Talk:National Museum of Australia

Australia: Canberra / Education Low‑importance

	Australia portal National Museum of Australia is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Canberra (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Education in Australia (assessed as High-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Museums Mid‑importance

	museums portal This article 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Image trimmed from article

I have removed the following image from the article as there where too many for the size of article. Please feel free to re-add it if the article length warrants it. --Martyman-(talk) 07:07, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Architecture controversies

The section on the achitecture of the building avoids mention of the controversies associated with the braille panels as per Miranda Devine[1] and the references to the holocaust as per Windschuttle[2] plus the accusations of plagiarism[3]. Any other views before I start adding these in?--A Y Arktos\^talk 10:56, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the much greater need is to work up the facts of what the museum design is, before adding more about how it might be interpreted or controversies in its reception. Basic facts. E.g. the correct spelling of the architect's name; that the 'architect' was a firm (ARM) not just one person; that the 'Garden of Australian Dreams' (with the 'blue poles')is the design of eminently name-able landscape architects. Etc. R Jones 08:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you have sources for this information, add it to the article, rather than talking about it here. I'd do it, but I don't know anything about the architects involved. --Myk 10:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was not intending to carp, just wanted to say that facts about the project should be a higher priority than chasing 'controversies' - whether genuine or just media beat-ups. I know enough about the project to tell that there are gaps in the article but I too would need to do some research before editing to be sure things are right. A handy starting point for any Australian architecture project is always the project gallery on the RAIA web site - http://www.architecture.com.au/i-cms?page=3940. And its likely that Ashton Raggatt Macdougall and Room 4.1.3 have info about it on their own web sites. R Jones 03:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need to add difficulties with deciphering meaning, for example in Garden of Australian Dreams[4] and deciphering post-modernist meaning[5]--A Y Arktos\^talk 13:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More on post-modernism and the museum[6] plus Museum board claimed they didn't know of Libiskind reference.[7]--A Y Arktos\^talk 13:30, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sofixit

Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the Edit this page link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome.--A Y Arktos\^talk 09:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Further, to the comments above, R Jones suggested the architect's name was spelt incorrectly. Not according to any source I have found. I have clarified he was the design architect - to me that is what is important; that he had members of his firm putting together the detail is not important to me even if the detail is of course what holds the building together - we haven't put down details of the engineers or builders either. Can be added by any interested editor - footnote one links to the details. If someone thinks the landscape architecture of the garden is notable and wants to add more detail including the designer - go for it. Fixing gaps in the article is what the wiki is about.--Golden Wattle ^talk 19:28, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on National Museum of Australia. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:50, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]