Talk:Back-to-back house

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 05:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Now rated GA!--Dthomsen8 (talk) 16:21, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Bradford

I haven't got citations, but I know from experience (I used to live in one) that Bradford still has quite a lot of back-to-backs, either renovated into through-terraces or in their original form. The district around the university especially. The Bradford Museum also has a rebuilt row, showing their usage from the Victorian age to 1950s. This might be useful info, but I haven't got references at hand. If anyone can find them, it'd probably improve the article. --Filipek (talk) 00:04, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Misattribution of quote?

While I am delighted that the article has reached GA, I am concerned by one edit. It trims a long quote I added from Hansard. No doubt it needed to be trimmed, but it has been done in a way which obscures the difference between the MP's own 1959 words, and his "reading into the record" of a medical officer's report during WWI. I'm not sure how to ameliorate this, without adding unwelcome length. Perhaps:

...that little had changed in generations. Wheeldon first quoted the 1918 medical officer:

(quote 1st para)

The MP then went on to comment:

(quote 2nd para)

It isn't a particularly elegant solution, as it breaks the blockquote, but at least it distinguishes the two sources of opinion. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 09:38, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

During the review, I couldn't disagree that the length was an issue (and I recall you noting this in an edit summary when you wrote it at the time). I don't think the content of this would have an impact on the article's good article credibility so any further improvements shouldn't be a cause for concern. Perhaps the current 2nd paragraph could be converted to prose instead of direct quotation, to retain the message being relayed?

On a separate note, I am considering sending it to DYK, if you have any hook suggestions. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 09:49, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

I think the MP's passion comes across better in his own words, rather than a flat paraphrase; I can implement my suggestion above if nothing better springs to mind.

As for DYK, I'd suggest something about slum conditions continuing into the 1960s - i.e. not a focus on their modernisation, but the grimness. Is it OK to use a plural form? E.g. DYK that back-to-back houses relied on communal toilets in the shared courtyard. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 11:47, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Seems inconsistent?

Is the Birmingham example the last courtyard example surviving or isn't it? Apparently, the BBC says it is, but the next paragraph implies otherwise. 86.5.88.131 (talk) 07:15, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Doesn't always sound very neutral?

Some of the text on heritage value sounds, frankly, like advertising for the cause. As do the comments about relaxing building regulations. There are surely downsides here e.g. that whatever modcons you put in, you still have ventilation issues with only one exterior wall etc. I'm damn sure there are people who want building regulations further relaxed, but that's only one side. 86.5.88.131 (talk) 07:19, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

UK wide?

The article describes this as UK housing, but all the examples are English. Was this form of housing found in the other countries of the UK? 86.5.88.131 (talk) 07:22, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Birmingham

"Birmingham: We Lived Back to Back: the Real Story" by Ted Rudge and Mac Joseph, published by Fonthill Media, 2015, ISBN 978-1-78155-267-4.

The outhouse for laundry was called the brewhouse.

The dustbins, or the area reserved for them, was called the miskins.

These two meanings of words are missing from Wiktionary and, it seems, the whole Web. 46.33.143.125 (talk) 11:17, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

Public Health Act 1875

This required new houses to be connected to sewers. However, I don't see where in the Act it gives powers to local authorities to ban the building of new back-to-back housing. Please clarify this. 46.33.143.125 (talk) 11:51, 6 October 2024 (UTC)