Talk:Southgate–Lewis House

	museums portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Museums, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of museums 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.MuseumsWikipedia:WikiProject MuseumsTemplate:WikiProject MuseumsMuseums articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

African diaspora

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject African diaspora, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of African diaspora 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.African diasporaWikipedia:WikiProject African diasporaTemplate:WikiProject African diasporaAfrican diaspora articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

United States: Texas / Austin Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance).
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas - Austin (assessed as Mid-importance).

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

All Stick Style discussion removed from Southgate-Lewis House article.

I believe that ALL Stick Style discussion has been removed from the Southgate-Lewis House Wikipedia article. All Stick Style discussion has been removed from *both* the figure captions, as well as the body of the text.

DGAAustin

DGAAustin (talk) 20:36, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is Jackie Craven’s “Yellow House” a Stick Style American Home?

Given your expert knowledge and all that you have written about the Southgate-Lewis House, might you be willing to express your thoughts about Jackie Craven’s Yellow House?

As you know, Jackie Craven has written an article entitled, "House Style Guide to the American Home". In this article she identifies some 55 different "Styles". She provides a photographic image of a prototypical example for each “Style".

(Personally, I took note of the fact that the New York Times boldly asserts Dr. Craven is "one of the Internet's reigning authorities on buildings and architecture.” As I have declared, I am not an expert in categorizing house styles.)

https://www.thoughtco.com/house-style-guide-american-home-4065233

If you scroll down to the 17th entry, you will find a “Yellow House”. Of all of the possible photographs of houses that are available to Jackie Craven (in Wikipedia Commons and elsewhere), this is the house she selected as the prototype – the house that exhibits the essential features of the “Stick Style American Home”.

Do you agree with Jackie Craven?

(1) Can the Yellow House be categorized as a Stick Style American Home?

and/or

(2) Does the Yellow House exhibit the essential features of the Stick Style American Home?

It seems to me that in many respects this Yellow House is similar to the Southgate-Lewis House. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGAAustin (talk • contribs) 14:32, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully,

DGAAustin DGAAustin (talk) 12:13, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

To begin with, the essential question isn’t “what does it look like to me”, but “what does it look like to experts, preferably such who have put their ideas in print somewhere.” Ideas without a source behind them are, in theory, banned on Wikipedia. In practice there are exceptions, but they are minor, and relate to stuff which is both obvious and trivial. This is neither.

That said, even in another forum, there are deep, deep problems with your argument. To begin with, your publisher is not a scholarly expert one. Thoughtco is clickbait, and the praise it receives for evenhandedness largely means that it doesn’t start pages on recent presidents with “the Mendacious Manatee” or “the Kenyan Interloper”. Just because something isn’t deliberate agitprop “fake news” does not mean it is always factually accurate.

Next, the writer isn’t a scholarly expert, either, although some of her work is clearly good. The first version of the page, excepting the glaring error at its start, is a useful reference, as are many of the intervening versions.

Finally, it is posited on your own personal beliefs and judgements, which I’ suggest are inexpert and wrong.

Can the Yellow House be categorized as a Stick Style American Home? No, although it shares some elements with them. Victorian eclectics were designed on the Chinese Restaurant Menu System…you know, “pick one from column A, two from column B, one from…”

Does the Yellow House exhibit the essential features of the Stick Style American Home? No. An actual archetypal “Stick House” would show a suppostitious frame system made of rather substantial boards. These boards would outline a Vierendeel truss, or a series of portal frames, or a trussed frame, and so on. The “Stick” trim boards would show as a series of rectangles and triangles. All of these boards would outline, fully, an (almost always) imaginary structural frame. There would a consistent, if imaginary, load path. The outlined frame is made of simple boards - planks or strips or such- of rectanglar cross section, possibly with relieved corners. These boards are well proud of the field of the elevation. Thick boards, made to suggest heavy framing timbe poking its way out. They either cover the siding completely as an appliqué, or they are a good deal thicker than it. Look at the Emlem Physick place, which Ms. Craven originally used to illustrate the style, and which some Thoughtco sub-minion, most likely, replaced to save a buck, and accuracy be damned. Qwirkle (talk) 17:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Comparison of a prototypical illustration of Victorian Stick architecture with the Southgate-Lewis House.jpg

~~Comparison of a prototypical example of Victorian Stick architecture with the Southgate-Lewis House.~~As discussed here, this is not, in fact a prototypical stick house, but rather reflects poor internet publishing practices.

