Talk:Talhenbont Hall

A building? An estate? A family?
, after all the recent edits, the very first paragraph still tells the reader that -- and thus that it is a building, that in the past it was an estate, and that it now is part of an estate. All of this may for all I know be true; but if so then its exposition could and should be made clearer. The second (and longer) half of the introduction is about the building's (and/or the estate's) past and present ownership: which certainly is nontrivial information, but whose presentation in the introduction seems to outweigh the description there of what the "hall" was and is.

Beyond its introduction, this draft seems less interested in the building than in matters that are little more than genealogical. This is odd for an article that sets off by telling the reader that such-and-such "is a grade II listed building". -- Hoary (talk) 23:39, 23 October 2023 (UTC)


 * , Ok, that's fine, I simply presented the current evidence for the site. I'll look at the article tomorrow (E.S.T. 19:43). But please tell me if this could be a new article or not... ? Cltjames (talk) 23:44, 23 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Cltjames, is it about a building, an estate, a family, a building and an estate, or an estate and a family? Please say. Then its content will need to be juggled and trimmed accordingly. The result will have to be judged as a candidate article about the specified subject. (If it's about the family, then I'll recuse myself from evaluating it, I have no knowledge of these matters and no reference materials.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:59, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I would like to bring this article to your attention: Llugwy Hall. I believe that the references presented and the fact it is not in the Pevsner books make it more of an article about a family. The only facts I could find about Talhenbont were about its owners, except for the Coflein webpage which gives a very brief history of Talhenbont Hall. Also, the Cadw article specifies a history of the family, which is why I added the family history section. So, I am correctly using the sources and the information on display is all I can find about the hall. I cannot find any literature about the hall, but only about the estate's owners. So, really the article is about a family and the adjoining former estate of Plas Gwynfryn and the family's connection to Corsygedol and Nannau, Wales family estates (William Vaughan (MP)). Also, could you give some advice about Nannau and maybe any recommendation as to whether the context fits into the article? So, to conclude, would it be better suited to remove the infobox like the Lugwy article, and make the article more about the Vaughan ownership and subsequent owners, 1607-1959? Or re-trim the article removing a bulk of the work so that the article only includes a brief mention of the Vaughan ownership, then remove the family tree? Then there is a gap between 1959 and 1978, and the current owners. But I feel there is so little about the hall, that the paragraphs about the family estate are the only real bulk about the hall's history, and I feel it shouldn't be changed much. Unless you have any other suggestions, please? To assess, because of the lack of information regarding Talhenbont, the article does seem to be more of a Vaughan family (there is a Nigerian Vaughan family) article. However, to better connect articles linked here, I believe there should be a Corsygedol article and separate Talhenbont article and a Vaughan (Vaughan of Corsygedol?) article connecting all the people involved. Only the material for the hall's is so sparse, so I don't know which direction to go in.Cltjames (talk) 15:50, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * As assessed, in the long term there is the opportunity to do an expansion for the FitzGerald dynasty section and make a separate House of Corsygedol adding the section Vaughan family dynasty into a newly created article. And then, separate articles for the halls of Talhenbont, and Corsygedol. But I don't have all the reading material available to make the Corsygedol hall article, which I'm sure is available, unlike Talhenbont. Also, the material used in the FitzGerald article is all potentially WP:RS because it's all over 100 years old. Cltjames (talk) 20:24, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, so I've thought about the potential multiple articles that could be created for this subject of the Vaughan family ownership of Talhenbont. Then I added a description from Cadw (which I should have done in the first place, sorry). I think there isn't too much trivia anymore, but a better introduction explaining the article in full, then a better explained ownership section without a family tree. I think it's good to go this time, unless you still feel there is too much trivia...? Cltjames (talk) 21:49, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * , Llugwy Hall looks to me less like an article about a family, more like jottings for a possible article about a family. But so far as it is an article about a family, it seems strangely mistitled. Unless, that is, "something-something Hall" is a conventional way of describing Welsh families. (Cf "House of something-something", meaning a family -- e.g. "House of Dunkeld", which reads to me like mere mumbo-jumbo, though my failure to appreciate it may of course be due to some failing in me.) If, as you suggest, there's scant literature about Talhenbont hall (i.e. the building), but there is sufficient literature about the family to show its notability (a matter that I cannot judge) and the family isn't referred to as a "hall", then some new title is called for, and the draft (candidate article) shouldn't start by