Template talk:Modern architecture

Jump to navigation Jump to search

New template[edit]

Started this new template today, feel free to use it. I am planning on placing it on included articles except those on archhistory template, which is what this template is endebted to. Maybe once these are up to same quality there will be more overlap. DVD+ R/W 19:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Discussion on format[edit]

I wonder whether this template and "postmodernism" should be re-formated so it spans the width of a page. It's accompanyment with images at the moment is always a little forced and awkward - especially if the article is image heavy (which most architecture articles should be IMHO). Reformatting to 100% wide would enable the template to be placed consistently at the bottom of the articles page and not interfere unduly with the layout. --Mcginnly | Natter 08:12, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

ro:Format:Modernarch


I like. DVD+ R/W 20:20, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Mayan Revival architecture[edit]

Regarding this diff I meant to refer to Mayan Revival architecture. --Mcginnly | Natter 15:58, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Heliopolis style[edit]

User:Xlance would like to add Heliopolis style to this template. What's the consensus opinion? --Mcginnly | Natter 16:33, 17 January 2007 (UTC)


Since Heliopolis style is absolute local, it's not the right place for it. Thanks Xlance 19:55, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Remove Jugendstil[edit]

Hi, Jugendstil is being merged into Art Nouveau, so there will be duplicate links on the template. Therefore, it should be removed. --Stomme (talk) 14:15, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. Now should Structuralism (architecture) added? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:58, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
I've added it. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

new template?[edit]

In the "History of Architecture" template, it has Modernism and Postmodernism as two different choices and rigthfully so. Shouldnt there be two different templates then for modern and postmodern architectural styles as oposed to this singular one we have now? I am willing to do it, i just wat to check with others to see if my reasoning is flawed.--Found5dollar (talk) 13:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree, this template is all over the place.Vinay84 (talk) 12:39, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

American Craftsman[edit]

Shouldn't this template include American Craftsman? It can be considered a major movement and is also experiencing a significant resurgence at the moment. The911s (talk) 01:45, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Modern or contemporary?[edit]

It seems to me that most of the architectural styles included in this template are not modernist at all, but contemporary, which can be very confusing. Perhaps (in an extreme case) the title of this template should be changed? TheNk22 (talk) 15:44, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Agree, the scope of this and the title are inconsistent. The Modern architecture article talks of Postmodernism succeeding and replacing Modern architecture but this template has Postmodernism.Vinay84 (talk) 12:37, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree that there is an issue, there seems to be a confusion in this template. But the definition of contemporary architecture on its page seems to indicate that it refers only to 21st-century architecture. So changing the title won't fix it. I propose to split this into a modern and a postmodern template. Herrikez (talk) 15:23, 13 June 2020 (UTC)