@Qwirkle:

Thank you for your very thoughtful and cogent reply. (Thank you so very much.)

You most definitely do seem very knowledgeable about the specific details of this matter. Under the present set of circumstances I believe we must defer to your judgement.

However: We are left with a very clear difference of expert opinion (a very sharply defined difference of expert opinion) from a woman whom the New York Times refers to as, "one of the Internet's reigning authorities on buildings and architecture.” I believe that Jackie Craven's Doctoral Degree along with her 20 years of experience writing on such topics allows us to appropriately refer to her as a scholarly expert. She has clearly earned the title. I suspect that she could muster a thoughtful and cogent defense for why she chose the Yellow House as her very best example for the category of style entitled "Stick Style"; and further, why she did not chose the Emlen Physick Estate as her very best example.

Finally I will note that Jackie Craven did use the Emlen Physick Estate in an article within that very same year. She used the Emlen Physick Estate as a prime example for: "Mansions, Manors, and Grand Estates in the United States". This is what I would refer to as a "Fancy" example of a "Stick Style" house. The Emlen Physick Estate is not a "Simple" example of Stick Style – such as the Yellow House. The Emlen Physick Estate is a gorgeous complex 18-room mansion. It undoubtedly required a fortune to construct such a mansion. It is beautiful.

In consonance with the opinion you have carefully described above, Jackie Craven stated that the Emlen Physick Estate "is a hallmark example of Victorian Stick Style architecture".

With gratitude and respect,

DGAAustin DGAAustin (talk) 19:06, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Emlen Physic house is the building which Ms. Craven first used in the article. Someone replaced its picture, probably to save money, without ammending the text. That is very, very bad publishing. Ms. Craven did not initially select the “Yellow house” to represent this style. It is extremely unlikely that any one human being could find these two very different buildings as the Apotheosis of Stick

Fact-based disciplines, like science, technology, medicine, and most branches of history have remarkably little overlap with an English degree these days, at least on the high end. A doctorate in English can reflect almost anything from disciplined logic to air-headed mush. Even if, however, she got a strong scholarly foundation, she got no specialized academic training in architecture or architectural history.

Almost all of Furness’s own works are catalogued. None matches this location that I have found. What does that tell you? What does it tell you that a supposed archetype of a major style has no name?

Finally, “Best on the internet” is hardly unmixed praise. Qwirkle (talk) 21:56, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwirkle:

Yes, "Best on the internet is hardly unmixed praise". Your point is well taken.

And yes, I was very disappointed when I could find absolutely *no* additional information about the simple yet elegant little yellow house. I asked ThoughtCo for additional information. They have not yet replied.

And yes once again, we agree 100% that the simple yet elegant little yellow house is most definitely not the "Apotheosis" of the Stick Style. 100%. Whereas, the Emlen Physick Estate might well qualify for this grand title.

DGAAustin

DGAAustin (talk) 23:41, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwirkle:

@Dicklyon:

@Magicpiano:

A REPLY FROM JACKIE CRAVEN

User:Qwirkle was "spot-on".

I sent a message to ThoughtCo several days ago and they have yet to reply.

I sent a message to Jackie Craven directly and she responded to me almost immediately. It appears as though the suppositions proposed by User:Qwirkle regarding ThoughtCo were "spot-on" – quite correct. ThoughtCo did, in fact, supplant photographs – after Jackie Craven had retired! (And still they used her name? Holy cow.) Here I will paste what Jackie Craven said.

Dear Dr. Albercht,

Thank you for your email and your kind words. Although I wrote the text for the article you mentioned, the webpage was revised after I retired and I did not choose the photos. Some of the photos in the article are not accurate examples of the house styles described. For example, the images for Tidewater Style and Renaissance Revival Styles are certainly off the mark.

The passage about Stick Style homes references the elaborate Emlen Physick House. The house shown in the illustration might be called a simple version of the style.

I regret that I don't have any information about it.

For information about Stick Style architecture, books by Vincent Scully are excellent resources.

Best wishes for success with your research.

End of note from Jackie Craven.

And there we have it – from Jackie Craven.

DGAAustin

DGAAustin (talk) 01:52, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Architectural style.

This is not a stick style, nor gothic revival, nor…. Qwirkle (talk) 02:54, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If one follows the link to the National Register Information # 85002265 for the Southgate-Lewis House, The National Register of Historic Places specifically states that the Architectural Style is "GOTHIC."

https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/85002265

— Preceding unsigned comment added by DGAAustin (talk • contribs)

…which, the reader may note, may bring up a page that points out that this PDF has not been digitized. Qwirkle (talk) 22:29, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

PS:Four tildes ”~~~~” will leave a signature and a date stamp.

