Talk:Bishop Museum

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Untitled][edit]

I added a sentence about William Tufts Brigham, based on his entry in Wikipedia, although I don't see a specific citation for the dates of his term as curator and director in that article. On the title page of his publication, Hawaiian Kapas from the Collection in the Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum of Ethnology and Natural History (Honolulu: The Bishop Mout7ttghhytseum"; that's the only firm date evidence I have. Uncommon fritillary (talk) 20:49, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

POV check[edit]

I've added the tag due to the undue weight and one-sided nature of the claim represented by Jeanie Ainlay with no official response from the museum, as published in the Honolulu Weekly. Viriditas (talk) 12:13, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just revised the treatment in the article about the Falls of Clyde ship deterioration issue, which i had added quickly. It is based on reliable sources that are footnoted. What is the Honolulu Weekly source (an article or an opinion column?) to which you refer? It is not included. Can you provide a URL? Actually, not having the Weekly article or column, i don't fully understand your statement. Perhaps you are implying or assuming that there is POV editing by local participants in the controversy. To clarify, just in case, I who made the edit am not local to Hawaii and have no association with the person you mention. I visited this article only upon reading the New York Times article by Pala which describes an apparent scandal involving the museum that I believe is appropriate to mention in the museum article. I wish only to describe the situation accurately here and in the Falls of Clyde article (where it is appropriate to have more detail about technical matters in the ship's maintenance and its deterioration). It appears to me that there is documented controversy about the museum's role in the deterioration of the ship, and some treatment here in this article about the museum is appropriate. Does this current revision address appearance of POV concerns? doncram (talk) 17:16, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I find at the Honolulu Weekly website this feature article by Pala, who also was author of the New York Times article: http://honoluluweekly.com/feature/2008/09/falling-into-place/. It includes this passage:

“The Bishop has utterly failed in its mission as a museum, which is to preserve what’s been entrusted to it,” said Jeanie Ainlay, a British-born, 73-year-old businesswoman who worked on the Falls for 20 years, mostly as a tour guide. Blair Collis, the museum’s vice-president, replied, “Museums need to weigh unlimited needs with very limited resources. We spent as much as we could and it just wasn’t enough.”

It seems the claim by Jeanie Ainlay has been directly and officially responded to, by the museum, I don't see anything being one-sided here, if this is the article to which Viriditas refers. doncram (talk) 17:31, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's what I was saying (I suppose it reads ambiguously). As published in the Honolulu Weekly. I'm going to take a break from this for a week, but I will return to it. Viriditas (talk) 07:52, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox[edit]

Propose placing {{infobox museum}} in the lead section and moving NRHP down. Viriditas (talk) 11:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds reasonable. Arjuna (talk) 21:04, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try and get to it later tonight. Viriditas (talk) 00:52, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine by me. It was a museum first and the NRHP designation is secondary. A stripped-down version of the NRHP infobox might be included at the bottom of a museum infobox, following examples for including NRHP infobox within Lighthouse, Train station, and Windmill infoboxes, at Template:infobox nrhp and Template:infobox nrhp/testcases. doncram (talk) 01:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Doncram, which one would you prefer? Viriditas (talk) 20:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see how it works. Trying it out now... Viriditas (talk) 12:07, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What happened to the Museum infobox? Only the NRHP info box is there now. Both should be present, since the place is both a museum and a historic location. Two infoboxes is not at all taboo; see the article on the New York Transit Museum, which is both an accredited museum and an NYCTA subway station. As a museum there are a number of things about the Bishop Museum that should be covered, such as accreditation, attendance, annual budget, leadership, etc. That's what infoboxes are for, to organize basic information in an easily-scanned format. Reify-tech (talk) 22:49, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the Richard T. Mamiya Science Adventure Center is mentioned as existing, but there is no further information about it. If it is still a viable organization, there should be far more coverage of it. Reify-tech (talk) 22:53, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing on administration or funding?[edit]

This article is somewhat exceptional in comparison to those for numerous other such institutions, in that it says nothing about who administers the facility, or where its financial support originates. It would be very good if someone could add a section giving some of these details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.23.68.6 (talk) 18:41, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bishop Museum. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 07:06, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Bishop Museum. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 02:01, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bishop Museum. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 06:42, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bishop_Museum&oldid=1195186398"