Talk:Rotunda (architecture)

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Greece Low‑importance

	Greece portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greece, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greece 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.GreeceWikipedia:WikiProject GreeceTemplate:WikiProject GreeceGreek
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

European history Low‑importance

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe 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.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article contains broken links to one or more target anchors:

[[Steinway & Sons#Special designs|Art Case Piano]] The anchor (#Special designs) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

The anchors may have been removed, renamed, or are no longer valid. Please fix them by following the link above, checking the page history of the target pages, or updating the links.

Remove this template after the problem is fixed | Report an error

Merge proposal

I just proposed at Round church that it should be merged into this article. AFAICT there's no reason for listing some buildings under the one title and some under the other (and indeed, eg Temple Church under both). --Thrissel (talk) 12:55, 30 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This article is far too broad for such a merge; rotundas are a common architectural feature used in all types of buildings. The round church article is about a specific subset of church buildings, not just their architectural features. oknazevad (talk) 05:03, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't get it. What else than architecture makes them specific? Certainly nothing that I can see in the round church article. --Thrissel (talk) 15:53, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rotunda (architecture). 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/20110927020145/http://sitemason.vanderbilt.edu/newspub/bjfTyg?id=2166 to http://sitemason.vanderbilt.edu/newspub/bjfTyg?id=2166

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) 02:10, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Change of name

I just changed the wrong name Osterlar to the right name Osterlars, which made a link to the church appear. ChurchNerd (talk) 07:11, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 23 April 2025

It has been proposed in this section that multiple pages be renamed and moved.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Rotunda (architecture) → Rotunda
Rotunda → Rotunda (disambiguation)

– Clear primary topic by both pageviews and long-term significance. Other stuff does not have nearly as many views, or is purely a WP:PTM. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:42, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. WikiNav for March says the proposed architecture topic is the most popular, but the other two generic topics also get visible reader interest. At the same time, the architecture is listed on top, while the other two are at the very bottom, in the "other uses" section.

Maybe we first need to format a MOS:DABCOMMON section on top?

Overall, the pageviews/clickstream numbers for March aren't convincing. With 322 total views, we could only identify 72 clicks on the first item (~22%), and there were 57 filtered clickstreams, 22 to script, 17 to geometry.

Even if we very generously assume that the long tail of filtered clickstreams has the exact same distribution (72/111 = ~65%), that's still 57*0.65 = ~37, so ~109 total clicks on the first item, compared to 322 total - which is only ~34%.

If we can't barely get a third of readers to click on the first item in a list, there's no real primary topic by usage.

For long-term significance, we first need some comparative analysis including these other two general topics. (Oppose) --Joy (talk) 10:12, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of the other two topics are of nearly the same longterm significance. One is a largely unreferenced, minor typeface variant. The other is a type of polyhedron, an esoteric math topic which, at least currently, fails both WP:INDISCRIMINATE and WP:GNG. I don't see how they are equivalent at all. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:52, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so why would this chunk of readers be finding these two and clicking on them, is the formatting of the list causing them to be unduly promoted? --Joy (talk) 05:05, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Clear primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:18, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support as primary topic. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 22:22, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]