Talk:Holland House

Gilt Chamber

There isn't much description of the architecture or contents of the House, so there didn't seem to be a place to put the following. I also don't know if the room still exists; I only have an old drawing of the room and this description.

Gilt Chamber

• The Gilt Chamber at Holland House: In that room the figures over the fireplace were painted in flesh color wherever bare; the rest was in shaded gold. The lower marbles of the fireplace were black, and the upper ones were Sienna; the capitals and bases of the columns and pilasters were gilt, and the groundwork from which all the glittering decoration rose was white.
  • "Elizabethan and later English furniture". Harper's New Monthly Magazine. 56 (331): 23–24. 1877-12. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors= (help)

--SEWilco (talk) 03:34, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for this interesting snippet. I grew up nearby, and can report that sadly the Gilt Chamber certainly no longer exists. That would definitely enrich the article as a historical note, though. Is it possible that you could scan the illustration?  — Scott • talk 22:35, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

There you go. Wish it was more colorful. -- SEWilco (talk) 05:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I've finally gotten around to adding these to the article!  — Scott • talk 12:08, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Joseph Addison

Perhaps we should mention that the guy died in this building.[1] --Ghirla^-трёп- 17:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Done. Thanks!  — Scott • talk 12:22, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Source for working with

Lloyd Charles Sanders, The Holland House Circle, 1908 (Google Books copy), seems to be the perfect book for expanding this article from. At the very least it can be referenced extensively, but I'm pretty sure it's out of copyright (death of the author plus 70 years) and can be used directly.  — Scott • talk 12:41, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Recent restructuring has made this article look much worse

@Lobsterthermidor: Hello. I appreciate that you've clearly put in a lot of work here recently, but you've completely destroyed the structure of the article for general readers. The table of contents has gone from being simply structured to a hyper-dense morass of names and dates of birth and death. The extra images in a column on the right stretch so far down the side of the article that they cover up the expand/contract controls on the timeline boxes at the end. There was no need to push the Greville quote into a section of its own that is unlikely ever to be expanded; likewise adding sub-section headers such as "Gilt Chamber" for single paragraphs was unnecessary. Again, thanks for all the extra content, but I'm letting you know this out of courtesy before I start making fixes. Your input is welcome.  — Scott • talk 17:49, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

References

Any chance of the simplifying the references, notes, and multiple bibliographical lists here? Seems quite difficult to track the footnotes, and also makes it difficult add new material and references. Why should short wikipedia articles references have so much apparatus not found in books and articles?Unoquha (talk) 12:46, 6 May 2020 (UTC)