Talk:Goetsch–Winckler House

National Register of Historic Places Mid‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Michigan Low‑importance

	Michigan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Michigan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Michigan 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.MichiganWikipedia:WikiProject MichiganTemplate:WikiProject MichiganMichigan
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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.

Did you know nomination

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

The Goetsch–Winckler House

... that the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy once bought the Goetsch–Winckler House just two days before it was to be auctioned off? Source: Mack, Linda (January 2, 2005). "'Teardown city': Wrong address for Wright ; A conservancy works to save Frank Lloyd Wright houses from demolition". Star Tribune. p. 1F
- ALT1: ... that a lanai was added to the Goetsch–Winckler House because one of its owners wanted to be secure? Source: Bandes, Susan J. (Fall 1990). "Affordable Dreams: Frank Lloyd Wright and Mid-Michigan". The Frank Lloyd Wright Quarterly. Vol. 1, no. 3. p. 6.
- ALT2: ... that the Goetsch–Winckler House's owners rehired its architect to design a second house less than a decade after it was completed? Source: Tepfer, Diane (1991). "Alma Goetsch and Kathrine Winckler: Patrons of Frank Lloyd Wright and E. Fay Jones". Woman's Art Journal. 12 (2): 15. p. 16.
- ALT3: ... that the Goetsch–Winckler House was designed for two members of a co-op that disbanded after failing to obtain construction loans? Source: Sergeant, John (1984). Frank Lloyd Wright's Usonian Houses: The Case for Organic Architecture. Whitney Library of Design. p. 78.
- ALT4: ... that before the Goetsch–Winckler House was built, more than 50 financial institutions refused to give its owners loans due to its design? Source: Sergeant, John (1984). Frank Lloyd Wright's Usonian Houses: The Case for Organic Architecture. Whitney Library of Design. p. 78. (Technically, the owners were part of a co-op, and the rejected loans were intended to fund all the houses in the co-op, not just this one.)
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/SZA
- Comment: Hook suggestions welcomed

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 719 past nominations.

Epicgenius (talk) 21:10, 25 April 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Approved: Article is long enough, and generally in good shape. It's an old article, but expanded within the window. QPQ is done. I think ALT0 and ALT2 are the best of the hook: ALT1 is pretty opaque, to my reading, and I'm not sure how interesting ALT3 and ALT4 would be to a general audience. If using ALT2, I would be inclined to link Wright on "its architect". Those two hooks are cited and included in the article.

Freedom of Panorama law for buildings in the United States requires that the building be visible from a public place: looking at the map on the page, the images seem to be taken from the house's grounds and driveway, but by the very scientific method of looking on Google Street View, I think we're fine, as the Street View car was able to photograph the house from the road. That question aside, there are no evident copyvio or BLP concerns. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 14:04, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review UC. (With regards to freedom of panorama, the building was completed prior to December 1, 1990, which according to c:COM:FOP US makes the building itself public domain except for the plans, regardless of whether it can be seen from a public place. At least, that's my understanding of the matter.) Epicgenius (talk) 18:15, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, looking at that page, I have the same understanding, so the point's moot in any case -- the building is PD for the purposes of photos. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 18:27, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]