Talk:Farnborough Hall

Untitled
So, before 1684, to whom did it belong? DavidFarmbrough 22:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC) ((Nuke)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by StJohnPG (talk • contribs) 05:33, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Why is there no history before the Holbechs' ownership?
The history starts "The Holbech family acquired the Farnborough estate in 1684" but from whom did they acquire it? The National Trust site is similarly silent in this respect. DavidFarmbrough (talk) 16:11, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

National Trust pilot
Hello! During late June, July and some of August, I'm working on a paid project sponsored by the National Trust to review and enhance coverage of NT sites. You can find the pilot edits here, as well as a statement and contact details for the National Trust. I am leaving this message when I make a first edit to a page; please do get in touch if you have any concerns. Lajmmoore (talk) 09:08, 4 July 2022 (UTC)
 * , if you have contacts in the NT, could you please look at 's recent edits concerning the ownership of Farnborough Hall, and if possible find a published source that states who owns it? Maproom (talk) 07:12, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Found the deed. Title number WK447311. Does not mention anyone named Caroline. Kenyon2005 (talk) 07:37, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * hello @Kenyon2005 that sounds like original research, which isn't suitable for inclusion in articles, which must rely on published, secondary sources. @Maproom thanks for the heads up, I will pass your request on, although it might take some time to reach the right person Lajmmoore (talk) 08:18, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * This is very famous case. Not original research. There is a Netflix documentary about the gallery. Kenyon2005 (talk) 08:27, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * What documentary @Kenyon2005? Lajmmoore (talk) 12:20, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * There is one about the Knoedler Gallery called Made You Look Kenyon2005 (talk) 14:38, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I referring to the deed you said you'd found? For changes to pages, you need to provide trusted secondary sources and reference them within the text. Lajmmoore (talk) 09:33, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, for your response. A related issue is 's (recently deleted) claim at The Grand Canal and the Church of the Salute that Farnborough Hall contains a stolen art work. Maproom (talk) 11:45, 8 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks @Maproom Lajmmoore (talk) 12:20, 8 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Correction. I now understand that Kenyon2005's claim is not that Farnborough Hall contains a stolen art work, it is that an artwork has been stolen from Farnborough Hall. Maproom (talk) 20:01, 8 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello, Lajmmoore,
 * This article, for some reason, has been an on-going target of vandalism so I've protected it for 3 months. I reverted to an earlier version of the article from this summer but if you could review the article in its current state, I would welcome your participation. Sorry for this little bit of chaos, this is very unusual activity for a Wikipedia article about a country house. Liz Read! Talk! 06:33, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Liz thanks so much, and apologies for the delay in reply, I was away for the last two weeks. I'll take a look at it this week. Lajmmoore (talk) 11:08, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * , thank you for your attention. Note that the chaos started on July 4th of this year − or at least, that was when I first became aware of it. Maproom (talk) 17:17, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * https://www.christies.com/lot/lot-6387095?ldp_breadcrumb=back&intObjectID=6387095&from=salessummary&lid=1
 * Here is the painting that caused Caroline to kill herself. 73.134.65.39 (talk) 14:18, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Page revision
Hello fellow editors, I've been working on a re-write on the page, and the following points are ones that I have been unable to find a supporting secondary reference for: I would be really grateful if other editors come across references that support this content, that they could add it, and the relevant citation back to the article. The National Trust guidebook from the 1990s might be a very useful resource, but I do not have a copy of it. Many thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 16:17, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * "The family first moved into the house in 1692." (addressed 30.10.22)
 * That William Holbech II's Grand Tour had a particular focus on Venice?
 * That the hall was used as a hospital in the Second World War. (addressed 30.10.12)
 * That Henry Hakewill "undertook extensive remodelling of the gardens" in the early 19th century - the reference given is this - https://whatsonoxon.co.uk/online-leaflet/farnborough-hall - but it makes no mention of Hakewill.
 * "The house has been described by historians as a "small but exquisite" country house with the original Roman busts and plasterwork being exemplary" - does not say which historians, or give a source for the quotation.
 * That Sanderson Miller was a "good friend" of Capability Brown?
 * That reproductions of the Canalettos and Paninis hang in the house. (I don't necessarily doubt this, but a reference needs to be given for the claim)


 * @Liz, @Maproom, just tagging you in, so you don't miss what I've done. @DavidFarmbrough, it appears it was the Ralegh family (related to Walter Raleigh) - I can send you the pdf of the journal article that mentions this if you like? Lajmmoore (talk) 16:33, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. I suspect that it will be more helpful to put "citation needed" in where we are unable to verify a bit of information, rather than to delete it, as this will help future editors verify or refute. DavidFarmbrough (talk) 23:53, 3 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi @DavidFarmbrough, yes absolutely in normal circumstances - it seemed to me though, that for the time being since the page had been subject to repeated vandalism unevidenced edits, that only having verified information on it was the most prudent course. Lajmmoore (talk) 07:50, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * In the circumstances, I agree with . As a pedantic note, no criticism intended, there has been no vandalism. The intention of those edits was not, I believe, to disrupt, but to present claims for which no valid evidence was presented. Maproom (talk) 08:02, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks @Maproom and thanks for the correction - I've struck vandalism through - you're quite right! Lajmmoore (talk) 08:06, 7 October 2022 (UTC)