This article is within the scope of WikiProject Museums, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of museums 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.MuseumsWikipedia:WikiProject MuseumsTemplate:WikiProject MuseumsMuseums articles
This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places 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.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Open for any and all discussionCoal town guy (talk) 14:16, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I dunno. It seems to be a bunch of semi-unrelated facts strung together; I expect more cohesion in a start-class article. Also, I'm bothered by the amount of direct quotations. --Orlady (talk) 03:27, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I used the direct quotes from Jim Wood, the only person who bothered to write a history of Raleigh County WV, so in a sense, I wanted to provide authentic data, in other words, what did Alfred Beckley say about his own house. I agree about the organization part, and would be open to any and all suggestions. I tried to keep the purchase and original property name in the history sectionCoal town guy (talk) 12:39, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Just rewrote the article again, this time I think the flow is betterCoal town guy (talk) 13:01, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the flow is better, but I think it's still a stub because it still tells the reader very little about the house. The National Register nom is less informative than the typical NRHP nom, but it has a lot of basic information that I didn't find here. --Orlady (talk) 19:33, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have read the nom form in detail and beliecve it or not been to the house on a tour. The only other features, I could see wree those you would find in a real estate ad, fireplaces, exposed wooden beams, plans are to restore the house to its original form, which, I have had some fun with, they want to use clap board as Beckley did, but some other historians and I have discussed this and many want the log cabin, not the clap board. I will look and update some of the physical features.Coal town guy (talk) 21:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