The "GOTHIC" is in the asset metadata there. Yes, it's sad that that asset has not been digitized. Dicklyon (talk) 03:29, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Later note: Just to be clear, the NPGallery/AssetDetail page is incorrect that text and photos documents for the place have "not been digitized". They have been digitized and are provided in one combined document available as this copy of "NRHP document for Southgate-Lewis House" at National Archives (as noted by Magicpiano below). And the same is also available as this copy of NRHP document at Texas Historical Commission. And as I note further below, this "NRHP document for Southgate-Lewis House" consists of about 1.5 pages of text excerpt from a longer East Austin MRA document (115 pages, slow to download, at National Archives), plus a signature page from the East Austin MRA document, plus a two-page "Evaluation/Return" form which is almost entirely empty and useless, plus a photo on page 6, a caption on page 7 for that photo, and a page 8 suggestion to look for a map.. The longer document does not include photos but does clarify the author and date of authoring of the short excerpt. --Doncram (talk) 02:45, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DGAAustin and Qwirkle: I suggest we bring the discussion from User talk:DGAAustin to here. Dicklyon (talk) 03:26, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - -

@DGAAustin, Qwirkle, and Dicklyon:

As per the suggestion of User:Dicklyon, I have cut and pasted this item.

I will try to organize a picture.

DGAAustin

DGAAustin (talk) 13:36, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - -

Hello again User:Dicklyon,

I would like to address both you and User:Qwirkle simultaneously -- and all of Wikipedia -- in a new section, but I really do not know how to accomplish such a communication.

I wonder if you might be able to find the time to look at a photograph of a house – in light of the opinion of User:Qwirkle, concerning the categorization of style.

This photograph shows a very simple Stick Style house. It is not a "fancy" version of a Stick Style House. However, it was designed by none other "than acclaimed American architect Frank Furness".

Allow me to quote from the article:

" The house shown here is an especially fine example of Victorian Stick architecture. Designed by architect Frank Furness, the house has "stickwork," or decorative half-timbering, on the exterior walls. Other features include prominent brackets, rafters, and braces. These details are not necessary structurally. They are decorations ... "

(If I knew how to include a photograph of the house here I would do so.)

Here is the Link:

https://www.thoughtco.com/house-style-guide-american-home-4065233

You will have to scroll down quite a ways. It is photograph number 17. It is the simple little two story yellow house. They use it as their **prototypical example** of "Stick Style".

" an especially fine example of Victorian Stick architecture "

More fancy versions of Stick Style (which I presume User:Qwirkle has in mind when he thinks of this style) can be found. Here is one such link:

https://www.oldhouseonline.com/house-tours/a-study-of-stick-style/

Thank you,

Duane

DGAAustin

DGAAustin (talk) 00:17, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

- - - - -

As a casual glance at the first source above will reveal, on the first few pages, the connection between the illustration and the text is sometimes…imaginary. Look at the picture selected to represent the Stanley-Whitman House. The Dutch Colonial illustration is equally inept.

As for the second, perhaps DGA should put down the Mind Reader Module; either it’s broken, or he isn’t competent at its use. Qwirkle (talk) 14:12, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't quite get your point about the Stanley-Whitman house. The source has a picture to represent New England Colonial style, and mentions that house, but does have a picture to represent it. Perhaps you're trying to say that the salt-box style is not a part of New England Colonial? Beats me. I also fail at reading your mind. You'll have to use your words more carefully. Hopefully more constructively, instead of just biting the newbie. Dicklyon (talk) 16:46, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Either you are contradicting yourself, or you left out a “not” or such above. Which? Qwirkle (talk) 19:56, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. If you've looked at the source, it should be clear that I left out the "not" where I intended to write "does not have a picture to represent it". Not that I would never contradict myself. Dicklyon (talk) 02:23, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No. If you look at the source over time, using the wayback machine, it should be clear that the pictures were originally topical. Try it. Qwirkle (talk) 03:27, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Going twice…. Qwirkle (talk) 03:02, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No idea what your point is here with "the pictures were originally topical". If there's something in the wayback machine you want us to notice, say what and give a link please. Dicklyon (talk) 03:37, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Look at this earlier version of the page. Each section which mentions a particular building shows a picture of that building, and the illustration for stick style is the Emlen Physick Estate. So, Ms Craven was originally using a very different house as the example, and one actually designed by Frank Furness, not the builder Victorian which illustrated it later. (Oddly enough, I’ve driven by the place several times, its just outa Kittery Point.)

