# Talk:Morgan Library & Museum

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)

"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)

The articles have been merged. Mfk91 17:50, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
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, by the way, is the correct style, used by The Morgan Library & Museum itself. --Wetman 00:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

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)

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

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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121010134231/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=391&ResourceType=Building to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=391&ResourceType=Building
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050830080608/http://www.stbernards.org/newslet/no27_p24.html to http://www.stbernards.org/newslet/no27_p24.html
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)

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:

Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.artinfo.com/galleryguide/22151/8669/about/the-morgan-library-and-museum-new-york/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090105164350/http://arcadia.org/pml/gs-collection.html to http://arcadia.org/pml/gs-collection.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150418222726/http://theartnewspaper.com/news/museums/154428/ to http://theartnewspaper.com/news/museums/154428/
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)

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)
Reviewer: Alan Islas (talk · contribs) 21:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
---
Starting on this review. Alan Islas (talk) 21:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
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)

@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)
Thanks again for your patience. I have addressed all of the comments you've raised. Epicgenius (talk) 03:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Looks good to me and I'm promoting it to GA. Thank you! --Alan Islas (talk) 03:54, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

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)
Background

“by members of the Phelps Stokes/Dodge family” perhaps “by members of the Phelps Stokes/Dodge merchant family”
Done. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
“Morgan may have collected these objects exclusively for pleasure”: Perhaps “Morgan may have collected these objects exclusively for pleasure and not for investment purposes”.
Done. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
“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”
Done, but with slightly different wording (the law was passed in 1897, and he began moving his collection over in the subsequent years). Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
“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”
Done. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
“Morgan had told McKim that "I want a gem"”: Perhaps: “Morgan had told McKim that he wanted “a gem"
Done. Epicgenius (talk) 03:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
“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)
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”
Done. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
“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.”
Done, but with a slightly different wording. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Public institution

“hundreds of autograph letters and papers”: autographed?
Good catch, yes. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
“By the early 1970s, the Morgan Library had several hundred "fellows"” : Why quotes on fellows? Does it refer to members?
Indeed, it does. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
“The library reopened on April 29, 2006,[186][197] and was renamed the Morgan Library & Museum”: Does the article subject needs to be in bold here? I don’t know.
Since the name is already bolded in the lead, probably not. MOS:BOLDALTNAMES recommends that "Only the first occurrence of the title" be bolded. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
“The renovating cost $4.5 million”: The renovation cost…?
Yes, indeed. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Collection

Could suitable images be added to illustrate the Visual art and Other objects sections?
Sure. I've added two images. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Building

“Although externally inconspicuous, the building helps links the interior spaces of the complex”: helps links
Done. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
“designed by Bartholomew Voorsanger and completed in 1991”: Add wikilink to Bartholomew Voorsanger
Done. Epicgenius (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

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): 

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

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): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: