Template talk:Museums in Minnesota

Minnesota Template‑class

	Minnesota portal This template is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
Template	This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Museums NA‑class

	museums portal This template is within the scope of WikiProject Museums, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of museums on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MuseumsWikipedia:WikiProject MuseumsTemplate:WikiProject MuseumsMuseums articles
NA	This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Please suggest additions and subtractions from this template at: Template:Museums in Minnesota/scorecard

Creation and invitation[edit]

I pulled this together from Category:Museums in Minnesota. Please feel free to add new museums I missed, and also feel free to remove places that are not museums, but were erronisously listed in Category:Museums in Minnesota. I hope you enjoy. TableManners ^U·T·C 06:16, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks really good TableManners! The only place I can think of adding that isn't there already is Glensheen Historic Estate in Duluth, which runs tours and is set up as a "museum" of sorts owned by UMD. Maybe a stretch, one man's opinion here. Keeper | 76 15:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Improvments[edit]

Part of the following was copied from here
Please take a look at {{Museums in Minnesota}} navigation bar, and enhance as necessary. If it seems to complicated, but you have a suggestion, leave a message {{Museums in Minnesota}} (talk) and I or somebody else will try to improve it. TableManners^U·T·C 15:40, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at both the template and the List of museums in Minnesota, I'm wondering what constitutes a museum. Many of the List of Registered Historic Places in Minnesota are museums, defined as "permanent institution in the service of society and of its development, open to the public, which acquires, conserves, researches, communicates and exhibits, for purposes of study, education, enjoyment, the tangible and intangible evidence of people and their environment." Anyway, I suggest added a link to the List of Registered Historic Places in Minnesota in the template, and then deleting any specific entries that are on that list (to avoid duplication and potential massive growth of the template).--Appraiser (talk) 15:50, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll have to get to that later. Good point. TableManners^U·T·C 15:52, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many of them are, but a lot of them aren't. For example, you can still buy gas at R.W. Lindholm Service Station. Fasbender Clinic doesn't treat diseases any more, but you can get your finances checked out at the Edward Jones office there. And, if you walked into the John G. and Minnie Gluek House and Carriage House and asked for a tour, I think the residents there would politely ask you to leave. I'm also wondering if we should include every museum in Minnesota in the template. Minneapolis Institute of Arts and Science Museum of Minnesota are big, well-known museums, while the John Dwan Office Building (the 3M Museum in Two Harbors) is a small building with a few rooms of exhibits. I'd suggest putting the larger museums in the template, but keeping all the museums in the category and the list. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 16:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let's work on which we will remove, and which we should add. Also, we should probably come up with criteria for keeping a museum out, and also a reason (e.g., the template is too unwieldly) for doing so. The first criteria I used was "does it have an article on wikipedia?" I think this is a fairly objective and straightward criterion. I have started a scorecard at: Template:Museums in Minnesota/scorecard TableManners^U·T·C 03:24, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Dwan Office Building[edit]

I have updated the scorecard, and would like to dispute the removal of John Dwan Office Building on the grounds that it is notable enough to have an article on wikipedia, and according to that article, it is a museum. TableManners^U·T·C 03:43, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sequence[edit]

What is the sequence used for the entries? It's hard to check if something is in the lists when they're in random order. -- SEWilco (talk) 04:40, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. What order do you want them? I can go try to do alphabetical. TableManners^U·T·C 04:44, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This template needs a good photograph.[edit]

Too bad the photos of the Minneapolis Institute of Arts @ wikipedia aren't the best. It would be good if somebody could go take a nicer looking photograph, and we can use it on this template. TableManners^U·T·C 17:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really like this photo.
What about this one?
Maybe that could be used? The Wiesman definitely has "unique" written all over it. Keeper | 76 17:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually I prefer no photo. A clean template is more useful than a decorative one (the other templates have no photos, for example, in Minnesota and Minneapolis and Minneapolis neighborhoods nothing is singled out). Thanks for your work on this. I made my edits directly in the template rather than on the discussion pages. Best wishes. -Susanlesch (talk) 19:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I like the photo above, and I prefer a photo rather than no photo. We can add photos to the other navigation boxes that do not have them. What is with Minneapolis and their museums?

Oh well, to each city its own. TableManners^U·T·C 06:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to be pendantic. If a template is neutral then the content comes forward. (There must be some principle of interface design to back up that statement; if you really want me to look it up I'll try.) If one thing is highlighted with an image, that's an editorial call. One I don't want to make. Hard enough to do when there is room for two photos per topic (a layout I thought worked great in Minneapolis, Minnesota but there we have a multitude of topics over which to share). What, may I ask, do you mean by "What is with Minneapolis and their museums?" -Susanlesch (talk) 07:06, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is an editorial call, but a lot of navigation boxes have photographs. Minnesota seems to have two museums wrapped in tinfoil so that seems to be a fairly straightforward call. TableManners^U·T·C 07:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I see this template was created on 10 January, about a day or two after I started to expand The Bakken. I also see you have written to two WikiProject Minnesota contributors who you identified as having edited articles about museums in Minnesota, as well as to the project page, and then moved that discussion here? -Susanlesch (talk) 07:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your words/question? Are you trying to say that you would want use a photograph of the The Bakken instead? Or did I not notify you? My apologies if the later. If the former, I really don't care which photograph, I just like photographs. I moved the discussion here because the discussion was about this template. I also left a note/archive if I remember correctly. TableManners^U·T·C 07:20, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, TableManners. Two excellent places to study interface design, in my humble opinion, are useit.com and alistapart.com. I myself retired from Web design about six years ago in favor more recently of trying to figure out mobile access but try to keep up with one or the other. Hope this helps. -Susanlesch (talk) 07:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I did not wrap those buildings in tin-foil. :) TableManners^U·T·C 07:48, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice foil for the bare cement. -Susanlesch (talk) 07:49, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, it looks like two of think the nav box could use a photograph. The Weisman photograph is higher quality, but is it a good representative museum? TableManners^U·T·C 07:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not succeeding here in getting any answers (and have really tried to bring some rationale in here). You mean you have already read all of Jakob Nielsen and are still asking about adding a photo to a template? I really think it is silly. Sorry. -Susanlesch (talk) 08:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Further, I withdraw from this conversation until February. IMO, anyone who witnessed WikiProject Minnesota during December would. Sorry. -Susanlesch (talk) 08:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Sorry I don't agree with you or Jakob Nielsen, but this is a wiki. Take care though. TableManners^U·T·C 18:47, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent) I'd rather see photographs of each museum in the List of museums in Minnesota similar to the List of National Historic Landmarks in Minnesota. I don't think adding one to the template would be an improvement, but ensuring that each museum article has a quality photograph would be.--Appraiser (talk) 18:39, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that each should have a photograph too. I am not inserting a photograph, just expressing my opinion that I think it makes the nav box look better, and also shouldn't be too controversial (except those who have very strong views against this based on some other interface design guru's opinions). But it sounds like 2 for 2 against, with no good reason either way--just preference. TableManners^U·T·C 18:47, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Registered Historical Sites in Minnesota that are also museums[edit]

The following is a partial list of WP articles on the List of Registered Historic Places in Minnesota that are also "museums". We could 1.)add them all, 2.)add a link to List of Registered Historic Places in Minnesota, or 3)add the "most significant" ones.

Others that don't have their own articles include the Henry Hastings Sibley House and the Faribault House (in Mendota).--Appraiser (talk) 19:39, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]