en.m.wikipedia.org
Wikipedia:WikiProject Libraries
"Wikipedia:Librarians" redirects here. For the so-called "Librarians" in other language wikis, see Wikipedia:Administrators.
WikiProject Libraries
WikiProject Libraries
Main / talk
Introduction
Main / talk
Members
Main / talk
Resources
Main / talk
Assessment
Main / talk
WikiProject Libraries
This is a WikiProject, an area for focused collaboration among Wikipedians. New participants are welcome; please feel free to participate!

Table of contents
Goals and scope
Goals
  • Coordinate maintenance of library-related content
  • Develop and discuss proposals for improvements to Wikimedia (especially literature-related sites) based on library experience
  • Assist at the Wikipedia Reference Desk
  • Assist with categorization
Scope
This WikiProject covers all areas of library and information science, including (but not limited to):

To do
Article alerts and assessments
Article alerts
Articles for deletion
Categories for discussion
15 May 2021 – Category:Paintings of the Ambrosiana(talk · edit · hist) was CfDed by Ham II(t · c); see discussion
Good article nominees
21 May 2021 – Callimachus(talk · edit · hist) was GA nominated by Modussiccandi(t · c); start discussion
Articles to be merged
Articles to be split
Articles for creation

Museums and libraries AfDs
Ateneo Art Gallery (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)
(Find sources: Google (books ·news ·newspapers ·scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS ·JSTOR · NYT ·TWL)
Unsourced and promotional
09:00, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:33, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:33, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Weak delete, unless someone is willing to rewrite this article by adding citations and removing the promotional crap. —hueman1 (talkcontributions) 11:52, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep The subject is notable - references would be nice, but this is no reason for deletion. Johnbod (talk) 13:02, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Black cube art museum (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD)
(Find sources: Google (books ·news ·newspapers ·scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS ·JSTOR · NYT ·TWL)
Essay-like article unimproved and unsourced for 10+ years, no clear evidence that this term is in wide circulation for this phenomenon. —Kusma (talk) 14:06, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. —Kusma (talk) 14:06, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. —Kusma (talk) 14:06, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:50, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete, it appears to be a Neologism and not a common term I've ever come across before in the art world. I can't find any evidence online (unlike "White Cube") that convinces me otherwise. None of the galleries listed in the article describe themselves as "black cube" galleries. Sionk (talk) 15:11, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge/redirect to white cube gallery. I found this paper to attest that the concept has received some scholarly attention, but not enough to merit a stand-alone article. More like a couple sentences in the white cube one, contrasting the two forms. Kncny11(shoot) 15:53, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
    @Kncny11: I'd be happy with this as an ATD if there is a second scholarly paper using the term. From the article you cite, I can't tell whether the term was invented by the author of that paper, and I see no evidence that it has caught on. —Kusma (talk) 18:54, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Note I actually started this article years ago under CDM1500. "Manasseh, C" used the term often in his lectures and I made it for an assignment while in his class. I believe he uses the term in other scholarly works but I don't know if this page should remain if it's a term not used outside of scholarly contexts. There's also now an actual museum called "black cube" which may cause confusion. —CDM1500 (talk) 04:25, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
  • the author's other works
  • black cube
Delete I am unable to find evidence beyond the article Kncny11 cited that this is a type of gallery that exists and is discussed as such in reliable sources/ StarMississippi 20:55, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Keep Although an infrequently used term, there is increasing use, especially with digital mediums becoming prominent. User:Asandersgrant User talk:Asandersgrant 14:43, 14 June 2021 (BST)
That's the same article Kncny11 found, so we still have exactly one source. —Kusma (talk) 13:48, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
Deprodded without explanation. A non-notable local museum; fails WP:NORG. As WP:NGO notes, local organizations are notable only if they have attracted coverage outside of their geographic region. That criterion doesn't even come close to being met here: a WP:BEFORE search finds only trivial mentions in the local press. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 15:43, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 15:43, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 15:43, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 15:43, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Merge and redirect to Pleasant Hill, Missouri I would support creating an exception for museum articles like this one, but until that discussion is had it is best to merge and redirect so as to preserve the information if a separate article is not necessary.--​User:Namiba 16:06, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Photo from 2016, included in article, showing expansion of the museum
