Talk:Baluster

Untitled

The OED thinks the banister also refers to the handrail, and this is certainly common usage in my experience. I think the article should be updated to reflect this, rather than claiming the use of banister for handrail is erroneous. http://www.askoxford.com/concise_oed/banister?view=uk

Winjer (talk) 14:32, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

• I agree. I've made that change; if someone wants to revert that, please support your opinion that this widespread usage is in error with a reference. Thanks! Jutta (talk) 22:16, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1911: "Baluster"

The following is the entire text from Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1911 "Baluster":

BALUSTER (through the Fr. from the Ital. balaustro, so-called from a supposed likeness to the flower of the βαλαύστιον, or wild pomegranate; the word has been corrupted in English into "banister"), a small moulded shaft, square or circular in stone or wood and sometimes in metal, supporting the coping of a parapet or the rail of a staircase, an assemblage of them being known as a balustrade. The earliest examples are those shown in the bas-reliefs representing the Assyrian palaces, where they were employed as window balustrades and apparently had Ionic capitals. They do not seem to have been known to either the Greeks or the Romans, but early examples are found in the balconies in the palaces at Venice and Verona. In the hands of the Italian revivalists they became features of the greatest importance, and were largely employed for window balconies and roof parapets.

The term "baluster shaft" is given to the shaft dividing a window in Saxon architecture. In the south transept of the abbey at St Albans, England, are some of these shafts, supposed to have been taken from the old Saxon church. Norman bases and capitals have been added, together with plain cylindrical Norman shafts.

A Wikipedia editor insists on reinserting This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). Encyclopædia Britannica (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. {{cite encyclopedia}}: Missing or empty |title= (help) in place of the simple reference: "Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1911, s.v. "Baluster". The confusion may be between quoted text and ideas that are given cited sources. A comparison between the above and the expanded, edited and corrected modern version shows that the phrases in red, given modern citations, are retained in the present article. Just so you know. --Wetman (talk) 02:27, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Closing sentence - "erroneous" use of the word bannister

It appears that an anonymous editor is determined to add content regarding the "erroneous" use of the word bannister to this article. If this is a true quote, as it appears in the article, it must have a source. It appears, however, that the quote is in fact a quote of this same article, which is grossly inappropriate. If it is a true statement, it should be sourced appropriately.

I have removed the incorrect quotation and will leave it to the editor who originally added it (or someone else who can find appropriate references) to properly source it if re-added. It would also be good to explain why such minutae regarding the usage of a different word should appear in the article "Baluster"... LUxlii (talk) 04:51, 25 May 2014 (UTC)