# Talk:Boston Central Library

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 1 September 2021 and 20 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Potato-ssiumChloride.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 18:16, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Nothing mentioned about the two sculptures out front!?  There's a image of one "Personification of "Science"" but nothing more.  It'd be great if someone in the know could add more info on these (date installed, artist, donor, titles, etc).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.172.19.51 (talk) 18:51, 18 September 2011 (UTC) 

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Boston Public Library, McKim Building. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100612191545/http://bpl.org/ to http://www.bpl.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
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) 11:41, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

As a heads up to anyone watching this page, I'm currently rewriting this article in my sandbox and plan to publish the changes in a few days. However, I should note that when I researched this building, I noticed that most of the sources refer to it as the Boston Central Library or the Copley Square branch, and that "Central Library" or "Boston Central Library" seems to be the WP:COMMONNAME. The name "McKim Building" doesn't actually seem to appear in that many sources; in fact, that name is usually used only to differentiate the original section of the building from the Johnson Building next to it. Furthermore, sources often treat the Johnson and McKim buildings as a single structure, the Central Library.
Once I'm done with my rewrite, I'm planning to move this page to reflect the above. – Epicgenius (talk) 03:16, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

There used to be a discussion of the inscriptions but I can't find it in the present text. Where did it go? 207.180.169.36 (talk) 05:05, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

This material is in the "Exterior" subsection of the McKim Building section. The exact inscriptions are in footnote [h]. Previously, the main text focused too heavily on the inscriptions and not on the design of the facade itself. Since the inscriptions themselves are just one part of the facade, the text has been streamlined to give due weight to other aspects of the design. Epicgenius (talk) 15:14, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
As it stands now, the article is drowning in barely relevant detail, and hides one of the few features likely to be noticed by anyone who is not an architect (or architectural historian). Tens of thousands of people pass by that façade every day! 128.30.9.76 (talk) 21:08, 23 July 2025 (UTC)
Barely relevant to you, maybe, but all the information I added is highly relevant to the topic. As I said above, highlighting only the inscriptions when the facade has so many other decorations is still a violation of an actual policy, WP:DUE. Epicgenius (talk) 21:25, 23 July 2025 (UTC)

The MFA hasn't been in Copley Square since 1909, so I deleted the claim that it's across from the library. The former location might be relevant to the main article about Copley Square, or to one about the museum, but not here. Vicki Rosenzweig (talk) 01:58, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

@Vicki Rosenzweig, thanks for catching that. The source mistakenly presented the MFA as still being in Copley Square, and I forgot to double-check it. – Epicgenius (talk) 03:08, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Boston Central Library/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
The article is well-sourced, with strong coverage of the library’s collections, architecture, and recent renovation. To reach Good Article level, the lead should preview all major themes; historical role, usage statistics, and interior design/art features should be expanded; and more visuals/maps would help. These are goals that seem achievable within a hold period. Crystalite13 (talk · contribs) 01:46, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

@Epicgenius Crystalite13 (talk) 01:47, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
Thanks. I can take a look at expanding the lead in a bit. Unfortunately there isn't much I can do about visuals and maps, though I can try to look for old public domain images and/or freely licensed pics. Epicgenius (talk) 02:07, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
Good luck! Crystalite13 (talk) 04:06, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
With regards to the individual points:
the lead should preview all major themes - I've now expanded the lead to summarize the sections.
historical role, usage statistics, and interior design/art features should be expanded - I added a bit about current visitation numbers; the historic visitation numbers are already in the article. The page already discusses the interior design and artwork in detail, which I've now summarized in the lead. Not sure what to do regarding "historical role", though, as this building is and always has been a library from day one.
more visuals/maps would help - I've added some images and am looking for additional maps.
– Epicgenius (talk) 14:44, 14 October 2025 (UTC)
Ok, good! At this point I have no concerns. Sources look okay and there is little plagiarism percent on the page. Prose is definitely lengthy enough, so this will be promoted. You are free to continue on your hunt for maps, though! Crystalite13 (talk) 18:18, 14 October 2025 (UTC)