Talk:Frank Sander Residence

[Untitled][edit]

I reworked the article to provide architectural information on the house. I removed much unsourced information, some of which clearly falls under WP:BLP rules. Please discuss here if there are issues about what should be included. Savewright (talk) 05:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could it be that Maxwell33 has done some WP:OR on this subject? Perhaps a few more verifiable sources in support of this information? --Waltloc (talk) 23:31, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to say. I was unable to find supporting references for the bulk of the article. I left a note on his talk page but he removed it without responding. Given that and the tone, I'm going to remove the unsourced information. Looking to other architectural articles for guidance helps here. Savewright (talk) 00:32, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi hi. I am Maxwell33 and I am wondering why the beautiful page I created on this historic house keeps being changed? I put a lot of effort and thought into it and it does not violate your policy. I throughly researched the house and submitted an entire report for my Art class at Westhill. It is the only Lloyd Wright house in our city and legend has it is haunted. Hence the suicides. I found much of the information from the FL Wright Foundation and also from my local library and the City of Stamford Assessors Office. There is no negative tone. The history is part of the house. I will put it back the way I had it. M.M.

Thanks for the information and for contributing to the article. Wikipedia is very different from a research paper in that it has a policy of no original research WP:NOR. Since articles are worked on by lots of people, all facts must be clearly cited. Information that is not clearly sourced can be removed. Also, articles about architecture should focus on architectural details, not ownership details. This house may not even meet notability guidelines for Wikipedia, although more citations will make that issue clear (simply being designed by a noted architect is not enough). See WP:NOTE. Also, things like purchase and ownership history typically do not appear in architectural articles for a variety of reasons, some relating to WP:BLP and privacy. While this information is publicly available, unless it adds significantly to the understanding of the structure it's best to tread lightly, especially for private residences. Original budgeted cost is interesting, purchase price in 1986 less so. Savewright (talk) 04:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand who you, "Savewright" are? Who is "Waltloc?" I am changing the article back ot the way I had it. I also gave you specific sources of the sucides. Maxwell33 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxwell33 (talk • contribs) 04:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest doing a Wikipedia search for "Farnsworth House" so uou can see a similar write up like I did for the Frank Sander House. If you guys are going to be total jerks about all the work I did and my contribution, which I may add no one else will ever do on thsi ugly house, then I will build my won webpage on it. You guys need to chill bro. Maxwell33 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxwell33 (talk • contribs) 05:01, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also search "Kentuck Knob" and you can see another FLW house that mentions owner history. Get a life! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxwell33 (talk • contribs) 05:10, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The construction/owner information on those pages is presented in a very different manner. But more importantly, we are not criticizing your work, we are simply asking that you cite sources for information you add. Much of it reads as your personal opinion which is fine for a paper but is not appropriate for Wikipedia. Savewright (talk) 07:06, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]