Talk:Madison Square and Madison Square Park

message: The article currently claims that there were two temporary arches at Madison Square built in 1889. I can find mention of only one at in connection with Washington, and even there I'm not sure they don't mix up their facts.
As far as I know, there were:
*The original wood-and-plaster Washington Arch, located near the entrance of Washington Square Park on Fifth Avenue. That was nowhere near Madison Square. Built for the 1889 Washington Inauguration Centennial.
*Possibly another temporary arch at Madison Square, for the same occasion (see above). Is there any confirmation of this arch?
*Two temporary arches at Fifth avenue and 22nd and 59th street (the first would be close to Madison Square), constructed in 1892 for the 400-year anniversary of Columbus's discovery of America.
*The Dewey Arch, built 1899 at Fifth Avenue/24th street, demolished 1901.
*The Victory Arch of 1918 also seems to have been located at Fifth Avenue/24th street.
Any more? Lupo 15:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Arches at Madison Square 

message: "Victory Arch" is both a name and a description, hence the quotation marks.  It is not "the" Victory Arch, because it is not extant.  Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 18:59, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Victory Arch

message: I have changed the headings for conciseness and clarity:
*"Early New York" → "In early New York" because it does not talk about early NY, just the park in early NYC
*"The park opens" → "Opening" because it is shorter and doesn't sound like a storyline
*"In the 20th century" → "20th century" because it is shorter and doesn't sound like a storyline
*"Madison Square today" → "Today" because we all know what the subject is, and the title is shorter
Are there any objections to this? Epicgenius (talk) 20:41, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes.  If "In early New York" is preferable to "Early New York", then "In the 20th century" is preferable to "20th century" for the sake of consistency. BMK (talk) 23:42, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, so let's keep "In the 20th century". Or, we can still have just "20th century" for that section, and then rename "Early New York" to "Early days" because we know it's in NY already from the lede. Epicgenius (talk) 00:25, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Headings 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Madison Square. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thetoycenter.com/about/ITC_History.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150522040657/http://www.madisonsquarepark.org/ to http://www.madisonsquarepark.org/
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) 22:51, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: As much as I do love a game of "guess the reason for the revert with no edit summary and no talk page message," could you comment, , on why you prefer this image of the Seward statue over this one, considerably clearer/sharper.
If it is placement or cropping, these are the kinds of easy-to-fix things that make edit summaries so great. For example, since we have prose about this statue in particular, and because the other image of the old statue was under the "the park today" gallery (it is indeed part of the park today, as it was a century ago, and as are several other elements not included in that gallery) moving seemed like a good idea to me, but perhaps I am lacking context for why it was set up that way. And if it were to stay in that gallery, it would probably indeed make sense to pop over to the CropTool on Commons to make it a similar proportion to the others. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:27, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: There is already a picture in the best place, in the gallery with other images of statues in the park.  It did not need to be replaced, and it did not need to be moved. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:26, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: So you prefer the location. Alright. That's a partial answer.  is nonsense unless you mean that in your judgment the image you restored is a higher quality image than the one you removed. As you're still requiring that I read into your edits to determine your motivations, I will guess that it's because you think it's aesthetically nicer to have an image of just the monument rather than the monument with the park scene to either side. Again, if that's the case, just say so in the edit summary, being what it's there for and it would take me 30 seconds to crop it to something that would still be a much higher quality image than what's there. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:47, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I've had another look at the image, and you are correct, it is better.  I agree that you should go ahead and crop it and replace the current image in the gallery. Beyond My Ken (talk) 16:53, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seward images 

message: An editor is attempting to add a image to the article's gallery.  It is of a temporary exhibit from 2006-2007, 16 years ago by a relatively unknown artist. I object to this addition of several grounds:
*The article has a sufficiency of images, and is not in need of another, especially this particular one;
*It is an image of a temporary exhibit from 16 years ago, and does not illustrate the park as it currently is;
*The artwork and the artist (Ursula von Rydingsvard) are relatively obscure;
*The placement of the image seems promotional in nature.
I have requested that the editor not restore the image until they have a consensus here to do so. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:20, 4 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attempt to add image 

message: Performed at "Madison Square Roof Garden" per here. FloridaArmy (talk) 21:14, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Golden State Quartette