describing the building (whether this building is called a "hall", a "mansion", or anything else). -- Hoary (talk) 23:58, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I think my idea of creating several articles is better than trying to fit all the separate families into one. But I also think Talhenbont has a historical value and is a relatively important site today, and could do with a small article for other related people and places. I would like to finish creating a suitable historic home article for Talhenbont, so, I would like to ask for your help in trimming the 'trivia' please. From my point of view, the article is better than Llugwy Hall (which is a mess frankly), but is on the same lines of describing a family (dynasty). So, I added hall description which I think works for the article. Otherwise, I've tried to label the families involved with sub headings. In my opinion this is the only way to secure the history of the hall's occupants, but by all means if needed, the ownership can be drastically downsized again to have a very brief history of the owners (then I'll look into separate articles for Vaughan and Corsygedol). So, my end of the work is done, therefore, could you please input suggestions for a Talhenbont hall article, aka trimming pre current hall estate owners, and Plas Hen (pre Talhenbont) owners, that's what you need? But, for the record, I think it's ready for submission in comparison to the average historic home article on Wikipedia. Cltjames (talk) 01:25, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, again, I seem to be working backward and missing the key points for referencing the estate correctly, sorry. I was looking at Wynnstay and thought about how it displays multiple grade listed buildings and realised Coflein did have a list of outbuildings and garden web pages for Talhenbont which should be included. The article now should have enough bulk directly associated with the estate to be a historic home web page. At the same time, there's still the dilemma about the 'trivial' ancestry and ownership issue about being potentially off-topic. Again I find myself thinking a few extra paragraphs about the family's history is a good thing to further explain the dynamics of the hall's history in the local vicinity. But if you like I can cut down big parts and try creating new articles to better explain the Vaughan family in Wales. Can you confirm if this drafted article is acceptable now, or if it needs trimming again? Ps. I think the family history makes the article worth reading because it doesn't need to be too small a text. Cltjames (talk) 02:51, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Cltjames, an article about the family history isn't something I'd want to evaluate (or, sorry, even to read). Plenty of other editors do seem to appreciate such histories. An article about a building needn't, and I think shouldn't, be illustrated with coats of arms. You seem to think that it does need them; let's agree to disagree. I'm inclined to promote this to article status, to wish it well, and to let it vanish from my sight. -- Hoary (talk) 05:13, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @Hoary Ok thanks. I believe an article should be correctly verified through references, and thus should reproduce the description set by the sources used. And in this case the actual bulk of information about the hall is vague at best. However, there is a back story which compliments the history of the hall which is mentioned in the article, and I've simply added the text based on the description of Cadw and the few references I could I find, then I cross referenced with DWB & books and then elaborated. I appreciate your help in bringing my draft to a better standard, and hope it can be published for Wikipedians to enjoy reading about. The text really fills in the gaps on Wikipedia linking many articles about the Vaughan's and Talhenbont. And again, on average, the article is a higher standard than a lot of the Welsh hall Wikipedia articles, and in my opinion deserves a submission. Cltjames (talk) 05:26, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Renaming
Was the hall renamed in the 20th century (introduction), or was it renamed some time between 1845 and 1884 ("Ellis-Nanney baronets")? Or did the owners' 19th-century renaming only catch on in the 20th century, or what? -- Hoary (talk) 04:29, 25 October 2023 (UTC)


 * @Hoary it was during the tenure of the Ellis-Nanney family that the hall was renamed, as in 1845-1945/59. But unfortunately I cannot confirm the exact date. Cltjames (talk) 05:15, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Clean talk page
I've done some final English language grammar drafting as opposed to some American English used in the text. Also, I moved the article to Talhenbont Hall, capital H due to grammar reasons, so now both searches are available, depending on the user. I was wanting to ask if it's okay to delete the talk draft conversation and add a simple welcome disclaimer about the article, is that ok with you? Otherwise, I'm trying to get hold of newer images, and if any more information pops up I will add too. Cltjames (talk) 00:32, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Cltjames, it's most unusual to delete discussions in the talk pages of articles. It's only done exceptionally, and for good reason. Neither the obsolescence of what's said nor any grave misunderstanding by the original poster is a good reason. We do try to avoid excessive junk in talk pages, and the standard way to achieve this is by archiving. I don't think even this is yet necessary, but I'm not opposed to it and therefore I'll set it up. -- Hoary (talk) 02:16, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. Cltjames (talk) 03:29, 2 November 2023 (UTC)