Talk:Cloud Gate

message: "The artist has transformed the sculpture's two-dimensional physical structure into three-dimensional space."
What does this mean?  I've never heard of a 2-D sculpture.
::Technically speaking a mirror is a 2D surface because it is a flat plane--even if it is bent into a curve. The image we see behind the mirror is in 3D. I think this fact (tension between perceived surface and image) is actually important to the way we respond to Cloud Gate. Burressd (talk) 03:12, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Huh? 

message: I just stumbled upon http://www.chicagotribune.com/topic/arts-culture/sculpture/cloud-gate-PLTRA0000109.topic.  We should probably run through these articles and make sure we have not missed anything about the bean.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM)  20:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good source of info. I'll comb through as many as I can to make sure I didn't miss anything important. Torsodog (talk) 22:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Take your time.  You may not need it at WP:GAC. Just make sure you go through everything before WP:FAC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM)  03:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chicago Tribune Archive 

message: I think the problem with the differing arch heights stems from the idea that there is the principle arch that is visible from outside the bean and then there is the "omphalos" that can be seen from underneath that extends up even farther. I found some numbers for it all, but I will have to find them again later when I'm not at work. --TorsodogTalk 18:08, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arch height 

message: TTT asked me to have a look.  I'll get to this as soon as I'm done with Everglades.  Feel free to revert any changes and ignore any suggestions I make; all I'm trying to do is improve your chances of getting through FAC.  The "price" I charge for my copyediting is that editors do something more than sit there like a bump on a log.  Either tell me I'm wrong and why, or tell me I'm right and use the information to be a better writer, or if I change something to bring it in line with our style guidelines and you don't like it, argue your position on the style talk page.  The price for my copyediting is that you guys need to do your part to make the FAC process work better. - Dan Dank55 (talk)(mistakes) 20:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Copyediting

message: I looked at the reference given for the claim of "one of the most popular sculptures in the US" and I am not sure the Time magazine article actually grants this superlative on Cloud Gate. The Time author says it is "a destination" and an "essential photo-op," but does not compare its popularity to other sculptures. Am I not reading the Time article right? I am one to question a superlative in Wikipedia and beleive they need a very strong reference. I have found too many longest, biggest, or such to be wrong. I do not consider that placing "one of the..." in front of the superlative removes the requirement for a reference. BTW, thanks for pointing me to WP:Lead when you undid my first citation request. - PennySpender1983 (talk) 18:06, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I read the reference given for this popularity claim again and still don't see how that article says Cloud Gate is "one of the most popular sculptures in the country". Can you explain how the reference backs this statement? I am think aboout entering a citation request in the article again. - PennySpender1983 (talk) 01:40, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there have not been any responses, I am going to tag the article. - PennySpender1983 (talk) 22:08, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't find the proper citation from among the non-Chicago periodicals in the footnotes.  this Chicago source backs up the statement, but for an international resource I will withdraw the statement unless I can find something outside of Chicago.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM)  18:45, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The mp3 file is a valid source for a superlative if the critic is identified. I.e., "Chicago art critic Edward Lifson considers Cloud Gate to be among the greatest pieces of public art in the world." Or something like that. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 03:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  One of the Most Popular Sculptures in the US? 

message: Is it possible to have a cross-sectional drawing of the sculpture?  I'm trying to picture the omphalos - the text says it's a concave chamber so I assume it doesn't go all the way through the sculpture making it like a doughnut; one of the photos shows some of it and it looks quite deep.  What are its dimensions and how far into the sculpture does it go?  How does it terminate (ie in what form - conical, rounded etc?)? 86.159.39.99 (talk) 15:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have not seen a cross-section drawing on which something like this could be based. The article says the sculpture is  tall, and that the apex of the omphalos is  above the ground. The maximum height of the arch where people can walk under / through the sculpture is not given, but looking at the photo, I'd estimate it as maybe . So the distance inside the sculpture between the top of the omphalos and the top of the sculpture is , and walking under and looking up, the rounded top of the omphalos is about  above the "ceiling" you walked in under. Ruhrfisch  ><>°° 17:13, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

text: Basically, it is only called the omphalos because the world omphalos means "navel". It is explained in the article as "a concave chamber that warps and multiplies reflections". Maybe the word should be delinked and put in quotes so the reader knows that it is simply a term the artist uses to refer to the concave underbelly of the sculpture? --TorsodogTalk 01:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: In clssical useage an omphalos is usually an inverted navel or "outie," also the axis mundi or center of the world. Interestingly the Cloud Gate omphalos is not inverted.Burressd (talk) 03:25, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Omphalos 

message: What do people say who aren't overwhelmed by the piece? Sorry, I may be just a philistine hack writer, but there has to be someone besides me who thinks that this thing is just a giant soap bubble or a squashed Zeppelin and doesn't really belong in in a public place. I'm reminded of that glass pyramid between the Louvre and and the Hotel Crillon in Paris. Or the Disney theater in downtown LA. People think it's great art because people who are paid to say that it's great art, say it's great art. I think it's the world's most expensive shaving mirror. I'm sure that there must be someone in the art world who agrees with me.68.111.71.197 (talk) 10:29, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: We can only quote reviews in relaible sources - if you know of negative reviews that are from reliable sources, please post links to them (or citations for them if print only) here so they can be included. Ruhrfisch  ><>°° 14:27, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I can't help but think that 68.111.71.197 hasn't seen it in person. Derekbd (talk) 15:16, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: But what do real critics say?

