Jump to content

Talk:List of museums in Florida

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

Untitled

[edit]

This article contains a list of museums in the state of Florida. Online-only museums do not belong on this page. It was separated from List of museums in the United States on December 14, 2007. Please refer to this list for all history & dicussions prior to December 14, 2007.

Each museum should have at least one icon using Template:Museum followed by a Wikipedia link. If the Wikipedia link is red, there should also be a separate web link to the museum website. If the museum does not have a website, specify "(no website)". If the Wikipedia link is not red, the website should NOT be specified here. It should be specified in the museum's own Wikipedia article to reduce clutter and file size of this article.

If the museum is in an "Elsewhere" section (or if there are no sections in a particular state), you must also specify the city after the Wikipedia link. Museums from the same city may have their own section if there are 5 or more of them.

This list is only for museums -- not aquariums, planetariums or zoos unless they contain a museum. For these, see:

If you feel the need to change a rule, please post to this page so we can talk about it and find a way that everyone can agree on.

For articles on individual museums, please use Template:Infobox Museum.



Discussion

[edit]

Miami museums

[edit]

Should Miami museums include museums in Fort Lauderdale and Palm Beach since they are in the Miami metropolitan area? I say yes. --Comayagua99 17:30, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would say 'no', that is too confusing. -- Donald Albury 17:39, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NOT GROUPED: I agree that they should NOT be grouped together as they are separate cities and all cities on the page thus far are separated. Except with Twin cities like Minneapolis & Saint Paul in Minnesota. I don't believe that Miami, Fort Lauderdale, and Palm Beach are twin cities ("triplet cities"?) but I could be wrong. Please correct me if this is the situation. --Ben Boldt 22:01, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(This Miami museums discussion section was moved from List of museums in the United States because List of museums in Florida was separated from List of museums in the United States.) FieldMarine (talk) 23:10, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

We have only been using one wikilink per city on this page as per wikipedia guidelines for wikilinks or else it becomes redundant. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 14:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's my understanding, FieldMarine, that what you are saying is usually only applicable to articles which are expected to be read from top to bottom. There is no need for more than one link in such cases. In a list of this sort, though, especially one in which the locations are scattered throughout a long listing, it is most useful to have each instance linked to help users, who are likely to be looking for some specific entry, and who may not be reading the whole article. I just checked out the Connecticut and Michigan lists, and they both link all instances of locations.
There does not seem to be any mention of this convention for the Florida article on the article talk page. Perhaps it would be useful to hear from others, so I will place this there, too. Tim Ross·talk 15:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, it does not matter to me & I did what you did only to have my edits changed back later by someone else. As far as the discussion goes, this page (as well as all the other lists of museums for each state) was recently separated from List of museums in the United States & that is where all the real history is for this page (and the other state lists of museums). Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 15:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the background on this. A check back to the List of museums in the United States discussion page didn't turn up any agreement or even any discussion regarding some special restriction on numbers of links for these lists, so I think it would be wise to continue to do what both of us have apparently attempted: Make it easy for the users to find the Wikipedia entries for the museum locations, by linking the city names in the articles. I'll forge ahead and see if anyone complains. If that happens, we can talk about it some more here. Tim Ross·talk 16:23, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I spent a lot of effort in the past to limit links to cities in the list in conformance with the MOS, and no one ever objected or changed them back. That would make conforming to the MOS established practice in the List of Museums, even if it was not formally discussed. If you want to change that established practice and deviate from the MOS, it would be better to try to find a new consensus here on the talk page. -- Donald Albury 16:54, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're quite right, Donald. The Wikipedia Manual of Style (WP:MOS) does show a strong preference for limiting numbers of links. We've all seen articles in which the same term is linked time after time, to no possible purpose. This preference, though, is not a requirement, and the MOS makes it clear that a major guiding principle is to be ease-of-use. As I noted, above, forcing a user to scan over a long list hunting for the one instance in which "Sarasota" is linked is not helpful. Providing the links where they will probably be used is helpful. We can do it either way without violating the manual, I think, and it makes sense to follow the most user-friendly approach. Other states have decided to link all locations, as I mentioned above, if that precedent is important.
As an alternate, and one which I would prefer, we could make individual listings for any location with 2 or more museums, rather than the current 5 or more. (In fact, each location could have a header even if there was only one museum in that locality, if we wished.) This would have the advantage of directing a Florida visitor to all the listed museums in a location, without searching through the list to make sure they've found them all.
Do any other editors of this page have strong feelings on this point? Tim Ross·talk 13:18, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Tim Ross• -- I am in agreement with grouping by 2, but also recommend hold fast on any change in format until we complete discussions on formatting of all state lists. Please voice your opinions at Talk:List of museums in the United States, an ongoing discussion of formatting. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 13:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the advice FieldMarine. I have followed up on it, and added various thoughts there. It looks like it will be quite a while, though, before any consensus is reached (although some of the states seem to be forging ahead on their own). Tim Ross·talk 21:15, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photos

[edit]

I would like to see photographs of some of the museums on this list page. Not too excessively, but maybe one or two per city and a few in the Elsewhere section. I don't want to just add them myself, but have others say what would seem reasonable. Thoughts? --Ebyabe (talk) 15:00, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean adding photos used on the individual museum articles or new photos? I think a few photos would liven up the page, but too many could bog it down. FieldMarine (talk) 15:56, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't think it would hurt to have a photo of some sort of representative Florida museum at the top. Might be an improvement. I think, though, that a scattering of photos among the listings would be a distraction. Tim Ross (talk) 18:18, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
An assortment of possibilities to choose from can be found at WikiCommons here. Have at! :) --Ebyabe (talk) 19:01, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO, four rows of photos at the beginning of the article seems distracting. I recommend keeping it to one row or placing the photos at the bottom & if moved to the bottom, no more than four rows. As a general reminder, consensus was achieved in Talk:List of museums in the United States not to include photos in the list itself. FieldMarine (talk) 20:22, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Galleries are usually near the bottom of articles and such. I'd say the museum info should be first. More photos is a nice idea, but not at the top would be better, imho. :) --Ebyabe (talk) 01:34, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

+Would like to establish a link under Florida museums to the Military Sea Services Museum, Sebring, Florida webpage. Our museum is a nonprofit museum dedicated to preserving the traditions and customs of the U.S. Sea Services (Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard). Our webpage is milseasvcmuseum.com. Please let us know if the requested will be established or if we need to do something further to have the link established in Wikipedia. Thank you for your consideration. 207.30.244.63 (talk) 05:02, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

genekissner@yahoo.com or navmargrd@milseasvcmuseum.com

Link created on list. I'll make a stub for the museum soon, no advertisement though. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 05:12, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Groupings of museums

[edit]

I recommend keeping this list with groupings of museums by area as it is currently formatted & not combining all museums in Florida into one long list as done in some of the other states. We can add additinal groupings as necessary, particlarly as the list grows. This organization will allow for articles on specific cities to link to a specific section of this list that contains the museums in that city. Please comment so we can acheive consensus on keeping this current format or please propose an alternate organization. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 03:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, FieldMarine, but I just finished formatting the info into "one long list as done in some other states". Truthfully, I didn't notice your comment here before I did it, but it can all be reverted if you don't like it. The page was in a sorry state, though, with mixed format listings, and really needed some sort of consistency. It will be a good deal nicer, though, if I can figure out how to make the table open with one or the other column selected. Tim Ross (talk) 13:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tim, Thanks for cleaning up the table. It looks much better. Here is what I recommend for the table format.
1. Change Website column to Notes & increase the size of this column. Like with other state lists for museums, only add a link to an external website in the notes section if there is no internal link to that museum. If there is an internal link (i.e. a “blue” link to the museum) to a separate museum article, than it is redundant to have an external link. In this case, I say we eliminate the external link, which really follows Wikipedia guidelines for external links in the middle of articles.

