Talk:Sailors' Snug Harbor

message: Snug Harbor Cultural Center vs Sailors Snug Harbor dm 16:24, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge two snug harbor entries? 

message: I suggest we merge the Snug Harbor Cultural Center page into the Sailors Snug Harbor page.  The two articles would do better being merged into one.  I think the Sailors Snug Harbor title is the one more people will recognize it by, but of course redirects will allow both titles to remain working.
dm (talk) 15:26, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wow, not sure I agree with myself anymore :)  Please see Talk:Snug_Harbor%2C_New_Orleans#Help for more discussion on this. dm (talk) 01:24, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: Snug Harbor Cultural Center vs Sailors Snug Harbor dm 16:24, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see Talk:Snug_Harbor%2C_New_Orleans#Help for more discussion on this... dm (talk) 01:22, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The above brief discussion is superseded by the discussion below.  Currently, there is very little about the current organization in the article, so it can be included in the merged article.  If someone later wants to expand greatly about the current organization, to an extent larger than is appropriate in the merged article, then a separate article could be re-created at Snug Harbor Cultural Center (which should be converted to being a redirect to the merged article, for the indefinite future).  This mainly just to respond to Jllm06's comment.  For followup, perhaps best to join in discussion below. doncram (talk) 19:19, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  merge two snug harbor entries? 

message: We still need to decide what to do about the Snug Harbor Cultural Center article.Elan26 (talk) 17:42, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: At the very least, the page neme nees to change to match the current name of the institution, The Snag Harbor Cultural Center and Botanical Gardens.  I still suggest one article, with separate Wikipedia entries for each notable coponent, the chilcren's Museum and Chinese Gardens hav had such pages for a while now.Elan26 (talk) 17:53, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The more I think about it, the more it seems that the Cultural Center and Botanical Garden is an umbrella organization, and it probably makes the most sense to give each of the parts its own page.  Eliminate the old Snug Harbor Cultural Center page.  And keep this one omnibus page for the whoe place.Elan26 (talk) 18:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we may be having difficulty knowing what to do about the Snug Harbor Cultural Center because many of us, me included, have little idea what a cultural center is, much less whether Snug Harbor Cultural Center is a notable one.  The wikipedia article on it is unsatisfying, and just tries to define by example, providing links to a few places with Cultural Center in their name.  Those examples do not belong to a category "cultural centers" and seem to be all different.  Is it an organization, is it a place, or what?  I suspect that naming this one "Snug Harbor Cultural Center" reflects wishful thinking on the part of its organizers (not inappropriate) that the organization or place become indeed an important center of culture.  I don't currently believe it is a center of New York City culture, or even a real center of Staten Island culture.  I currently believe it is an impressive collection of buildings that was formed as Sailors' Snug Harbor, a retirement home for sailors, and that is now severely under-used.  None of us present in this discussion write articles about cultural centers, as far as i know.  I don't think it needs to be developed, but it is okay by me if "Snug Harbor Cultural Center" is left as a stub referring strongly to the main article about the place.  About the various other arts organizations that may be beneath the SHCC umbrella, I would leave it to editors writing about other arts organizations to perhaps create articles about these ones, eventually, but i rather doubt they rank high in the priorities for wikipedia article creation relative to other arts organization candidates. doncram (talk) 20:50, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe it's an umbrella non-profit organization that maintains the physical plant for the city and provides space and support to constituent organizations such as museums, art school, botanical garden, occasional performance groups, etc., and rents space for meetings, weddings. I would say it is locally notable. Station1 (talk) 21:20, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I went to Guidestar, the service that provides the Form 990 tax filings (the main annual financial report of U.S. nonprofits) and other reports on nonprofits, and find it there.  Its entire "Who we are" statement is as follows:  "THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF SNUG HARBOR CULTURAL CENTER IS TO OPERATE, MANAGE AND DEVELOP THE PREMISES KNOWN AS SAILORS' SNUG HARBOR THROUGH ITS CULTURAL PROGRAMS."  Note, the SHCC is a nonprofit organization, and it officially refers to the place as Sailor's Snug Harbor.  990 forms from 1999 through 2006 are available.  You may have to create a free account, as i did some time ago, in order to access them.    In 2006, its revenues and expenses were both around $3.7m U.S., and its year-end assets were $2.6m.  Let's describe Snug Harbor Cultural Center that way, as a nonprofit that operates the Sailors Snug Harbor facilities.  It is a nontrivial nonprofit, notable enough for an article as an organization. So, I am happy with saying DON'T MERGE.  doncram (talk) 21:45, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You're fundamentally correct, although I found old articles about court battles.  Seems the modern art tyypes would like to alther the buildings, and architectural preservations have gone to court (more than once) to stop them.  The art museum gets some attention among contemporary art afficianados, but the only things that draw numbers seem to be the Music Hall, the childrens Museum, and the Chinese grarden.  I was there on a beautiful summer Sunday and it felt like a ghost town.  A ollection of wonderful buildings in search of a purpose.  Like Audubon TerraceElan26 (talk) 22:20, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  My gut feel was that there were two articles here, one for the NHL and one for the Cultural Center and it's various institutions.  Doncram did not agree, but spent the time digging into the details and in the end changed his mind providing convincing arguments as to why keeping them separate is a good idea.  I realize Elan feels strongly that the article should be a single one named Snug Harbor.  I believe leaving the Snug Harbor as a dab page is the right idea.  Anyway, more than anything, I think we should all step away from this article for a few days and gain some perspective. dm (talk) 01:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, it's been a week and things have calmed down. I still think it's best to merge the two articles (why make people read two instead of one?) but it is admittedly a close call and since three editors, by my count, say don't merge, there seems to be no consensus to do so. In that case though, it makes sense to move the bottom half of "Sailors Snug Harbor" to "Snug Harbor Cultural Center and Botanical Garden". I just began a clean up of "SSH" but didn't move anything between articles. There also seems to be consensus to leave "Snug Harbor" as a dab. (I changed the name of "Snug Harbor, New Orleans" to "Snug Harbor (jazz club)" iaw WP:NC.) A minor question remains as to whether to move "Snug Harbor Cultural Center and Botanical Garden" back to just "Snug Harbor Cultural Center" (I don't think it's too important). I assume no one objects to moving "SSH" to "Sailors' Snug Harbor" (with an apostrophe on "Sailors"). Station1 (talk) 02:47, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Lots of points to cover.  Let's see.  I think we should merge to one article.  Snug Harbor Cultural Center and Botanical Garden seems a bit wordy; I'd prefer something shorter, but this isn't a major issue for me.  As long as all the other versions become redirects pointing to the real article, I'm fine with the name.  I'm good with leaving Snug harbor as a dab page, and if it turns somebody on to put the apostrophe in the article name, I'm cool with that too.  I guess when you boil it all down, the only issue in the bunch which I really have an opinion about is that we should merge to a single article.  Just one editor's two cents.  -- RoySmith (talk) 02:54, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: [I added the apostrophe to the title Sailors' Snug Harbor since there seemed to be consensus for that - just for the record. Station1 (talk) 06:47, 29 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: To Merge or not to Merge

