From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Catalan-speaking Countries which aims to expand and organise information better in articles related to the history, languages, and cultures of Catalan-speaking Countries. Please participate by editing the article, or visit the project page for more details.

Catalan-speaking Countries Portal

	Spain Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	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.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the assessment scale.

---

Contents 1 High-speed rail controversy 2 why so long? 3 Accent 4 Rationale for cleanup template? 5 Material and cost 6 Foto very old 7 Tower spires influenced by cubism? 8 Construction Time 9 When did construction begin? 10 Request to move the name 10.1 Survey 10.1.1 Survey - in support of the move 10.1.2 Survey - in opposition to the move 10.2 Discussion 11 Orientation 12 has the building been consecrated? 13 Greenpeace

[edit] High-speed rail controversy

A section should be added discussing the possible threat posed by the high-speed rail line being constructed near the basilica. http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/09/news/church.php?page=1 Gregohio 15:10, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I think that the wikipedia must be out of politic controversials about the path of the AVE. Currently this discussion is more about politics parties than for real reasons. You can find as many supporters as detractors of the project. Of course the ones to live under the future rail line, are detractors, and the party in the government affiliates are supporters. I think that the last paragraph of the introduction must not include this type of discussions, it don't deserve it. There are a lot of more important topics. Jose piratilla 22:15, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree with Gregohio. Though this matter may be resolved in the political realm, the issue involves a potential threat to the structural integrity of the church. The constuction committee itself is lobbying for a change in the path of the AVE for this reason. --76.167.43.150 04:52, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] why so long?

It says when they expect to complete it by, but somebody should add the reason why it takes so long to build - the intricacies, etc. Saccerzd 22:40, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

If the Sagrada Familia is a basílica, does that make it the only church to be so designated before construction was complete? - Montrealais

It's not yet concecrated, is it?--Aristocrates 23:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it is a basílica. 130.221.105.69 16:55, 22 September 2006 (UTC) Alberto

In Catalan, we say «Basílica» as a synonym of church, that's all. (Jordi Ferrer)

Jordi, this is not true. Basílica has two different meanings. The first is architectonic and only regards about the structure of the building. But in this case, the term Basílica is used to categorize the use of the church. As far as I know, the city of Barcelona is already complete in terms of parish. A church of this dimension can only be considered as a Cathedral. But, Barcelona already has a Cathedral, and it seems that it won't change. So it can't fit in the hierarchical distribution. The only solution is to consider it as a Basílica, that is, a church out of hierarchical distribution. Jose piratilla 22:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think the term "basilica" has the same generic meaning it may have in Spanish. A basilica (ignoring the Roman definition) is a church designated so by the Holy See. The Sagrada Familia, as colossal as it may be, is a church. Until it is designated otherwise, we should not confuse the matter. --76.167.43.150 04:59, 2 December 2007 (UTC) Alberto

Is it still under construction, or is it finished?

It is still under construction of course. Of the 18 towers, only 8 are finished. Jose piratilla 22:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the following "Since 1940 the architects Francesc Quintana, Puig Boada, and Lluís Gari have carried on the work." These architects are all now dead so it should refer to the past tense. It is now Jordi Bonet i Armengol who is the director of construction. (Lluís Gari's son)

The towers were originally intended to be three times higher... the [central] tower's total height will be one metre less than that of Montjuïc, as Gaudí believed that his work should not surpass that of God.

As the central tower is only ~1.5 times the height of the others, Gaudí himself can't have intended the towers to be three times higher, can he?

I think this cathedral is constructing by turkish hastarbeiters who don't even know how to make a concrete —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dars-dm (talk • contribs) 12:11, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Accent

The proper name in Catalan is Sagrada Família, not Sagrada Familia (although this name, without an accent, is perfectly correct in Spanish). So, I don't know in what language this article's supposed to be, but if the long official name used is Temple Expiatori de la Sagrada Família (Catalan) instead of Templo Expiatorio de la Sagrada Familia, then I think the article as a whole should be renamed/moved to Sagrada Família.--80.58.35.237 16:58, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

I think english wikipedia politics says that things have to be named in its native language if the translation in english is not used. So this article should be moved to Sagrada Família because Catalan is the native language of Barcelona.--62.15.156.164 13:41, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Page moved. UrbaneLegend 10:26, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry but such a dramatic change needs to be discussed beforehand. Please list the proposal at WP:RM, thanks. Asterion^talk 23:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I stop making the changes. But if I changed it was because there was already a discussion, nobody objected about the change and the only argument AVM gave to rename it (without discussing it here) was: "The word "familia" ("family") carries no accent, so this article's title has been misspelled for some time", what it is seems an ignorance of the reality (probably (s)he didn't know that the official name is not in Spanish but in Catalan). Anyway, as you said, I will propose it. Thank you, --Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 00:34, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Done.--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 00:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate that. This would stop any possible edit war in future. --Asterion^talk 02:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

The name of the temple is "Temple Expiatori de la Sagrada Família", in Catalan. All the discussion above seems not to have had the proper conclusion if this long name is not correctly spelled in Catalan too. Joan Solà (talk) 21:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting points but what do we do with the phrase "often simply called the ..." In this case, I don't think there should be an accent as the statement seems to be indicating what most people call this place. No one would use an accent except those familiar with Catalan, which is very few people, certainly when compared with those familiar with Castillian—the latter group would obviously simply refer to the this place as the "La Sagrada Familia" with no accent. Thus if it is "often simply called the ..." with an accent by those in Catalonia, it is often simply called the "Sagrada Familia" everywhere else. So the statement as it is now, with the accent, seems misleading to me. 76.167.43.150 (talk) 18:47, 16 March 2008 (UTC) - Alberto

[edit] Rationale for cleanup template?

