This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Lots of unsubstantiated claims of 'class war spite' on the part of the government - this violates NPOV and is most likely complete garbage.
Exile 15:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
IMHO this is turning into a good article (lower case!) Maybe it should be nominated as a Good Article? BaseTurnComplete ( talk) 10:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
wow I like staff like that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.250.197 ( talk) 12:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
The coordinates for the house actually designate the stables. The house is a little ways East. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.158.179.176 ( talk) 01:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
The article contains a claim with respect to coal-mining on the estate: "the decision has been, and is, widely seen as useful cover for an act of class-war spite against the coal-owning aristocracy." This is clearly a strong claim, which needs good sourcing. Initially I removed a stronger version of this, as poorly sourced opinion. User:Johnbod then reinstated a modified version, with the comment "dubious probably POV edit" - although I'm not a fan of such terms, it's true that the original text was dubious and probably represented an editor's point of view. Based on the discussion on this talk page, above, I added a note that this is the view of the Sunday Times Magazine - rather weak, but it's something. Johnbod then reverted this, noting that the talk page is not a reliable source (and, therefore, presumably, we cannot assume that the Sunday Times Magazine said anything of the sort). While I'm dubious about this, clearly if they suspect that the claim does not appear as stated, it needs to be removed. If, on the other hand, they believe that the Sunday Times Magazine did say this, the contextualisation is essential. Warofdreams talk 09:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
The article says:
>> Its East Front is 606 feet (180m) long, making it the longest country house façade in Europe.
Surely, though, the 325-meter-long Catherine Palace near Saint Petersburg beats this hands down.
Or is the term "country house" understood as fundamentally different to "palace"? What would the distinction be, then?
Here's what the article on English country house has to say:
>> The great houses are the largest of the country houses; in truth palaces, built by the country's most powerful – these were designed to display their owners' power or ambitions to power. [8]
>> [8] Girouard, p2-12.
>> Girouard, Mark (1978). Life in the English Country House: A Social and Architectural History.
Primaler ( talk) 22:28, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Can the public visit any part of the house or grounds? I don't think this article says anything about it. 213.205.251.28 ( talk) 10:30, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Can it be true? Is Wentworth Woodhouse really the largest private house? I thought Blenheim Palace was the largest. -- 79.214.37.208 ( talk) 21:04, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Wentworth Woodhouse/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
.
|
Last edited at 23:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 10:23, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
I've changed the wording of the heading for that section because it seems more than a little overblown. I've no doubt that the open-cast mining caused terrible damage to part of the estate, but since it only covered 99 acres out of the 15,000 acres quoted for the size of the estate elsewhere in the article I'd say it was quite a stretch to say the estate was "destroyed". Also, the article would be improved if it could clarify under what legal mechanism the mining was implemented: the way it reads now the government just sent excavators to dig up someone's private property and the owners were helpless to prevent it. Did the government/coal board have that kind of power in 1946? I feel there's a significant part of the story missing here. 24.115.46.109 ( talk) 01:37, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Useful blog and evidence base here: https://www.historichouses.org/resources/all-resources/guest-blog-wentworth-woodhouse.html which contains the 1947 photo as shown in the article (from 'The Sphere'), for contemporary references on the impact of coal mining on the estate see the caption. The caption (not referenced in the article??) states: "THE PROGRESS OF OPEN-CAST COAL-MINING AT WENTWORTH WOODHOUSE A view showing how the excavation of the property has now reached the very doors of Earl Fitzwilliam’s historic mansion. In issues of “The Sphere” on April 20 and 27 last year details were given of the open cast coal mining activities at this celebrated Yorkshire estate near Rotherham. At the time a bitter controversy was raging between Mr Shinwell Minister for Fuel and Power and Mr J A Hall, President of the Yorkshire Mineworkers’ Association, the former declaring that the coal from Wentworth must be obtained at all costs and the latter urging that further mining of the property amounted to vandalism. Mr Shinwell won his point, and during the past 10 months the open cast workings have been extended from the parkland at Wentworth, across the gardens and right up to Earl Fitzwilliam’s historic mansion. Much needed coal for our industrial drive has been yielded by the Wentworth site and in due course will be levelled off and prepared again for cultivation. Agriculturalists declare, on the other hand, that real restoration is impossible as the soil has been disturbed to such depth. Wentworth Woodhouse is the largest private residence in England. Last year Lord Fitzwilliam offered it as a gift to the nation. . . " See also Hansard: HC Deb 16 April 1946 vol 421 cc2493-4 https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1946/apr/16/opencast-operations-wentworth-woodhouse — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben Haywood Smith ( talk • contribs) 16:27, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Lots of unsubstantiated claims of 'class war spite' on the part of the government - this violates NPOV and is most likely complete garbage.