why the illustrations changed appears to be an example of Lauper’s Law. The new illustrations are all freebies. I rather doubt the author was responsible, but Thoughtco itself. Qwirkle (talk) 04:01, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, probably they switched to illustrations with CC licenses to protect themselves. But how is Cape May near Kittery Point? I've been to both, but not on the same trip. Dicklyon (talk) 05:22, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It isn’t. The yellow house there is in Maine. It has nothing to do with the Emlen Physick house, except a slight, very restrained version of Furness’s exuberant, over-the-top stick style. It is not the building Jackie Craven gave as an example originally. Qwirkle (talk) 05:34, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, I misinterpreted your sparse words again. My older bro lives in Kittery, and I've enjoyed vacations there and in Cape May. Lots of cool old houses, but I confess I know nothing of architectural styles. Still, less biting of the newbie seems to be in order. Dicklyon (talk) 04:12, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DGAAustin, Qwirkle, and Dicklyon:

Additional images

I have tried to insert two images. The Yellow House is presented by ThoughtCo as a prototypical example of Victorian Stick Style.

I quote: "The house shown here is an especially fine example of Victorian Stick architecture. Designed by architect Frank Furness, the house has "stickwork," or decorative half-timbering, on the exterior walls." https://www.thoughtco.com/house-style-guide-american-home-4065233

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%22Stick-Work%22_comparison_of_a_prototypical_example_with_the_Southgate-Lewis_House.jpg

There are many other characteristics of Stick Style architecture.

This version of the Southgate-Lewis House entry (dated 12:10, 30 June 2021 -- prior to deletion) contains a more complete description. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Southgate–Lewis_House&oldid=1031220587 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Southgate–Lewis_House&oldid=1031220587#Stick_Style_High_Victorian_Gothic_Revival_House https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Southgate–Lewis_House&oldid=1031220587#Stick_Style_Victorian_Architecture

You have my apologies for my novice maneuvers.

Thank you.

DGAAustin

DGAAustin (talk) 14:34, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - -

@DGAAustin, Qwirkle, and Dicklyon:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/thoughtco/

Media Bias / Fact Check

Media Bias/Fact Check has a Six Point Rating Scale for "Factual Reporting".

Very High High Mostly Factual Mixed Low Very Low

Media Bias/Fact Check provides ThoughtCo with their highest rank: "Very High".

Here I quote:

"Overall, we rate ThoughtCo Least Biased based on minimal use of loaded language and simply answering questions with evidence. We also rate them Very High for factual reporting due to the excellent sourcing of information and assisting in fact checks."

"We also rate them Very High for factual reporting due to the excellent sourcing of information and assisting in fact checks. (D. Van Zandt 2/21/2018) Updated (3/9/2020)"

DGAAustin

DGAAustin (talk) 15:10, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - -

@DGAAustin, Qwirkle, and Dicklyon:

Regarding User:Quirkle's rejection of the categorization by the National Register of Historic Places . . .

If one follows the link to the National Register Information # 85002265 for the Southgate-Lewis House, The National Register of Historic Places specifically states that the Architectural Style is "GOTHIC."

https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/85002265

User:Qwirkle correctly points out that "this PDF has not been digitized".

Later note: It has been digitized and is available: see notes about that above or below. --Doncram (talk) 03:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While it is certainly true that the supporting material has not yet been digitized, can we not trust a committee of experts at the National Register of Historic Places to make a correct judgement? The committee has certainly carefully read and analyzed the relevant material (that has not yet been digitized) and has come to the conclusion (in their "Collective Wisdom") that the term Gothic (in all caps for them) applies to the Southgate-Lewis House.

Later note: As MagicPiano explains below, no we cannot believe there is such a committee nor can we trust the meta-data characterization of it being Gothic. MagicPiano is a longterm editor of NRHP articles fully conversant with exactly what is available, and how the meta-data is usually created by data entry clerks drawing upon text of full nomination documents, and in this case it appears the data entry clerks erred. --Doncram (talk) 03:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you.

DGAAustin

DGAAustin (talk) 15:10, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - -

@DGAAustin, Qwirkle, and Dicklyon:

It is perhaps worth mentioning that MIT (the Massachusetts Institute of Technology) uses Media Bias/Fact Check to help train their Artificial Intelligence Technology.