Could the person who tagged this article for cleanup please say why. Templates are useless by themselves. Furthermore, the page looks fine to me. - UrbaneLegend 10:27, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

7 days and no reply. Template removed. UrbaneLegend 15:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the 'future building' tag. While it isn't complete, there is little that is speculative about the article, other than its completion date. It is hardly of the speculative nature of most future buildings or events and was clearly added by a pedant. Damiancorrigan 13:17, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Alphachimp. Apparently last 18 July 2006 your Alphachimpbot tool re-added, for no apparent reason, a cleanup tag to the Sagrada Familia article.

Last February user UrbaneLegend politely asked: "Could the person who tagged this article for cleanup please say why. Templates are useless by themselves. Furthermore, the page looks fine to me." ... He/she got no answer, so he/she went on to remove the tag on March.

Now (July 2006) the cleanup tag is back again, apparently thanks to your bot. I agree with user UrbaneLegend: the article looks fine to me, too. I wonder, what needs to be cleaned up? I find it interesting and informative, with no language problems, no mistakes, no useless info. I believe the tag is spurious. Perhaps you could teach us about what has been found wrong in the article? --Regards, AVM 00:16, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

The article doesn't cite its sources and I found a mistake in the orientation of the facades (which I corrected) unless the museum on the basilica site is incorrect. I'm afraid I don't know anything more, but without sources or acknowledgements it is hard to trust. Also, the images are confusing since they get in the way of the text since there are so many of them - suggest gallery section. --Aristocrates 23:52, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Material and cost

What material does the building consist of? Also, what is the estimated cost of construction, and who is paying it - the government? The local archdiocese? Vatican? Funnyhat 22:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

We visited this stunning building two days ago on 22 June 2006. It appears that multiple materials are in use. There is a great deal of seemingly traditional stone masonry, such as you might find in mediaeval cathedrals, but also clearly visible evidence of reinforced concrete work with masonry facings, use of various glazed and plain tiles and tile fragments (such as can be found elsewhere in Parc Guell), and in some places the decorative work also includes broken bottles. If you are interested in the construction process then I heartily recommend a visit - it is a very active building site with a lot going on and much to see.

I know nothing of the funding / costs involved.

Al 13:20, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The funding of the construction (since its beginnings) is obtained only through private donations of individual persons. That's why the works were delayed some times on the inicial stages: there weren't enough donations. Nowadays there's little problem because the incomes from the visits to the temple provide enough founds to keep going with the construction.

No institutional help is being provided (in fact some of the decisions from the public authorities do not help the cause a lot). RR 14 July 2006.

[edit] Foto very old

The photo in which the city goes out of barcelona and to the bottom(fund) the Sacred family is very ancient. It is not from recent Barcelona, at least it is 20 years old. Barcelona has changed very much and is a great city, not since like it goes out in the photo. To look for the current photo that there are many

-> If you're talking about the "Sagrada Familia and Eixample viewed from Montjuic" photo you're wrong, I took this picture myself in June 2006, as specified in the caption --Jullag 08:57, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tower spires influenced by cubism?

Re: "the towers on the Nativity facade are crowned with geometrically shaped tops that were probably influenced by Cubism".

I am not convinced that this is true. He was a master of geometric form long before Cubism. Furthermore Robert Hughes opines that Picasso (a major player in Cubism) may very well have been influenced by Gaudi since his studio overlooked the famous chimneys of the Palau Guell. Either way, it seems like a statement that is difficult to back up. Should it be nixed or altered at all?

130.221.105.69 00:01, 21 September 2006 (UTC) Alberto

[edit] Construction Time

I'd like to see a more direct explanation as to why the construction has taken over 100 years. From reading it, I can GUESS that it's because of the complexity and enormity of the design. However, I'm sure that many other readers will wonder and so perhaps this should be addressed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Kaihoku (talk • contribs) 17:12, 4 December 2006 (UTC). Allah topunuzu davul etsin

Yes, the construction time seems to be one of the most notable aspects of the building, other than its complexity, yet it is explained very little in the text of the article and I find myself still wondering. Could someone more familiar with the subject please expand on this? Suntiger 01:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The construction has taken a long while because it relies on donations. Also, there was a period between approximately 1936 and 1950 where the main task was to rebuild Gaudi's models (a task that continues as new shards are studied). Nowadays, the architects are having to make designs from scratch as they are beginning to construct parts of the church that Gaudi did not design to the highest detail. This takes time especially as they mate up with older parts of the temple. There are always a few hangups and, as I see it right now, one of these is the resolution of the area where the apse stair cases, two of the evangelist towers, and the apse windows converge.76.167.43.150 04:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] When did construction begin?

When did construction begin? --Eamonnca1 06:05, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Orientation

The Sagrada Família is oriented to the North-West, so the main entrance will be at South-East. The Nativity façade, is the first one finished and it is the one of the right (so the North-East). The Passion one is the one of the left (South-West). So, I think the corrections were not perfectly correct...--Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 17:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] has the building been consecrated?

if not, any planned date?CorvetteZ51 14:09, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Greenpeace

I dont see a point to the Greenpeace section added. This is an article about Sagrada Família, and a small one-day rally help by a group like GP seems out of place to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PaulBH11 (talk • contribs) 21:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• I agree. The protest itself seems to have had nothing to do with the structure. I'm removing it. Speed8ump (talk) 23:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)