2. I suggest we make separate tables for the larger cities with at least five or more museums, such as St. Augustine and Miami. This was discussed on the Talk:List of museums in the United States. This would provide for better ability for the bigger cities to link to this table & show the museums in that city. I intended on creating links to this table in these Florida cities in the future. These smaller tables should be placed in alphabetical order at the beginning of this list. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 03:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the kind words, FieldMarine. I agree with your thought, that the list might sometimes be more useful if the larger cities were broken out into individual sub-lists. On the other hand, though, that would cost us most of the advantages of having a sortable list. For instance, I think is would add considerably to the article's value if we had a "Type" or "Area of Study" column so that someone searching for, say, art museums could click on the column and see all such museums listed together. A "Region" column, as many states have, would also be useful to some users. Anyway, breaking out the larger cities would cost us that potential ability, since one would often have to search in each list, and I recommend staying with one long list. I guess, essentially, I favor what seems to be the consensus from Talk:List of museums in the United States. Tim Ross (talk) 11:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, we never really gained consensus in Talk:List of museums in the United States on breaking out cities in the larger states like California & Florida. So I think we decided on allowing some flexibility in those cases. I agree that when looking at the list by itself it looks cleaner as one long list, but you lose the ability for other articles to link effectively to this list, like city pages. IMHO, the ability for one article to link to another is a real benefit of Wikipedia. Unless you really object, I would to break out the list with separate tables for the larger cities.

Also, I’m opposed to regions because it seems a waste of time if we already have them orgainized by cities. This is especially true for Florida. I've seen how the other state lists for museums are shaping up & they all look good, except for the region sections. IMHO, regions for the most part on the other lists just don't appear helpful to me. Space is at a premium on these lists & we should try to keep them as compact as possible or else the lists become very long. I'd rather use the space to enlarge the notes section so we can provide a very short summary of the museum. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 12:06, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, that it would be best to change "Website" to "Notes" and enlarge it. I'll do so. I recognize your point, that there is logic to adding websites for red-link museums but not for blue-link ones, and perhaps even Wikpedia policy applies. It seems a little odd, though, and not helpful to users, to provide that immediate on-line source of further information for the one class of museums and not the other, even though the column space would be there in either case. Tim Ross (talk) 11:36, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that limiting external links & maximizing internal links keeps the user in Wikipedia & I agree with that policy. That’s why I recommend eliminating external links when internal links exist, like internal links to individual museum pages which already contain external links to the museum website. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 12:06, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that the use of "Regions" could be very helpful for transient visitors to the state, although they are not of too much use to long-time residents. A visitor going to Miami might well like to know if an afternoon trip to, say, Indian Temple Mound Museum in Fort Walton Beach, is a possibility. That said, I'm considerably more interested in a "Type" column, and would be happy to give up the one for the other.
You're right, of course, that an ability to link to that part of the listing containing the museums of just one city might be useful. One would naturally link there from the city article. In truth, though, such a link might be just as desirable for St. Augustine (with 15 museums listed) as for Stuart (with 1). Thus, an individual section for each town could be justified following that logic. The ability to search through all Florida museums, however, for those dealing with "Art" or for the one devoted to "Salvador Dali", is, to my mind, considerably more valuable. I maintain a strong preference, therefore, for a single list. Tim Ross (talk) 13:46, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A city with only one or two museums could provide a direct link to those museums in the article about that city while a city with many museums would need a list. I don’t agree that sorting a list for all the art museums in Florida is more valuable than being able to properly link cities to the museums in their area. One can find the art museums in Florida by accessing Category:Art museums and galleries in Florida. However, I believe that embedding a link to a museum list inside an article, such as an article on a city is cleaner & more effective then embedding a link to a category in the middle of an article. Good links like that create strong articles in Wikipedia as done by award winning articles on some cities. If breaking down by area was not valuable, than we would not have broken down the List of museums in the United States into individual state lists. It only follows then that the larger state lists of museums should also break down into city lists for the larger cities. If this is not done, I believe editors will create separate lists of museums for those cities & that would be redundant. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 14:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You make many good points, FieldMarine. I have no doubt of the utility of direct links to city listings within the Museums of Florida list. I do, however, seem to value the ability to have a full, searchable state list considerably more highly than you. Yes, as an alternate, one could go to Category:Art museums and galleries in Florida if searching for art, but all you would find would be the names of those places with articles. You would then have to go to the individual articles to find out where they were. Actually, in most cases other than art museums/galleries, maritime museums, and transport museums, that whole option doesn't seem to exist. I would like to point out, further, that at least some of the possible redundancies that worry you already exist. Of the ten cities with enough museums to qualify under your plan for individual lists, six already have reasonable lists incorporated within their respective articles: Jacksonville, Key West, Melbourne, Miami, Orlando, and St. Petersburg. (There is also already a List of museums in Fort Lauderdale, Florida which includes ten museums. I need to see which ones the Florida list is missing!) Actually, of course, all of this discussion assumes that there will, shortly, be a column in the list devoted to museum types. I intend to take care of that, but am holding off because of this search for consensus. Without any variables beyond name and city, your plan would be a fine way to handle the situation in my opinion. Tim Ross (talk) 19:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Museum type