"This AI can help spot biased websites and false news. We should take a lesson from it."

https://www.popsci.com/AI-fake-news/

DGAAustin

DGAAustin (talk) 15:19, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - -

@DGAAustin, Qwirkle, and Dicklyon:

Hello Qwirkle and Dicklyon,

Comparison of another Stick Style House with the Southgate-Lewis House.

Added another "simple" (not "fancy") Stick Style House. This house was categorized as Stick Style by the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation for the State of Washington.

Home » Historic Preservation » Historic Buildings » Architectural Style Guide » Stick Style

https://dahp.wa.gov/historic-preservation/historic-buildings/architectural-style-guide/stick-style

DGAAustin

DGAAustin (talk) 16:26, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - -

The NRHP nomination for this property is here. It does not mention the word "Stick" or "Gothic" at all, and describes the house as "late Victorian". IMHO (I am not an architectural historian, but I've seen lots of Victorian houses, and am conversant in the characteristics of some of the different styles) this house is not Stick style but has Stick style elements, mainly the treatment of the eaves and their brackets. It likewise has minimal Gothic elements, apparently just a few instances of relatively modest bargeboard trim. I would not rely on whatever keywords appear in the NRIS database to definitively classify the building in any way. Magic♪piano 13:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Later note: MagicPiano (who has long worked with NRHP documents as have I also) is exactly correct here. There is no apparent explanation for how the National Register data entry clerks saw fit to use term "Gothic" when that word appears nowhere in the materials available to them in this case. So the word is in effect a data entry error. NRHP editors including myself have documented hundreds or thousands of similar data entry errors in wp:NRIS info issues, organized by state, and I just added mention into subsection wp:NRIS info issues TX that this is another one. --Doncram (talk) 03:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DGAAustin: Do you have other sources that talk about Stick or Gothic for this house? Or should we go with what this nomination form says? This:

The Southgate-Lewis House is a late Victorian, wood-frame house with projecting eaves and gables and a prominent, projecting front bay which has a dentiled cornice. Siding and trim used in the construction of the house is unusually ornate and varied. There is a continuous band of vertical siding at the base of the building which is capped with a horizontal band at the window sill. Drop siding occurs up to the sills of the second-story windows, above which multiple rows of fish-scale and rectangular shingles alternate. Ornamental barge trim with brackets is located at the eave line and the roof is covered by wooden shingles. An ornamental brick chimney rises far above the roof line on the north side of a small dormer on the east elevation. The dormer has brackets and crossed barge trim.

Dicklyon (talk) 17:43, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dicklyon:

Set aside categorization as Stick or categorization as Gothic. Can we forget about Stick and Gothic? To the basic description of the observable features that are described within the nomination form I suppose one should carefully describe several features that are easy to observe (by everyone) within the photographic images. Perhaps something (perhaps not exactly this format) as follows . . . As can be seen: (1) There is a strong vertical emphasis with multiple stories. (2) The overhanging eves have exposed rafter ends. (There is a nice photograph that illustrates this point in Wikimedia commons.) (3) There are many one over one tall narrow double-hung windows that are frequently paired. (4) On the elevations, there are ornamental horizontal, vertical, and diagonal white-painted decorative boards that segregate, accentuate, and help to define underlying structure (that is, the decorative woodwork evokes the carpentered structural framework). The white-painted woodwork also segregates the siding from the shingles as well as the vertical siding from the horizontal siding. Finally, the white painted woodwork also occurs at the corners of the first elevation. End of That. Begin a Different Point. If we must categorize the style then why not simply defer to the collective wisdom of the National Register of Historic Places. Can we not assume the National Register of Historic Places has categorized the house correctly? Recall that if one goes the the National Register of Historic Places "ASSET METADATA" for the Southgate-Lewis House, they specifically declare the following, "Architectural Styles: GOTHIC". And here is the Link for the Southgate-Lewis House (85002265) --- https://npgallery.nps.gov/AssetDetail/NRIS/85002265