message: The structural engineer for the project was Atelier One; the article incorrectly credits Aerotrope, a company which was not founded until after the design work was completed.  One of the engineers who worked on the project for Atelier One (Chris Hornzee-Jones) went on to found Aerotrope while the project was under construction, and has since claimed the project.  Unfortunately, this is a commonly repeated error.  (Although I can't figure out how to link to the section of their website, Atelier One shows their claim to the work under their "projects" section - http://www.atelierone.com).  
The work, and multiple drawings for the project are also featured in the book "Liquid Threshold," referenced in the wiki article.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.121.219.13 (talk) 14:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, thanks for the information. Interesting story. One day I'll try to get my hands on a copy of "Liquid Threshold" to verify and see if there is any more useful information about Cloud Gate in the book. I'll revert back to your edit. Thanks for clarifying. --TorsodogTalk 14:47, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Engineering

message: Okay, I understand that  does not like trivia and pop culture material in articles. And removing unsourced lists like this and most of this would be fairly within accepted practice these days. However I am not thrilled with removal of material discussed in a significant way in a secondary source and prepared to edit war over it and write a misleading edit summary. So rather than arm-wrestle, am opening this for discussion here. I am (obviously) for a keep segment. Can folks offer a "keep" or "leave removed" below for consensus. My reason for keeping is it is discussed in detail (about a third of the interview and including the title of the piece) in a secondary source. Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:13, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Mmmyeah, I think that can work. It does segue ok from the bottom of that section.Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:30, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It is based on a reliable source and should be in the article somewhere - I am also fine with it being combined with the Reception section and tightened. Ruhrfisch  ><>°° 14:57, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cultural reference  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Cloud Gate. 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/20091003165049/http://www.wttw.com:80/main.taf?p=28,3,1,1&Date=05%2F15%2F2006&et=%20-%20Week%20Of%20May%2015%2C%202006 to http://www.wttw.com/main.taf?p=28,3,1,1&Date=05%2F15%2F2006&et=%20-%20Week%20Of%20May%2015%2C%202006
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:49, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Shouldn't the dimensions say what the width height length is instead of just "Dimensions	10 m × 13 m × 20 m (33 ft × 42 ft × 66 ft)".
This page says it is 66-feet long by 33-feet high
https://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/dca/supp_info/millennium_park_-artarchitecture.html 
Or this page http://www.chicagoarchitecture.info/Building/636/Cloud-Gate.php says they are
Maximum Height: 33 feet / 10 meters
Maximum Width: 42 feet
Maximum Length: 66 feet— Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.142.250.170 (talk) 09:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dimensions 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Cloud Gate. 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/20080602021642/http://www.lynnbecker.com/repeat/Gehry/kapoor.htm to http://www.lynnbecker.com/repeat/Gehry/kapoor.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100612233519/http://millenniumpark.org/newsandmedia/documents/CloudGateUntenting.pdf to http://www.millenniumpark.org/newsandmedia/documents/CloudGateUntenting.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080910135209/http://audio.wbez.org/848/2006/05/848_20060515b.mp3 to http://audio.wbez.org/848/2006/05/848_20060515b.mp3
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120719092231/http://southtownstar.suntimes.com/entertainment/virtusio/10781946-452/movies-the-vow-and-films-for-hopeless-romantics.html to http://southtownstar.suntimes.com/entertainment/virtusio/10781946-452/movies-the-vow-and-films-for-hopeless-romantics.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:53, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Cloud Gate. 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/20141006071018/http://voices.suntimes.com/arts-entertainment/the-daily-sizzle/grammer-stars-in-huge-weekend-hit/ to http://voices.suntimes.com/arts-entertainment/the-daily-sizzle/grammer-stars-in-huge-weekend-hit/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:49, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: About this text:
After it was completed, it was quickly found that the sculpture does not need someone to upkeep and maintain it since, conveniently, it is located outside and the rain can do it itself. Snow can be wiped off the sculpture from the many tourists touching it, allowing them to still take warped selfies under its "omphalos."
Is there any source that makes this claim? I only find sources claiming that maintenance is difficult and that regular cleanings are needed by specialized staff. 2603:3024:1838:4800:987E:C75:E219:1D7C (talk) 02:55, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Low or high maintenance?