Talk:Mentmore Towers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Buckinghamshire. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
??? This page has not yet been assigned a rating on the importance scale.
The article on Mentmore Towers is supported by the Golf WikiProject, which is an attempt to improve the quality and coverage of Golf related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page; if you have any questions about the project or the article ratings below, please consult the FAQ.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Golf Portal
Architecture Portal
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the assessment scale.

Didn't this place recently burn down?

Not as far as I'm aware. -- Francs2000 09:31, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "9/11 films"

a kind of a theme tune for 9/11 films: what are "9/11 films"? Hoary 11:14, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

It's not one of my edits but even I know the answer to that one - or is there a catch to this question that I'm not getting? Whatever? I can't see what it's got to do with Mentmore, irony is not encyclopedic so it can probably be safely removed - what are you doing here Hoary anyway, little off the beaten track for you isn't it? Giano | talk 15:21, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Oh, I'm just sticking my nose in where it's not wanted, as usual. I just got too bored by my janitorial duties at the talk page of the ghastly Elvis Presley. Anyway [raises voice], it's a free country, innit? (It isn't? I'm condemned to tabloid fodder?)
Really, I think there've been films about this 9/11 but guess you don't mean that; there's also the US thing, but I'm only dimly aware of a single film about it, Flight Something or Other. -- Hoary 07:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PoV? Crazed editorializing?

What the hell is going on in this article? It has just lost:

Those wooed were not greatly impressed and hung on to their cash, probably because the banquets which included up to six courses of vegetarian food, accompanied by an assortment of varying colours of diarrhoea-inducing, non-alcoholic grape juice followed by over two hours of brain numbingly boring speeches were not to the palate of most international philanthropists. These speeches listed and detailed in minute detail the works of the World Government's ten ministries, whose number included the Ministry of Consciousness and the Ministry of Enlightenment. During one banquet an elderly Englishwoman who had had the foresight to equip herself with a hip flask asked when they were going to get to the Ministry got Fornication and Copulation. The banquets did not prove to be a success.

on grounds of PoVishness or similar. Non-verifiability, perhaps, but PoVishness? Right then, how about rephrasing "brain numbingly boring" as "alpha-wave-inducingly relaxing"? OK now? -- Hoary 07:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

"PoVishness"? [Checking my edit summary.] I believe the grounds were "crazed editorializing". :-) Frutti di Mare 07:23, 30 June 2006 (UTC).
Well! I'm shocked "Non-verifiability"??? well that's easily solved Hoary, you try drinking eight wine glasses of grape juice combined with a vegetarian chapati followed by two over ripe avocados - that should verify it for you! - and as for you Frutti di Mare (obviously another vegetarian) I can't see why these important details have to be removed, as the give a flavour (geddit?) of the lavish and unique entertaining experoenced by the lucky few at this historic moment in the house's history. Giano | talk 07:49, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
You da man, Giano. All right then, "crazed editorializing". I've tried to de-craze the following:
Those philanthropists who were wooed were not greatly impressed and hung on to their cash, perhaps because the banquets — which included up to six courses of an assuredly aperient combination of spicy vegetarian food and multicoloured non-alcoholic grape juices, followed by over two hours of alpha-wave-inducingly relaxing speeches — were not to their palate. These speeches discussed in considerable detail the works of the World Government's ten ministries, whose number included Consciousness and Enlightenment (although not fornication). The banquets do not appear to have been a financial success.
Any better? -- seaweed-eater 08:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Yeah right. Maybe after eight glasses of Chianti. Frutti di Mare 08:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC).
  • An I also object to this edit [1] by an editor (Aloan!!! obviously of low handicap) who has quite clearly never extracted his gold plated Pings from his soft top BMW in the club's carpark and read the long list of how to dress oneself for the benefeit of a memebership who don't know how to. Apparently, one wears long socks with tailored shorts, and never short shorts unless one is a woman in which case one can expose vast areas of overweight thigh. Sleeves must be below the armpit also unless one is a woman, where badly shaved armpits are acceptable. This very sarotial editor was once asked to leave because he refused to wear socks with deck shoes in the bar. Giano | talk 09:53, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
How long have you had this preoccupation with how to dress as a woman? Frutti di Mare 10:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Why halved?

There was something odd about this article. Suddenly it dawned on me: it's terse about the architecture. I soon realized that this article was something of a social history, while the inconspicuously linked Plans and interiors of Mentmore was the architectural description. The latter seems a bit wordy, but salvagable; was there a good reason for starting the two articles separately; and if not, is there a good reason to keep them apart now? -- Hoary 08:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

  • That article was written a long time ago by a new editor, who never got arownd to finishing it off, (I suspect!) before he disapeared. Giano | talk 09:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
What if I were to compress that article, with the eventual aim of chucking the result into this article and redirecting here? -- Hoary 10:01, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
What a card, that User:Ragussa! Frutti di Mare 10:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC).
Fine! Whatever you like Hoary, I probably won't ever edit this page again, as I feel insulted and persecuted here by ALoan who has clearly never graced an elite fairway - and a seafood medley (probably elderly calamari), clearly unused to haute cuisine, who obviously crash landed on his/her head while Yogic flying! Giano | talk 12:20, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
Oh no, Giano -- don't go off in a huff, or even a minute and a huff! Moreover, you know how it is: you're doomed to produce FAs. It's your destiny; you can't escape it. (Incidentally, what's an "Elite Fairway"? is it perhaps this with walnut trim?) -- baby octopodes washed down with champagne 13:40, 30 June 2006 (UTC)