DGAAustin DGAAustin (talk) 00:25, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think one could say something like "The architectural style has been described as Late Victorian[] and as Gothic[]" with a ref for each. That way we're not saying in Wikipedia's voice that we necessarily accept the accuracy of sources that some see as suspect. For the observations on the photos, I'd put those into the captions, as they'd have no other source. Dicklyon (talk) 03:40, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I reiterate my statement that what appears in the NRIS metadata is not particularly to be relied upon; specifically, it is not safe to "assume the [NRHP] has categorized the house correctly". (I personally consider exactly two fields in the NRIS metadata to be reliable: the reference number, and the listing date. All other fields are subject to error of some form, to which the architecture field is no exception. See the archives at WT:NRHP for more on this.) The "Gothic" entry in the architecture field was probably created by an NPS functionary who scanned the nomination in order to figure out what to put in that field, since the nomination itself makes no statement about how to populate that field. It is also one of a sizable number of nominations approved on its listing date (much of the East Austin MPS was approved that day). Based on my read, they probably should have put in "Late Victorian", because the images presented of the house to date give little indication of Gothic character (no vertical board siding, no lancet windows, no steeply pitched roof, no discernable decorative bargeboard on the rake edge of the roof), and the construction date postdates the typical period of popularity for the style. Magic♪piano 13:35, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. Far from being a carefully considered expert judgement, this could be the best guess of a cardpunch data entry clerk. The house is a nondescript eclectic; maybe the “two or more” category might have fit better. Qwirkle (talk) 14:00, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, exactly, it is a guess by National Register data entry clerk, and is an apparent error, and I agree with MagicPiano's speculation of how it happened. They should have put in "Late Victorian". The longer PDF about East Austin MRA is unfortunately not searchable, but I think browsing it would likely provide other examples where "Gothic" applied, and then the data entry clerk could have just reused that term again here where it does not apply. --Doncram (talk) 03:03, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Architectural style: Categorization of Southgate-Lewis House as Stick Style.

User:Qwirkle and User:Dicklyon . . .

Does this help solve the problem that warranted the Template entitled, "This article's factual accuracy is disputed. (July 2021)" ?

"An especially fine example of Victorian Stick Style architecture"

. . .  from  . . .

"one of the Internet's reigning authorities on buildings and architecture."

Jackie Craven has identified for us "an especially fine example of Victorian Stick Style architecture." We can call it the Yellow House and we can compare the Yellow House to the Southgate-Lewis House.

Jackie Craven has written an article for ThoughtCo entitled, "House Style Guide to the American Home". In this article she identifies some 55 different "Styles". She provides a photographic image of a prototypical example for each "style". The article was updated September 25, 2019.

https://www.thoughtco.com/house-style-guide-american-home-4065233

Who is Jackie Craven?

Jackie Craven holds a Doctoral Degree in the Arts and an M.S. degree from the State University of New York, SUNY Albany. She holds a Bachelor of Arts Degree in English from Virginia Commonwealth University.

Jackie Craven has over 20 years of experience writing about architecture.

The New York Times called Dr. Craven "one of the Internet's reigning authorities on buildings and architecture."

"Jackie became fascinated by 19th century architecture when she purchased her first Victorian house in 1984. Over the years, she renovated several old buildings on her street . . . She now lives in a turn-of-the-century cottage and serves on the Schenectady Historic Commission."

"Since 1999, Jackie Craven has contributed more than 500 articles to the digital media outlet now known as ThoughtCo. Her features cover architecture, historic landmarks . . . "

The Spruce states: "Jackie Craven is an expert in architecture . . . "

In the article entitled, "House Style Guide to the American Home" Jackie Craven provides a prototypical example of the "Stick Style" category. A photograph of this prototypical example is shown herein with the Southgate-Lewis House below.

Also shown herein is a comparison of the "Stick-Work" of Jackie Craven's prototypical example of the Stick Style with the "Stick-Work" of the Southgate-Lewis House. As can be seen (and as the red arrows indicate) the "Stick-Work" is nearly identical.

This Yellow House was designed by the well known architect Frank Heyling Furness, who over the course of his career designed some 650 buildings. He was reported to be one of the highest paid architects of his time.

Allow me to quote from Jackie Craven's article:

"The house shown here is an especially fine example of Victorian Stick architecture. Designed by architect Frank Furness, the house has "stickwork," or decorative half-timbering, on the exterior walls. Other features include prominent brackets, rafters, and braces. These details are not necessary structurally. They are decorations ... "

One additional prototypical example of a Stick Style house might prove useful in this context. The prototype of the category has been identified by the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation for the State of Washington.

Home » Historic Preservation » Historic Buildings » Architectural Style Guide » Stick Style

https://dahp.wa.gov/historic-preservation/historic-buildings/architectural-style-guide/stick-style

There are many other characteristics of Stick Style architecture. Some of these characteristics were described in an earlier version of the Southgate-Lewis entry – prior to the deletions by USER:Qwirkle.