[edit]

Well, I went ahead and added a "Type" column, under the assumption that it will be helpful even if the listing is eventually split into sub-lists. Note that there are many blanks in the list. It would be great if you feel like filling some of them in! Tim Ross (talk) 15:11, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I fully support the additional column for type...looks good! FieldMarine (talk) 02:37, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

[edit]

Due to the size of this list, I recommend we keep the summaries in the Notes column for each museum to under two lines. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 04:20, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a good idea, I think. Tim Ross (talk) 09:29, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maitland Art Center - not a museum?

[edit]

Should we continue to list the "Maitland Art Center" here? According to the article, at least, it's a historical site offering various art classes, serving as a site for weddings, and providing a variety of events and exhibitions during the year. If the exhibitions are a significant and consistent part of the place, then perhaps it does belong here, but I don't know. Any thoughts/information? Tim Ross (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Coral Castle Museum

[edit]

Would Coral Castle qualify as a museum? --217.189.226.24 (talk) 11:38, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Museums in Florida

[edit]

I added the county column to List of museums in Florida to help ensure that all museums are included that have articles. Since museums articles are linked by county, it is useful to have that included in the table. Also, for Florida residents (not me), it can be useful to know what is in your own county, which is not directly seen via the region category. Please consider undoing your change to the article. Thanks. Jllm06 (talk) 14:17, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I have no problem with adding this category if the region category is eliminated. Having both is redundant & I think the county one is more useful (IMHO). However, consensus was achieved on what to include on these lists at Talk:List of museums in the United States. I recommend having that discussion here so that we can keep the state lists standardized as agreed upon. Thanks! FieldMarine (talk) 14:26, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Articles and photos

[edit]

I've been traversing the state and taking photos of museums when I can. For those wanting to create museum articles, it's at least 50/50 that there'll be a picture for it now. You know, for those wanting to turn more of those redlinks to blue. The link near the bottom of the list page to WikiCommons will lead you to where they are. --Ebyabe (talk) 17:51, 1 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Updates

[edit]

I see a lot of helpful updates were made. The |Children’s Museum of Boca Raton was removed, but the website is still up. How was it determined that this museum isn't in operation? Candleabracadabra (talk) 21:12, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You changed the old Wiki article after I looked at the county and now I have linked to the new article. Thanks for the update!Jllm06 (talk) 23:15, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of museums in Florida. 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) 09:05, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on List of museums in Florida. 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) 17:38, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:07, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_museums_in_Florida&oldid=1208270408"