message: The institution most similar to Snug harbor is Wave Hill (New York).  Note that it is also based on a pair of landmarked buildings, and also features  a concert hall series, and botanical garden - albeit none as grand as those at Snug Hill.  However, the rticle isnot called "Wave Hill House".  It is simply titled "Wave Hill."  Just as this article s=ought to be titled simply Snug Harbor'.   Not, for example, the Wikipedia article Worcester, the title goes to the small city in England, not to the large one in Massachusetts, because, I presume, ot the historical importance.  Likewise, Newton goes to Isaac, not to the city of 100,000 people in Massachusetts.  Sometimes, the significance of one of several things with the same name so outweighs the others that we assign the simple name to the big deal place, which Snug Harbor is.Elan26 (talk) 18:19, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Wave Hill is called Wave Hill because that's its name; it's not a shortened version of some other name, like "Snug Harbor" is short for "Sailors' Snug Harbor" or "Snug Harbor Cultural Center". (Why it has a parenthetical New York after it I'm not sure; I think I'll fix that when I have time.) As to Worcester, that was a huge controversy. See the talk page. Station1 (talk) 18:59, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Naming parallel

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests September 2011 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 10:50, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Chinese Scholar's Garden.jpg Nominated for Deletion

message: I found  while looking for something else.  Posting it here as a possible source for this article.
-- RoySmith (talk) 23:19, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Snug Harbor's Tug of War 

message: Basic information to add to this article:  exactly what the "Snug" in Snug Harbor means or refers to. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 20:10, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: To add to article