Talk:Legion of Honor (museum)

California: San Francisco Bay Area Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as High-importance).

Museums Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

First comments

I'm going to move this to California Palace of the Legion of Honor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chinasaur (talk • contribs) 05:59, 20 August 2004

Vertigo

The Legion of Honor was the location of several important scenes in Alfred Hitchcock's film Vertigo. I may return at another time to add the information, but thought I'd note it here in case anybody is watching this space and wants to fill it in. Cuffeparade 06:33, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

Removed Adam and Eve. Albrecht Durer, 1504 from the collection highlights. I was there today and it's definitively not show there. From my web research [1][2] it seems that this painting is the Museo del Prado in Madrid, Spain. --Xca1019 03:24, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures

I have a few pictures, including the unmentioned Chihuly Tree in the Courtyard. If I upload them, can someone post them on the page? Centrisian (talk) 16:24, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lead image

The lead image here was changed without explanation; I've removed it until the matter has been discussed.
~~The original image (march 2004 to nov 2006) was the one I've put in~~
The one I've put in was the original image (march 2004 to nov 2006); it was cacked up by a 3-edit contributor, and removed by a bot (in Nov 2007) The next image (added Dec 2008)was the one just changed. Which image is best for the lead of this article? And why? Swanny18 (talk) 19:05, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(1) is a good image, but too small. I like (2) -- note that I added it to the article, but it's not my photo so I don't really have a dog in this fight -- because it shows the reflecting pool in front. (3) is also a nice photo, but the angle in (2) along with the pool makes me prefer that. howcheng {chat} 16:48, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I specificaly changed the image to a larger, more detailed with an angle that I thought was more illustrative. Frankly this goes against guildlines to return the image. I was not wrong for the bold change. The image is better only in that it is larger and perhaps brighter. The burden of proff falls on those that return or revert. As it stands the image was replaced by a far less quality image by the original uploader and that just seems self serving.

Hey don't worry. I'll take my image off. I like the idea that a consensus is being formed but the person who replaced the larger images with the smaller low resolution image he uploaded is being extremly selfish and I simply don't wish to deal with it. I really don't care enough to make this a point.

I have a large amount of images from The Legion of honor and was intending to expand this article.....but I think it can stay this way. I don't care.--Amadscientist (talk) 00:25, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

First: a correction: I didn’t post the original image, I merely replaced it. The sentence above was misleading (lysdexia?) so I’ve fixed it.

Second: thank you for your explanation of why you changed; it wasn’t in the edit history, and it isn’t obviously better, so there was nothing to say it wasn’t just done on a whim.

Thirdly the "guideline”, if you want one, is WP:BRD; we are at the "Discuss” stage. And as change is by agreement, it is just as much incumbent on you to show why a change is better as it is for another to say why not.

I have my own opinion of which I prefer, but my purpose here was to find a consensus; So, do we need a new image? If so, what? It’s up to you whether you take part in this, or pick up your marbles and go…Swanny18 (talk) 12:28, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(1) is quite unimpressive compared to (2), which in my opinion is the better image of the two. Jack1956 (talk) 17:38, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That seems to be it: We'll go with image 2, then Swanny18 (talk) 12:12, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I took out my image from the consensus for one reason. I don't want to participate on this particular article (with no prejudice). The image is on commons and I have no real control of it's use on wiki or elsewhere, however as a participating member of the now defunct Project illustration, I actively replace low resolution images on Wikipedia. It is not a matter of artistic opinion. Bigger is better if no other problem exists within the new image. This is a matter of picking and choosing battles. I honestly feel that I can simply create another article with a different title and hope for expansion over time.

But I like 2 as well.--Amadscientist (talk) 01:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

naming

The Legion of Honor no longer refers to itself by its full name, so I'm going to rename the article to reflect and updating the lede. Not expecting it to be controversial so I'm not initiating a move discussion, but let me know if you have any questions please. Kevin Gorman (talk) 00:23, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Film Appearences

The exterior of this building also appeared in an episode of the original Star Trek titled "Bread and Circuses". Should this be added in the "appearences" list? Promus Kaa (talk) 23:53, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]