Talk:Architecture of Ottawa/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Rewrite entire article

I feel this entire article needs to be rewriten as it establishes a negative point of view on the built environment in Ottawa. Also, I feel it should be based chronologically, like the Architecture of Canada page, as it perhaps presents a more focused look on the details of actual architecture. I will work towards this but it will take some time.--Ducio1234 (talk) 01:58, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

There is definite room for expansion of this article, but we should also be careful to not present an overly touristic impression of Ottawa. The Parliament Buildings and other federal monuments are prominent structures, but they are also very unreflective of the city as a whole. Much more of the city looks like Barrhaven and Tunney's Pasture than it does like Parliament Hill. Too much focus on the attractive highlights will give an inaccurate impression of the city. - SimonP (talk) 18:44, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
While I wouldn't advocate touristic editing, I think the Parliament buildings (which could be more fully discussed) have come to define architecture in Ottawa, as they have influenced a host of other buildings in the city, like the Supreme Court of Canada, National Gallery of Canada, and the Bank of Canada. While suburban sprawl characterizes much of the city, I don't really consider this type of building notable architecture that needs to be included in depth.--Ducio1234 (talk) 01:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I worry the article has already gone too far in the touristic direction. I would be very surprised if you could find an architecture critic who would use the words romantic and picturesque to describe Ottawa's architecture as a whole. The same goes for saying that the Parliament Buildings "heavily influenced the architectural development of Ottawa." They really didn't. Ottawa's dominant style, both downtown and in the suburbs, is a deeply conservative modernism. Ignoring that fact by focusing on the prominent exceptions gives a false impression of the city. - SimonP (talk) 13:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I also don't think we should move to a more chronological approach. The evolution of government buildings from the Connaught Building to the R. H. Coats Building is a distinct story from the evolution of residential houses from Victorian to neo-eclectic and its better not to try and combine them. - SimonP (talk) 19:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I believe that architecture is best understood when the buildings are placed in their context and that a chronological approach best explains the larger developments in architecture that cross these thematic cateogizations, for example, why should a Neo-Gothic church be separated from the Neo-Gothic Parliament buildings when the design of the building was largely meant to do achieve the same goals and when they originate from the same period? Why should discussion of the rise of the suburbs be separated from R.H. Coats building when they are both essentially products of modernism's influence and interaction in Ottawa?--Ducio1234 (talk) 01:34, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
The problem with that approach is it tells us very little about Ottawa. The story of Neo-Gothic being used for nineteenth century institutions or of modernism leading to unadorned towers and suburban sprawl is exactly the same for any city in North America. Duplicating that same narrative here isn't useful, when such things are already well covered at articles like Gothic Revival architecture in Canada. The history of Ottawa's urban planning and the evolution of federal buildings are stories that are unique to the city and will be covered no where else in the encyclopedia, and should be the focus of this page. - SimonP (talk) 13:14, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
All I have to add to this discussion is to say that the article needs more citations. Looking at it now, the least touristy parts are those which quote from critics. I agree with SimonP in that I don't really see a need for a chronological approach -- the current thematic organization works fine. --Padraic 13:58, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Alright, I'll accept the current structure of the article. Do you know of any other articles have had this discussion? I'll see if I can add any in-text citations and clarifications. Let's not forget that tourists visit places and buildings because the sites are often significant.--Ducio1234 (talk) 15:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
What I'd really like to see is more about some of the unique characteristics of Ottawa's domestic architecture. Some people discussed this article at this forum and they noted that houses like the one in the Old Ottawa South picture are pretty unique to Ottawa. I agree, but I've never managed to find any external references that talk about this. - SimonP (talk) 19:39, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
Actually, houses like that are fairly common in Eastern Ontario, in a belt from Midland through Peterborough, Smith's Falls and Ottawa. Spoonkymonkey (talk) 20:08, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to see a new section about recent architectural additions, such as SOM's American Embassy, Claridge Homes' new building(s) in Lebreton Flats [1] and the Canadian War Museum, some of the new condos in the Byward Market [2], and especially highly renowned Fumihiko Maki's Delegation of the Ismaili Imamat [3] (a world-class, must-see building). The renovation of Lebreton Flats will supposedly bring about a whole neighbourhood of architecturally stimulating and notable buildings; although you can't really trust the NCC on anything, the examples so far set a pretty good example. M.Nelson (talk) 18:48, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

This article is a mess

It is sloppy, dismissive and pedantic. It contains gems like this: While the political capital, Ottawa has always been heavily influenced from the larger cities of Toronto and Montreal. I'm not sure what the writer is trying to say. Perhaps my problem is that I only speak English. We need someone who knows something about architecture to take a crack at fixing this. Spoonkymonkey (talk) 20:06, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Architecture of Ottawa. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 08:57, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Architecture of Ottawa. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 16:46, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

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

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) 05:11, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Architecture_of_Ottawa/Archive_1&oldid=1170092714"