This version of the Southgate-Lewis House entry (dated 12:10, 30 June 2021 -- prior to deletion) contains a more complete description.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Southgate–Lewis_House&oldid=1031220587 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Southgate–Lewis_House&oldid=1031220587#Stick_Style_High_Victorian_Gothic_Revival_House https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Southgate–Lewis_House&oldid=1031220587#Stick_Style_Victorian_Architecture

User:Qwirkle and User:Dicklyon . . .

Does this help solve the problem that warranted the Template entitled, "This article's factual accuracy is disputed. (July 2021)" ?

DGAAustin

DGAAustin (talk) 19:03, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@DGAAustin: Duane, what you're doing here is mostly what we call original research or synthesis. But to include your conclusions in the article, they'd need to be verifiable in reliable sources. If you want to write an article on the house and get it reviewed and published in a journal about historic houses or architectural style or such, then we'd be able to use that and cite it. Dicklyon (talk) 05:38, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond this, it is observably based on bad sourcing, as I mention above, and on the mistaken belief that any continuous molding is the exact equivalent of strip, board, or plank trim.

Whatever Thoughtco’s merits are overall, this is a webpage in which text is written about one building, and yet another building is shown in the illustration. That is a bad reference. Qwirkle (talk) 14:45, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

stick-styling seen in photo six

Hey, I think there is more "stickiness" in the house than has been properly recognized. Please consider the photo on page six of eight pages in what we can call the "NRHP document for Southgate-Lewis House" (which consists of 1.5 pages of text excerpt from a longer East Austin MRA document (115 pages, slow to download, at National Archives), plus a signature page from the East Austin MRA document, plus a two-page "Evaluation/Return" form which is almost entirely empty and useless, plus photo on page 6, caption on page 7 for that photo, and page 8 suggestion to consult a map). User:Magicpiano pointed to this copy of "NRHP document" at National Archives. There is also this copy of NRHP document at Texas Historical Commission, which opens bigger (although you can get the same larger view from the National Archives page by clicking on down arrow to bottom left of document view that first comes up).

This photo better shows the two stick-style brackets under a gable of the house, plus two stick-style brackets under the gable of the dormer window that has the two stick-style(?) sticks sticking up to either side above its gable. I think these six sticks justify calling the house "stick-style". Also apparent in this photo are the rafter ends, not covered by a fascia, under the eave of the roof from which the dormer projects. Those rafters look kinda sticky to me and I suspect might be considered stick-style. --Doncram (talk) 06:14, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brackets were used by many styles during this era, and the closer you got to the vernacular, the more so. Even the crossed vergeboards on the dormer were seen in several styles. Qwirkle (talk) 14:21, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The black and white photograph you have located and identified (shown herein) is a very nice photograph of the Southgate-Lewis House, shortly after its restoration, circa 1980.

The overhanging eves with exposed rafter ends are well worthy of note (see photograph shown herein).

In an article entitled “The Architectural Styles of Urbana’s 100 Most Important Buildings,” the City of Urbana identified some 28 different “Architectural Styles”. One of the styles they included was the Stick Style. Shown herein is the example the City of Urbana provided for the category of Stick Style – the “red house”. They also provide a discussion of the Stick Style.

http://urbanaillinois.us/residents/historic-urbana/top100/archstyle/stick

In addition to the elements that you have described, I think it is important to keep in mind the following. On the elevations of the Southgate-Lewis House, there are ornamental horizontal, vertical, and diagonal white-painted decorative boards that segregate, accentuate, and help to define underlying structure. The decorative woodwork evokes the carpentered structural framework. The white-painted external woodwork also segregates the siding from the shingles as well as the vertical siding from the horizontal siding. Finally, the white painted woodwork also occurs vertically at the corners of the first elevation.

DGAAustin (talk) 15:12, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would not characterize most of the body trim on this house as Stick style. It is by all appearances fairly conventional late Victorian (except for the trim offsetting the unusual band of vertical siding beneath the groundfloor windows), and not really representative of Stick style applied woodwork, which is often decorative and not diagnostic of the underlying structure. See Stick style for examples, where woodwork is applied to impart an appearance of Tudor style half-timbering on balloon-framed structures. Magic♪piano 15:32, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, while the body of the page describes the evolution of Stick into American Eastlake, the illustrations are based entirely on Eastlake and vernacular influenced by it. No notional framing decoration on either. Qwirkle (talk) 15:37, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notwithstanding the observation that "Brackets were used by many styles during this era" ...

“The stick style of architecture . . . often revealed exposed rafter ends or brackets,” Gabrielle M. Lanier and Bernard L. Herman.

Johns Hopkins University Press, 1997, “Everyday Architecture of the Mid-Atlantic: Looking at Buildings and Landscapes,” Page 168.

