Talk:Bristol Beacon

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music

Bristol Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bristol, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bristol-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BristolWikipedia:WikiProject BristolTemplate:WikiProject BristolBristol

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	At least one photograph is included in this article
	This article has a map
	This article has an infobox

Rock music Low‑importance

	Rock music portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rock music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rock music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Rock musicWikipedia:WikiProject Rock musicTemplate:WikiProject Rock musicRock music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Artists who have performed at Colston Hall

I am wondering if the section Artists who have performed at Colston Hall should not be split off into a separate list. It's long and getting longer all the time and overbalances the article almost fatally. Given that it's one of not that many decent large venues in Bristol, there's a certain inevitability to all this - do we really need it in the main article? I am certainly not bold enough to want to have a try at it myself, but would be very interested if someone else thought it worth a go. Surely all venue articles don't have to have such a list?? At the end of the day it gets closer and closer to "er, most important touring artists have probably performed here" ... does it have real value? Cheers DBaK (talk) 08:05, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I mostly agree. It started off as a short but well referenced list of notable artists who had appeared through the decade,s and has now grown into a trainspotters list of everyone who has appeared - albeit still very well referenced. I don't see why the information should be deleted but I do think it might be an idea to split it off to List of artists who have appeared at the Colston Hall, Bristol where the trainspotters can have a field day. --Simple Bob^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 12:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I think if I recall rightly that it was me who set up the heading in the first place. I did so because the existing body of text had referred to visits by acts like the Beatles and the Rolling Stones, then others added people like Bob Marley and the Wailers and before you knew it, it was becoming a slghtly odd collection of artists. So the list approach seemed more consistent but as you say it is really no longer very useful. Peteinterpol (talk) 12:48, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed it! See List of artists who have performed at the Colston Hall. --Simple Bob^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 13:35, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. I think this is an excellent (and very fast!) outcome. Thank you both for your helpful comments and Bob for sorting it out - I do understand how these things mushroom, and I agree entirely that it was well-referenced (and how!) and did not need to be deleted. This new arrangement is I think the perfect outcome: the data is still there for those who want to read it, and the main article is restored to balance and readability. Nice one. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 13:50, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Feel free to tweak the very short list of artists that I added in the body of the article. --Simple Bob^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 14:50, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've tweaked the list name, losing the "the", to conform more with what this article says and what external sources seem commonly to say - it's now at List of artists who have performed at Colston Hall. See its Talk page for more. Hope this change is OK. Cheers DBaK (talk) 08:24, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I see it has been reverted back. If it hadn't then I would have done it myself as the original usage was more grammatically correct. --Simple Bob^{a.k.a. The Spaminator} (Talk) 08:58, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, fair enough, I still think you're wrong, but don't really care. DBaK (talk) 09:04, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And please don't forget to tell the hall that their website is wrong! :) DBaK (talk) 09:08, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Colston Hall. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725185849/http://www.colstonhall.org/aboutthehall/history/history2 to http://www.colstonhall.org/aboutthehall/history/history2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:37, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

I have just uploaded a load more photos to the Commons categroy for Colston Hall. Which do people think should be used to illustrate the article - particularly as the lead image? I feel that the current lead image and this image which are both used are very similar & we also have better images of the new foyer.— Rod ^talk 17:48, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I like File:Colston concert hall - new entrance and foyer - Bristol (geograph 2230467).jpg; I guess I'm a bit twitchy about the lead image not showing the traditional stone-arched archtecture frontage. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:42, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the pictures of the 1898 fire and rebuilding at this page might be nice, but I am nervous about claiming PD-old or similar licence.— Rod ^talk 19:29, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are also some older pics and good material in this weeks Bristol Post article.— Rod ^talk 19:49, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Architect for 1950 rebuild

The article says "The hall was rebuilt, and reopened in 1951 to mark the Festival of Britain. It was designed by J Nelson Meredith and constructed by William Cowlin." However this source says "The rebuild was carried out to the designs of the architect Sydney Gerald Howitt L.R.I.B.A." and "Strangely after the new auditorium was finally opened a Mr Singer, who was Sydney Howitt's section head, claimed all the credit, I'm told that his is the name mentioned on the Hall's Foundation Stone instead of Sydney Howitt's." Can anyone confirm or provide additional sources for the architect?— Rod ^talk 19:36, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Part of the problem with this article is that the source material isn't particularly great. A lot of the history came off an old archive of the hall's website, which is fine up to a point, but it could really do with an expert source from somebody who's done the proper research into the hall's architecture, popularity and rebuilds. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:22, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Colston Hall. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:40, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Name change

Although the hall's official name has changed, surely it's too soon to have changed the article name. Shouldn't we wait to see if the new name becomes the new common name? -- DeFacto (talk). 12:26, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wind turbine

The video of the new solar panels in this B24/7 article seems to show that the wind turbine on the 2009 foyer building is no longer there. Can anyone find a source for why it was removed? I guess it was getting on for 15 years old, maybe it was life expired. -- rbrwr ^± 11:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]