Jump to content

Talk:Morgan Library & Museum

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Untitled

[edit]

While the traditional name for the library is the Pierpont Morgan Library, the contemporary usage as show by their own webpage is simply Morgan Libary Doc 04:28, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"The Morgan" is formally known as The Morgan Library & Museum since they reopened in April 2006. The name of this article should be updated. --Sils660 20:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles merged

[edit]

The articles have been merged. Mfk91 17:50, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From Talk:Morgan Library and Museum:

When this new official designation catches on, it will be time to move the present article. Meanwhile, readers will look first for its simpler title here. --Wetman 06:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

The ampersand

[edit]

The ampersand, by the way, is the correct style, used by The Morgan Library & Museum itself. --Wetman 00:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Break out Morgan Library ie: the nrhp building

[edit]

I'm thinking we may want to break out the morgan library building from the larger complex of buildings that makes up the museum. The NRHP is for the specific library, not the former residence, the new glass structure connecting all three buildings, etc. Thoughts? 04:02, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

"the" Nymphaeum

[edit]

What is "the Nymphaeum in Rome" that inspired McKim?--Wetman (talk) 19:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Morgan Library & Museum. 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:

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) 04:34, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Morgan Library & Museum. 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:

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) 16:25, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Morgan Library & Museum/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 18:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Alan Islas (talk · contribs) 21:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

---
Starting on this review. Alan Islas (talk) 21:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the delay Epicgenius (talk · contribs), I've been busier than expected. First of all I want to say that this is a very well written article and definitely worth GA status. I had to really look into the details in order to find any suggestions for potential improvements, all very minor. --Alan Islas (talk) 20:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Alan Islas, that's all right, and sorry for the delay on my end. I will be resolving these very soon. – Epicgenius (talk) 02:47, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for your patience. I have addressed all of the comments you've raised. Epicgenius (talk) 03:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good to me and I'm promoting it to GA. Thank you! --Alan Islas (talk) 03:54, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]

Lead section

  • “Both the collection and the buildings have received commentary over the years.”: Not sure this sentence is needed or maybe it needs a bit of clarification or rewriting. Does it mean that the collections and buildings are notorious, elicited cultural and or historical discussion, or articles by architectural and art critics? Won awards?
    • Basically, art and architectural critics generally praised the building and collection, but they had mixed opinions about the architecture of the annexes. I have clarified this now. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Background

  • “by members of the Phelps Stokes/Dodge family” perhaps “by members of the Phelps Stokes/Dodge merchant family”
  • “Morgan may have collected these objects exclusively for pleasure”: Perhaps “Morgan may have collected these objects exclusively for pleasure and not for investment purposes”.
  • “A law in 1897 permitted Morgan to bring his art to the U.S. without import taxes, and he also wanted to preserve the objects for the American people”: Perhaps: “In 1897 Morgan brought his art collection to the U.S. because a law allowed him to do it without paying import taxes, and also because he wanted to preserve the objects for the American people”
  • “Morgan was unable to expand the house due to the presence of an 18-foot-wide (5.5 m) driveway east of it”: Perhaps “Morgan was unable to expand the house due to an 18-foot-wide (5.5 m) driveway east of it”
  • “Morgan had told McKim that "I want a gem"”: Perhaps: “Morgan had told McKim that he wanted “a gem"
  • “Toward the library's completion, Morgan reportedly requested that the entire library be lowered by one foot”: Why? How? Was this request implemented?
    • Unfortunately, the source does not elaborate on this. He wanted to shorten the library's roof by one foot, but I'm not sure why, or whether this was implemented. This may be an apocryphal story, in which case I can remove it. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Private library

  • “but she initially tended to avoid auctions and rarely spent more than $10,000 a book without the Morgans' permission”: Perhaps: “but she initially tended to avoid auctions and rarely spent more than $10,000 on a book without the Morgans' permission”
  • “At the time, Morgan had bought thousands of objects, including 600 manuscripts and 3,000 medieval items, since 1899”: Perhaps: “Since 1899 Morgan had bought thousands of objects, including 600 manuscripts and 3,000 medieval items.”

Public institution

Collection

Building

Checklist

[edit]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
    a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by AirshipJungleman29 talk 12:01, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Morgan Library & Museum
The Morgan Library & Museum
  • ... that during the Panic of 1907, the presidents of New York City's banks and trust companies were locked in the Pierpont Morgan Library? Source: Roth, Leland (1983). McKim, Mead & White, Architects. Harper & Row. p. 410.
Improved to Good Article status by Epicgenius (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 665 past nominations.

Epicgenius (talk) 15:11, 25 July 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Substantial exquisite article about an exquisite place, on 360 (!) sources, offline sources accepted AGF, no copyvio obvious. A GA on its way to FA, I assume. Of the present hooks, I prefer ALT1, but none is impossible. I'd just quote "I want a gem." ;) - The image is licensed and shows a gem, - please let's have it, and the hook doesn't matter. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:29, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]