Talk:Atrium (architecture)

Untitled

The original author wrote "The Burj Al Arab .... is considered to be the most significant landmark of the city."
I've seen it. I consider it to be 'showing off' of the worst kind. I'd call it vulgar, if that did not seem so inadequate. Now, someone will say that my remarks are subjective, but so is the original text. Who considers it that? - Brunnian (talk) 12:56, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Focus of the article

Hi, I'm wondering if there is any particular reason the article so heavily focuses on a specific type of contemporary atria? Is there a nuance in the word which has escaped me? Is it for example really a defining characteristic of atria in general that they are "often several stories high and having a glazed roof and/or large windows, usually situated within a larger multistory building and located immediately beyond the main entrance doors"? Yakikaki (talk) 19:44, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Probably not a definitional issue; sounds more like description than definition. It is possibly because of the general natural tendency toward recentism in articles, where what exists nowadays and is most familiar is more often included because more people (and therefore editors) are familiar with it, forgetting that there may be a long history behind something. As for the glut of modern images, that's likely the issue of architectural fandom that shows up in most architecture articles. The lead should probably should be refined to the barest definition and the multiple related architectural uses. Though as for "several stories", aren't most of those that are one-story considered merely courts or courtyards? I'm working to fix it some, let me know how it looks.Morgan Riley (talk) 20:20, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Looks a lot better in my opinion. I checked my available written sources and the two I could find both define atrium as either a roman central courtyard, or an open courtyard in front of an early christian church; none of them even mention modern atria (one of the books is a historical overview so maybe it's not so strange). Wiktionary defines it generally as "A square hall lit by daylight from above, into which rooms open at one or more levels." So maybe the article could be even further tweaked somehow? I'm not sure, it seems a bit un-encyclopedic somehow? Yakikaki (talk) 20:57, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I have a suggestion: how about merging the three sections Ancient atria, 19th-c atria and modern atria into one section, and then having a general gallery at the bottom, with illustrations of atria from different time periods? If people are OK with it I can do it. Yakikaki (talk) 21:04, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

First Picture in the Article is not an Atrium

(Roman) Atriums are mainly indoors with impluviums (small pools), while peristyles are usually found outdoors with lawns. The picture is the same one used in the Peristyle article (not exactly, the peristyle one is slightly zoomed out, but it's the same location). This picture is inaccurate and I was wondering if we could find a better example of an atrium or just remove the picture from this page. --208.108.138.120 (talk) 12:42, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

Yes

I am glad someone else noticed this. I'll look for one. Sofia Roberts (talk) 16:45, 11 March 2015 (UTC)