Exile 15:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
IMHO this is turning into a good article (lower case!) Maybe it should be nominated as a Good Article? BaseTurnComplete ( talk) 10:07, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
wow I like staff like that —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.150.250.197 ( talk) 12:50, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
The coordinates for the house actually designate the stables. The house is a little ways East. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.158.179.176 ( talk) 01:42, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
The article contains a claim with respect to coal-mining on the estate: "the decision has been, and is, widely seen as useful cover for an act of class-war spite against the coal-owning aristocracy." This is clearly a strong claim, which needs good sourcing. Initially I removed a stronger version of this, as poorly sourced opinion. User:Johnbod then reinstated a modified version, with the comment "dubious probably POV edit" - although I'm not a fan of such terms, it's true that the original text was dubious and probably represented an editor's point of view. Based on the discussion on this talk page, above, I added a note that this is the view of the Sunday Times Magazine - rather weak, but it's something. Johnbod then reverted this, noting that the talk page is not a reliable source (and, therefore, presumably, we cannot assume that the Sunday Times Magazine said anything of the sort). While I'm dubious about this, clearly if they suspect that the claim does not appear as stated, it needs to be removed. If, on the other hand, they believe that the Sunday Times Magazine did say this, the contextualisation is essential. Warofdreams talk 09:36, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
The article says:
>> Its East Front is 606 feet (180m) long, making it the longest country house façade in Europe.
Surely, though, the 325-meter-long Catherine Palace near Saint Petersburg beats this hands down.
Or is the term "country house" understood as fundamentally different to "palace"? What would the distinction be, then?
Here's what the article on English country house has to say:
>> The great houses are the largest of the country houses; in truth palaces, built by the country's most powerful – these were designed to display their owners' power or ambitions to power. [8]
>> [8] Girouard, p2-12.
>> Girouard, Mark (1978). Life in the English Country House: A Social and Architectural History.
Primaler ( talk) 22:28, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
Can the public visit any part of the house or grounds? I don't think this article says anything about it. 213.205.251.28 ( talk) 10:30, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Can it be true? Is Wentworth Woodhouse really the largest private house? I thought Blenheim Palace was the largest. -- 79.214.37.208 ( talk) 21:04, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Wentworth Woodhouse/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
.
|
Last edited at 23:10, 1 May 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 10:23, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
I've changed the wording of the heading for that section because it seems more than a little overblown. I've no doubt that the open-cast mining caused terrible damage to part of the estate, but since it only covered 99 acres out of the 15,000 acres quoted for the size of the estate elsewhere in the article I'd say it was quite a stretch to say the estate was "destroyed". Also, the article would be improved if it could clarify under what legal mechanism the mining was implemented: the way it reads now the government just sent excavators to dig up someone's private property and the owners were helpless to prevent it. Did the government/coal board have that kind of power in 1946? I feel there's a significant part of the story missing here. 24.115.46.109 ( talk) 01:37, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
Useful blog and evidence base here: https://www.historichouses.org/resources/all-resources/guest-blog-wentworth-woodhouse.html which contains the 1947 photo as shown in the article (from 'The Sphere'), for contemporary references on the impact of coal mining on the estate see the caption. The caption (not referenced in the article??) states: "THE PROGRESS OF OPEN-CAST COAL-MINING AT WENTWORTH WOODHOUSE A view showing how the excavation of the property has now reached the very doors of Earl Fitzwilliam’s historic mansion. In issues of “The Sphere” on April 20 and 27 last year details were given of the open cast coal mining activities at this celebrated Yorkshire estate near Rotherham. At the time a bitter controversy was raging between Mr Shinwell Minister for Fuel and Power and Mr J A Hall, President of the Yorkshire Mineworkers’ Association, the former declaring that the coal from Wentworth must be obtained at all costs and the latter urging that further mining of the property amounted to vandalism. Mr Shinwell won his point, and during the past 10 months the open cast workings have been extended from the parkland at Wentworth, across the gardens and right up to Earl Fitzwilliam’s historic mansion. Much needed coal for our industrial drive has been yielded by the Wentworth site and in due course will be levelled off and prepared again for cultivation. Agriculturalists declare, on the other hand, that real restoration is impossible as the soil has been disturbed to such depth. Wentworth Woodhouse is the largest private residence in England. Last year Lord Fitzwilliam offered it as a gift to the nation. . . " See also Hansard: HC Deb 16 April 1946 vol 421 cc2493-4 https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1946/apr/16/opencast-operations-wentworth-woodhouse — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben Haywood Smith ( talk • contribs) 16:27, 21 January 2021 (UTC)