Talk:Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum

Collection

We say that the museum "can only show about 300 works at a time", but the source is from 1992. Is this still true after the Annex was completed and ban exhibiting works? -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:11, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

We also say "620 of the remaining works were designated as part of the Solomon R. Guggenheim Founding Collection". Do we mean that only 620 of the original collection remains, or that there are more that remain, but only 620 were so designated? -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:23, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

@Ssilvers, sorry, I did not see this before. In regards to the "620 remaining works" sentence, officials designated 620 works as part of the collection. I'm not sure whether 620 of the original collection remain, in which case all of the original collection would've been designated.

In regards to "about 300 works", the source actually says about 6% of the collection (compared to about 3% before the renovation). There were about 5,000 works at the time. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:27, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, User:Epicgenius. Please update if you find a newer source stating how many works can now be displayed since the Annex and other additions were added. Also, if you ever see further clarification on the 620, please add it. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:17, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Impact and retrospective commentary

In the Design section's 2nd paragraph, we have a nice quote by Goldberger about the design. But the 3rd paragraph under "Impact and retrospective commentary" could use something like it. Anyhow, good job on upgrading the article! -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:45, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

I'll work on adding something to the third paragraph of "Impact and retrospective commentary", as that paragraph is mostly a description right now. Also, thanks - hopefully this could be improved further to GA in the future. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:28, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Lead

I've partially reverted this edit, which updated the attendance while removing large parts of the museum building's description in the lead. The edit summary was removed duplicate text / updated attendance figures, but I have two issues with this.

1. The museum's architecture isn't actually mentioned anywhere else in the lead. It is a major enough aspect of the article; the building was given National Historic Landmark and UNESCO World Heritage Site designations, and it is an official city landmark. Furthermore, the building itself is the reason this museum has a separate article from, say, Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation.
2. The lead is supposed to summarize the body, per WP:LEAD. In that sense, it intentionally duplicates the body.

Thus, I've restored the description of the architecture. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:25, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Epicgenius. I support your revisions. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:27, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Incept date

The foundation began in 1937 but the museum was opened in 1939. However, the infobox uses the 1937 date. Viriditas (talk) 21:02, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

Agreed and changed. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:32, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

I agree with this change as well. I think this may be a holdover from a time when the article discussed the foundation at length as well, but the first museum space didn't open till 1939. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:16, 16 May 2024 (UTC)

Potential GAN

I am thinking of sending the museum's article to WP:GAN at some point in the future, since I'm going to try to create a good topic on The 20th-Century Architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright. Though this page is already substantial for the most part, I feel like the page may still be missing a few things about the collection, at least compared with other museum GAs like Frick Collection.

@Ssilvers, as one of this article's top contributors, do you have any thoughts on a potential GAN? Your feedback would be much appreciated. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:19, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

I think your analysis is correct. I do not have time to research the collection more, but if you want to undertake it, I think the history/architecture stuff should pass GAN with little difficulty. If you look at the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation article, a few years ago I did some research for that one that may have something more about the collection than is currently in the museum's article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I'll likely circle back to the collection section in a bit - from the looks of it, the Guggenheim New York shares some of its collection with the Venice and Bilbao museums, so that issue will have to be straightened out. It also seems like there are additional objects that can be mentioned in the collection section, but currently aren't. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:35, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

...and also shares/will share with Guggenheim Abu Dhabi? -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:39, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Yep. I'm still trying to find a source for that, since I didn't see it in the foundation's page. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:43, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

I had seen this article, although I can no longer access it. I don't think it says that they will share. They have held two exhibits in Abu Dhabi in advance of the museum's opening. The one in 2009 to 2010, called "The Guggenheim: The Making of a Museum" says: "This exhibition, which includes a selection of more than fifty paintings drawn from the museum’s holdings, simultaneously provides an introduction to the early history of the Guggenheim collection and the history of abstract art in the West from the late nineteenth to mid-twentieth century." (my bolding). But that was very early on, and they may have decided to make the collection unique from the NY collection. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:58, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

From what I could find so far, it does seem like Abu Dhabi is getting its own collection. There is no indication that they're sharing, though NY loaned two pieces to Abu Dhabi once (which I'm not even sure is all that notable). – Epicgenius (talk) 22:23, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Fair enough. -- Ssilvers (talk) 07:46, 14 December 2024 (UTC)