Talk:Porch

Untitled
There are many kinds of porches. 4 x 4 feet plain wood platforms to 12 x 20 screen porches complete with chandeliers and pool tables. and they aren't all in front of (single family detached) houses. Apartment buildings might have them. Arguably, the landing at the top of an external stair might be called a porch. - bill, 2004 Dec 9, 03:36 UTC
 * Welldone, Bill, that's just what this article needed. You are absolutely right and I'll leave it to you to add further content. I had only got involved in this because the originator seemed somewhat concerned about his style. Dieter Simon 22:37, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Integral Porches
Not all porches project from a house.

"An integral porch is one whose floor is set within the main structure, rather than being attched to the house, as in a projecting porch. Also called an inset porch." From page 182 of American Architecture by Cyril M. Harris, published 1998 by Norton.

--Fredgamble 08:32, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Definition
"For a quick definition, a porch is a porch." That is not a definition... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.164.59.242 (talk) 20:26, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Informal merge discussion
I am looking into this because I ran across a perplexing barrage of stub dictionary entry articles on break-off subjects that actually mean the same thing or are simply variations of the same thing. I can understand if there is an article that has grown to a size where splitting is necessary, but to have a ton of "Stub-class" dictionary entries, often with only a "See also" section (or some other section) added to propel the article to "Start-class". This just makes a mockery out of the article classification system as well as creating a system of related stub or start class articles that will never be improved.
 * The above Integral Porches section and the Definition section actually supports that a porch is a porch. This includes:


 * Screened porch,
 * Sleeping porch, and
 * Veranda that has three images of various porches and what some call a "screened-in porch". The talk page states, veranda is a large balcony on the level of a ground floor.


 * Porch sitting is a well referenced start-class article that might even be included.
 * Consolidating many dictionary stub entries or career stub or start-class articles into one place, thus creating a single better article, would be a vast improvement, natural, and it would seem uncontroversial, even though there will be "article defenders" that may argue differently just for the sake of it. I realize I could just start a merge request but I like to explore possible "friendly" discussions, that might result in better collaboration, that could reduce unnecessary linking and "See also" sections, that seem to go off into tangents not actually related. An editor at Talk:Screened porch stated "...alternate names for an already-existing article on this subject" and this sums it up fairly nicely as that is exactly what we have. We should split articles when this is an improvement or necessitated by size, and not just to "created articles". I will include links to this discussion on the related articles to hopefully create a fruitful discussion. Otr500 (talk) 12:40, 19 August 2017 (UTC)


 * My rule on these is, "What best serves the reader?"  From the examples given, some of these might demonstrate WP:Notability, which shows that we could have an article on them, not that we must have such an article. But overall, it would be a more readable article if merged. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:15, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I reorganized the article, to add the various types of "porches" in sub-sections, that also have articles on Wikipedia. The main purpose is not only for consideration of future merging of articles that "should be merged" but possibly articles that "can be merged", to create a better main article. The optimum scenario to me is an article with relevant sections, that can be "split" when a section becomes too large, that minimizes the practice of having several stubby-stub or dictionary type entry articles into one better presented article. This is only a first round as I found a lot of referenced information, that can be added as content, and articles determined that "should" really be merged will add even more with those references. I suppose this would depend if there is consensus (agreeable or by silence) on the above or if it should remain as a type of in-article listing. Another thing is that while I can move articles I am not experienced enough in the various stages involved in merging an article, or several, into a main article, as well as any that might have been omitted. At any rate comments on this would be appreciated, such as input on reasoning that merging of some articles would be good while others might be better retained separately. Otr500 (talk) 17:29, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Adding the various types of "porches" in sub-sections of Porch, with an eye to possible future merger, is reasonable. Adding Porch sitting (as was suggested almost seven years ago) would not be, though it could well be linked to in "See also". As I just pointed out in that talk section, porch sitting is not just sitting on a porch, as I sometimes do on a total stranger's porch to rest for a minute while walking around the city, much less a kind of porch. It is an activity with well recognized social significance. (See the references there.) --Thnidu (talk) 18:27, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I added things that I ran across but upon reflection the activity is not a porch. I am from the south, we have a porch and such a "tradition", so would not be an appropriate merge. Thanks, Otr500 (talk) 03:32, 24 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Against merge. Also put a merge discussion tag on all articles involved if anyone is actually considering this.  This article lists the various types of porches and links to those articles.  Couldn't fit all that information here, and it just reads easier to have these mentioned in separate articles like is now.   D r e a m Focus  05:58, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your comments Dream Focus. I am the editor that added the "various types of porches" which I indicated above. To be clear: I have not suggested that all (every article listed) should be merged, just that some should (especially non or poor referenced), so I think you might have misunderstood. I ran across several articles, that includes some like:


 * Arizona room, an unsourced 138 word (thus non-notable) article, tagged for possible OR in 2014. It does list one dead link. An Arizona room is called a porch in most states with a couple of exceptions. On a WP:BEFORE I couldn't fine any reliable references that weren't advertisements. Someone else may have better luck.
 * Carolina porch redirects to Rain porch which is a three referenced (one dead), with 182 words (stub) that is still a porch
 * A "Florida room" redirects to Sunroom that might be better as a stand-alone.


 * Some have references, like Veranda (open-air gallery or porch) with five references, one that has a definition reference mentioning in passing that the spelling is "veranda" not "verandah". The second entry (dictionary type) on that page is vagina or vulva? and a definition. Another reference is to a Google book listing of A History of Architecture and Urbanism in the Americas with no page number. One is another dictionary reference which leaves two possibly reliable references for a 303 word sectioned-off stub. This may be notable enough for a stand-alone article with better references.
 * There is no mandate to start a merge request when considering merges and investigating. Some of these stubs might be better merged so we don't have something like White car, Teal car, or Orange car, that could be included in an article titled car in sections.
 * If I decide evidence indicates some should be merged I will ping you (and list it as controversial of course with merge templates) on a case by case basis because "the other side" is always important. Otr500 (talk) 07:58, 29 November 2017 (UTC)