Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a2634b2bcf299de8

Jump to content

Talk:Capitol Hill Branch Library

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Bri in topic Withering review

The original donated property

[edit]

I'm pretty sure the original donated property that was sold to buy this one is where Kay Bullitt currently lives, and that she intends to will it to the city. If someone can verify that, it should probably be in the article. - Jmabel | Talk 18:25, 24 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

The Historylink article by Becker states that the Henrys donated property at the northwest corner of Harvard and Prospect to the city. 1125 Harvard Ave is on the northwest corner of Harvard and Prospect according to ordinary maps and county records. King County records and the Orbis West archive source in the draft indicate that 1125 Harvard is the Bullit house. Is this OK or do we still need a secondary source for the whole thing? ☆ Bri (talk) 19:47, 24 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Withering review

[edit]
  • Charles Mudede (April 17, 2013), "I Hate the Beacon Hill Library, and You Should Too: A Journey to Seattle's Heart of Darkness", The Stranger

Critical reviews are always good for expressive works, but I'm having trouble summarizing this neutrally. The writer said something about why the Capitol Hill Branch's architecture is good and the Beacon Hill branch is bad (I think). ☆ Bri (talk) 01:12, 25 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

The article's quip about Capitol Hill's branch isn't really worth including. The rest of it reads like a rant about race more than a critique of architecture, so I would be hesitant to even include it in the Beacon Hill article. SounderBruce 02:03, 25 December 2017 (UTC)Reply
Glad I didn't leap to include this, as tempting as it was. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:17, 25 December 2017 (UTC)Reply