Talk:Mostert's Mill

Mills High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mills, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mills 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.MillsWikipedia:WikiProject MillsTemplate:WikiProject MillsMills articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

South Africa Mid‑importance

	South Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa 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.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Museums

	museums portal 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 not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Post-fire image

Given that there may be a copyright issue with the image, should it be removed from the article? Mjroots (talk) 20:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was a copyvio. Deleted at Commons and removed from article. Mjroots (talk) 08:02, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The tower

The tower is still standing, therefore measurements pertaining to the tower itself should be in present tense. I reverted the first time it was changed, but it is probably better that this is discussed before being changed again. Mjroots (talk) 21:06, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've restore present tense to measurements relating to the tower itself. The photograph of the burnt out mill clealy shows the tower has survived intact. Mjroots (talk) 18:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"was"

Is there any confirmation that the windmill was completely destroyed in a fire? If not, it probably shouldn't be "was".78.36.163.169 (talk) 08:54, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't exactly seem beyond repair judging by this photo. I've changed it back to present tense. AngryHarpy‍^talk 10:36, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's restorable, but much historic material appears to have been lost. A reconstruction is certainly achievable if the authorities have the will to make it happen. Mjroots (talk) 10:42, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, trying to restore a historical building to its original state would take a lot of money and time. As a side note, is there a way we can find a photo that could be uploaded to wikipedia that reflects the current state of the windmill as I believe it would be good to include as it is an updated view on how the mill now appears? Jurisdicta (talk) 15:00, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Someone has started a fundraiser via gofundme.com to raise €500,000 to restore the mill. Can't post a link as it's blacklisted. Mjroots (talk) 16:42, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It premature to describe a standing structure as destroyed especially as it is unlikely that its condition has been properly assessed by qualified persons. This is not the first time the mill has been restored - much of what was destroyed in the fire was not original anyway but dated from previous restorations in 1935 and 1995. This is not the first nor the last time that a historical structure has been severely damaged in a fire. If the standard applied here is applied to all of Wikipedia we might as well regard nearly old building as destroyed. Old buildings get old because they are maintained and repaired - and there are few old buildings out there that haven't been through at least one or two major fires. I think the language should be adapted to state that the mill has been gutted, and that its current future is uncertain. But calling it destroyed before any formal assessment has been made is opinion and not fact. Francoisdjvr (talk) 11:17, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a source useable here, but the mill is being restored. Mjroots (talk) 09:21, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Request from John Hammer of Friends of the Mill

John, who has coordinated the restoration, would like this to be reflected in the article:

Mostert's Mill is situated in Mowbray, Cape Town, on a farm called Welgelegen. This was granted to Stefanz Bothma in 1676. It passed through a number of hands until it was owned by Gysbert van Reneen, who is said to have had the mill built in 1796. His youngest daughter married Sybrant Mostert, after whom the mill is named. It worked until the 1870s after which it became derelict. It was restored in 1935, which was paid for by the Dutch government, and again in 1995, this time by the Department of Public Works. It continued to work on a regular basis under the custodianship of the Friends of Mostert's Mill. It was almost completely destroyed by a fire in April 2021. It has now been fully restored and will once more be grinding wheat into whole meal on a regular basis, using the power of the wind. It is the last remaining working windmill in Africa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nathangeffen (talk • contribs) 15:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Nathangeffen: - Some of that is already in the article. As for the restoration, do you have a source that can be used to update the article? Mjroots (talk) 04:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]