  • Keep. wp:ITSAMUSEUM, an essay to which I contributed, gives the general argument: it is a public attraction, it is a museum, there will exist coverage in newspapers over the years (specific coverage not yet looked for), etc. This historical society and museum in fact was integral or at least contributing in supporting the National Register of Historic Places listing of the Pleasant Hill Downtown Historic District in 2005. The deletion nominator and other commenter were not aware of this; I just added a little about that to the article. The museum building(s) are partly comprised of pieces of historic buildings, but is not itself included in the historic district; it is adjacent at 125 Wyoming while the district includes 115 Wyoming. See map in the full NRHP nomination document version at National Archives. The museum continues to exist and has even been expanded, which itself says something about its significance, and it has an annual big fundraiser, the Pleasant Hill Railroad Days multiple-day event (with 78 vendors scheduled for the April 2021 event, though it was "with heavy hearts" cancelled for Covid https://phillrailroaddays.com/​) which no doubt garners plenty of coverage. Perhaps it would be an option to cover the museum in the historic district article, but it is not part of the historic district and that would be confusing. Better to keep and develop this separate article, so that it does more fully tell the story of the development of the museum and the historical society and their roles in preserving and interpreting the history of Pleasant Hill. Including about the creation of the museum building(s), and their expansion, which surely was covered in sources at and since that time. Expand also to be about the Railroad Days event. Pleasant Hill is 20 minutes from Kansas City, and the museum and its events will be covered in regional Kansas City newspaper(s), too. --Doncram (talk) 16:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge to Pleasant Hill, Missouri per the reasoning of User:Namiba, Doncram and WP:PRESERVE. While I do not think that everything that is a tourist attraction should be kept automatically, local history museums seem particularly encyclopedic as long-lasting repositories of recorded knowledge. 68.189.242.116 (talk) 18:31, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Probably keep -- It is often useful to have articles on Tourist Attractions. At worst merge. In any event add a sentence or two on it to Pleasant Hill, Missouri#history. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:26, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Nom's comment – no objection to a merge on my part. But museums are not ipso facto notable, and I continue to believe that, since no NORG-qualifying coverage can be found, keeping the article would be inappropriate. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:18, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to Pleasant Hill, Missouri - I'm not seeing how this organization meets WP:GNG. Tourist attraction or not - not every tourist attraction merits inclusion in Wikipedia, same with museums. Missvain (talk) 02:09, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 17:00, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Merge into Pleasant Hill, Missouri. Doesn't meet GNG or NORG as stated by nom, but would be a useful addition in the article of the town where it is located and perhaps it could incubate there if notability can be discovered by experts on the topic. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 00:18, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment. I !voted "Keep" above. Others may differ, but I feel it's better to separate article on a local history museum from article of one place which it covers, and/or where it is located. This helps for categories identifying it properly, and for clearly linking from possibly multiple location articles (Pleasant Hill, Missouri (the town), Cass County, Missouri and Jackson County, Missouri (the two counties that the town straddles. I'm adding links from each of those to the existing museum article. It wouldn't help to merge this article into just one of the location articles. Sure, the article can use development, but I am sure there are plenty of local/regional materials available at the museum itself and in clippings files etc of local/regional libraries, if/when someone local chooses to expand it. Should I call the historical society and ask them to provide sources and/or develop it themselves? I couldn't imagine explaining why there can't be a separate article (if decision here goes against keeping) and how they should instead develop in at least three location articles instead. Seems best to just let this exist and be developed by the future local editor. --Doncram (talk) 00:09, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Museums and libraries Proposed Deletions
Article assessments
Article identification and assessment
Identify, assess, and tag the talk pages of relevant articles using the {{WikiProject Libraries}} banner
Provide assessment for unassessed articles for both quality and importance.
Writing new articles
Group collaboration
Collaborate for two months on a single article to develop it up to Featured Article status!
Readers'_advisory - November/December 2009
Fact checking and adding sources
See also
WikiProject Libraries
at Wikipedia's sister projects
See also all subpages of WikiProject Libraries.
Cleanup
See the cleanup listing generated by CleanupWorklistBot.
Related WikiProjects
Additional resources
Projects of the Wikimedia Foundation
External links
Libweb - Library WWW Servers

Research tools and services
Outreach
Get involved
...Support Open Access...

Last edited on 9 February 2021, at 05:22
Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless otherwise noted.
Privacy policy
Terms of Use
Desktop
HomeRandomNearbyLog inSettingsDonateAbout WikipediaDisclaimers
LanguageWatchEdit