About the authors ...

Myron O. Stachiw, from the Society for the Preservation of New England Antiquities, tells us in a review of the book published by

The University of Chicago Press on behalf of the Henry Francis du Pont Winterhur Museum, Page 208:

“There are few people I can think of who are better suited to creating a book such as this. Both ... have spent many years at the Center for Historic Architecture and Design at the University of Delaware.”

DGAAustin (talk) 18:07, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You know, there is even a name for this logical fallacy, if memory serves… Qwirkle (talk) 18:23, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

@Qwirkle:

User:Qwirkle

Regarding the logical fallacy ...

Right. Your memory is working well. Your memory is dependable. (I think it is number three on the list of "common logical fallacies.") Nevertheless, after the "ThoughtCo situation," (which you correctly predicted) it seemed important (if not imperative) to clearly demonstrate that the sources of the information (that I was quoting) were dependable (i.e., trustworthy and reliable). In the future, perhaps such demonstrations of trustworthiness and reliability can be a little bit more restrained.

DGAAustin (talk) 01:27, 10 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - -

As can be seen in the pair of photographic images shown herein (and as one might expect) the southern elevation of the Southgate-Lewis House (upper image) is similar to the northern elevation of the Southgate-Lewis House (lower image) and thus there is an additional pair of decorative diagonal brackets under the extended overhang of the southern gable. (This increases the count, above, by two.) One can also see that there is an ornamental window at the apex of the gable, above the second story, within the southern elevation. Like the other windows of the Southgate-Lewis house, this small decorative window also has the characteristic external window encasement moulding (noteworthy external window encasement moulding) of the Southgate-Lewis House.

DGAAustin (talk) 21:23, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moved images up.DGAAustin (talk) 23:55, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please clarify what other architectural styles of that era used brackets as here? Contemporaneous Italianate architecture includes brackets, but those are different than the sticky ones here; Italianate brackets are somewhat complex solid forms, not simple open triangles. It did occur to me that the brackets here would look fine on American Craftsman bungalow houses in Pasadena, but the Craftsman movement is later, and is perhaps derivative. I wonder if history of the development of Craftsman style explicitly credits Stick style as the source for those brackets. This house was built in 1888. As stated in American Craftsman article, Gustav Stickley began The Craftsman magazine in 1901 (largely about Craftsman interiors) and the first Craftsman bungalow exteriors, perhaps including such brackets, may date from about 1905. --Doncram (talk) 03:44, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, exposed rafters and rafter ends are included in Craftsman architecture, but I believe that Craftsman rafter ends are all cut vertically (so on an angle to the board). Or perhaps sometimes they might be square-cut, though I think that would not look Craftsman-like to me. But the rafter ends on the Southgate-Lewis House have curved shaping. Is "curved-shaped rafter ends" a feature of Stick style perhaps?

Also, I love learning what is a Vierendeel truss (redirects to Truss#Vierendeel_truss) and User:Qwirkle's confident discussion above of what defines Stick style as involving an imaginary structural frame with a fictitious load path, etc., but note that is not reflected in Wikipedia's Stick style article. What Quirkle said was:

An actual archetypal “Stick House” would show a suppostitious frame system made of rather substantial boards. These boards would outline a Vierendeel truss, or a series of portal frames, or a trussed frame, and so on. The “Stick” trim boards would show as a series of rectangles and triangles. All of these boards would outline, fully, an (almost always) imaginary structural frame. There would a consistent, if imaginary, load path. The outlined frame is made of simple boards - planks or strips or such- of rectanglar cross section, possibly with relieved corners. These boards are well proud of the field of the elevation. Thick boards, made to suggest heavy framing timbe poking its way out. They either cover the siding completely as an appliqué, or they are a good deal thicker than it.

Can any of this be captured in improving the Stick style article? --Doncram (talk) 03:44, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These simple bracket types, as ubiquitous as they are now, pretty much entered North American domestic architecture with Downing and with some (Germanic, roughly) immigrant groups imported vernacular. You will sometimes see a simple triangulated bracket on vernacular Italianate or Gothic, but it will almost always be gussied up with a cover board with some pattern to it and at a steeper angle. To a Yankee (in the proper, pie-for-breakfast sense) in 1800, this would have suggested something you might hang off a barn to keep a woodpile a little drier, not something you stuck out in front of God and Country on the formal face of your house. Stick, Shingle, Swiss cottage and their relatives changed that. Qwirkle (talk) 22:15, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]