Talk:University of Nebraska State Museum

message: This article is very informative and contains information I have never come across before regarding the UNL museum. The massive amount of information is nicely  broken down into digestible sub-sections. One small suggestion would be to include the pictures in the gallery within their respective sections. I believe this would allow the reader the pleasure of seeing pictures as they are reading about the respective subjects as sometimes reading plain words can cause the reader to lose interest. Also, I realized the text style and fonts are not similar throughout the article, this would make the article seem seamless if this change was made. Overall, excellent work. 
Mpopal2 (talk) 04:36, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Very informative- Maral Popal 

message: I actually really enjoyed reading about the museum, and learned quite a bit of information I previously had no idea of. The overall content of the page is relevant and well done, and the organization seems to flow nicely. The sources used also proved to be informational, legitimate and relevant to each section's topic-- there is no question if any piece has inaccurate facts. However, I did notice that some of the styles throughout the page did not seem consistent. Some subheadings are much bigger than the standard.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cthoendel (talk • contribs) 06:06, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great Read 

message: Hi, I think that instead of just having a bunch of pictures at the end, it would be more helpful to place the pictures with the section that they belong with. Also I was confused as I thought it was known as Morill hall not elephant hall. Also could add more to the leadership sections as it just discusses two of the leaders, the first and the last. It would be make more sense to give a little information about all of them if you are going to include them. Otherwise it looks great. 
Delaniebarnard (talk) 21:51, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review 

message: Overall I really enjoyed reading this Wiki page, I learned quite a bit that I previously did not know about this museum. I like the fact that you all broke down the page into several different sections for the reader, this made it much easier to follow. I also liked how you talked about some of the current displays that are at the museum. Some suggestions that I would make would be to 1) Include pictures when talking about the current displays; I saw you did that with the "weapons" display and I think it would be beneficial and more interesting for the reader to see illustrations for the other displays that are discussed. 2) I see you say that most of the collections originate from Nebraska, but some are from New Mexico and Montana...why is this so? Is there a reason they went outside of Nebraska and if so, why these two states? 3) You also state that this museum is 5th in the country for largest collection of vertebrate paleontology; what are the top 5 largest ones? Aka who has more than this museum? 4) Lastly, is there any goals for the museum moving forward? Are they planning on expanding? 
Overall, great start and I look forward to reading the finished product! 
JeffChesnut (talk) 06:04, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review: Jeff Chesnut 

message: The idea behind the gallery section on the page was derived from viewing other pages pertaining to museums. It seems like the common theme is to include a few images throughout the page, yet having the majority found within a common location. I appreciate your suggestions and will add more images of the displays. Aaron Aldana (talk) 06:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addressing the suggestions made about image location 

message: I personally really enjoyed the read, for me being a senior here, I found it very interesting to know about that building that thousands of students walk past everyday. I never would have imagined that it was that advanced in the museum world. It was nice to learn about how many several species found there that someone could go learn about also and how many years of the past are being covered in there. The article itself is broke down nicely into groups and allows the user to go directly to their question for information. In the end, I still say great job on your article.  Clayton Schmitt (talk) 14:49, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review: Clayton 

message: These are all great suggestions!! I noticed the pictures would look better if they were incorporated rather than all at the end. Jeff, I really appreciate where your suggestions are leading-- those are definitely good things to include! There were also suggestions to include the internships offered by Morrill & the discoveries that have been made, and those would also be very informative to include :) 
For any suggestions to include photos of the exhibits-- I've tried. I had included a really neat photo of the first mountain lion exhibit, and it was removed due to copy right laws :( we are able to include non-specific photos, but mine was too specific and covered by copyright. Sad day. 
Anyway, thank you for all the great ideas!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amaris Stebbing (talk • contribs) 04:54, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Response to suggestions - Maris Stebbing 

message: This article was extremely informative and really appreciate the bard work that was put into this! I'm not even going to suggest the picture thing because that was the biggest criticism. Also, in the area of Weapons throughout time, that section was sort of confusing, could use just a little clarification. Was sort of confused by this part. Otherwise, I really learned a lot from reading this and found out way more than I ever knew! So thank you for that! Also, Elephant Hall, Morill hall, maybe clarify this part also. I didn't know it was called Elephant Hall ever. 
Otherwise, great job! Good Luck!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emilydu (talk • contribs) 17:31, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Peer Review: Emily 

message: A lot of the stuff that I saw has already been covered by the other peer reviews but some has not. My suggestion for the gallery problem would be a combination of a gallery tab and adding the images to the rest of the article. Other than that some of the smaller subsections could be enlarged, right now the paleontology subsection dominates the page and while it is the largest exhibit in the museum the other exhibits are still impressive. Besides those two things there are just some minor wording edits that could be done. some of the article reads awkwardly and that could be dealt with fairly easily.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unljohn (talk • contribs) 06:01, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Stephens- Peer Revie 

message: Nice start on your page. I thought the intro was a nice overview, but could possibly use some sources. Perhaps it would also help to connect the ideas between the name of Elephant Hall and why it's called that. I can assume it's because there are mammoth fossils, but could it be more explicit why it has this nickname (or is it a second name?). Who was Charles Morrill? How/why did he have that much money to throw around? Why was it important to him? Could you let the reader know the connection to why he found it necessary to fund Barbour's trip? I also think maybe the first floor's info was typed twice, in place of the second floor.
It gets a little confusing in the buildings section. What is University Hall? Could you link that to another Wikipedia page, or a website? The next sentence then starts with "Nebraska Hall," and I was confused by the jump. Also, it wasn't mentioned that a proposal was made, just that it was granted. That kind of jumped forward a bit for me as a reader.
How do you know comparing the structure of the elephant's bones and teeth inform a visitor about the elephant? I bet you have a source for that. The TOren Gallery also seems to me smushed in with another gallery's paragraph.
In talking about the Tree of Life, words like "recent" should be avoided, because this page will live on for hopefully a long time. Could you link to phylogenetic so the reader understands that inclusion? Also, the mention of the exhibit being fun and educational: did someone say that was the goal? Otherwise it could come across as opinion.
In the Weapons Throughut Time section, it may be better to avoid the as the name suggests" mention because it isn't very neutral. It could serve as passing judgement on a reader who doesn't make the connection, and is also an extra comment that doesn't drive a statement.
The Hall of Nebraska Wildlife is described as a "broad collection"-- could a number or some sort of clarifier be offered to make it seem less opinion-based? A number of items, or square footage, or something of that nature allows the reader to determine it is broad; they shouldn't be convinced.
I loved the ending section with leadership and contributors. It was neat seeing something extra about the first and current leadership (with links). It's great you included pictures. I also loved that you had information about individual exhibits. It seems pretty fleshed out, with a good amount of ground covered. Just a little repetition in places, and some clarification needed; as well as more neutral language here and there. This was a great draft with a lot of thought and heart put into it. It seems like you organized yourselves well. Looking forward to seeing how it develops.
LiHand (talk) 09:06, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review