted source for such information and it gets repeated ad infinitum ("if it's in Wikipedia, it must be true").... I suppose as a compromise it could be stated along the lines of "it has been claimed that the school was also designed by Pugin (Dorset Life ref here) but no corroborating evidence has yet been found." If it is removed altogether, people might erroneously reinsert it as fact. Stronach (talk) 10:38, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, a nice example of confabulation that might apply at Rampisham too - in my work on the article for John Halle's Hall, which was restored by Pugin in 1834, I found a fair few articles stating that the mock-Tudor facade of 1880-1881 was by Pugin. It might be that people knew Pugin had done some restoration work, and so assumed the (new, rather than restored) facade of 40 years later was also by him. 2 + 2 = 5. Stronach (talk) 10:46, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]