Talk:Weather Machine

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Weather Machine. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131111164436/http://www.thesquarepdx.org/design_features.htm to http://www.thesquarepdx.org/design_features.htm

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) 02:21, 15 July 2017 (UTC) [reply ]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Weather Machine. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120618130657/http://www.thesquarepdx.org/pdf/PCS_GroundsMap.pdf to http://www.thesquarepdx.org/pdf/PCS_GroundsMap.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911064622/http://americansforthearts.org/pdf/about_us/2003AmericansForTheArtsAnnualReport.pdf to http://www.americansforthearts.org/pdf/about_us/2003AmericansForTheArtsAnnualReport.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131214125550/http://www.thesquarepdx.org/documents/PCS-Summer09-Brochure.pdf to http://www.thesquarepdx.org/documents/PCS-Summer09-Brochure.pdf

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) 10:25, 21 September 2017 (UTC) [reply ]

Why does the article say the "height is reported to be between 25 and 33 feet (7.6 and 10.1 m)"? NickWikiAccount1708 (talk) 02:04, 6 January 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

One issue is that Wikipedia wants info from reliable sources, not self measurements. Jason McHuff (talk) 09:29, 6 January 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

I agree, couldn’t someone measure it, verify it, publish it, post it on Wikipedia...? Goofy to me that the measurement is an estimate for a finite structure. NickWikiAccount1708 (talk) 16:29, 6 January 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

@Another Believer: Is HowStuffWorks (currently cited in ref 23) actually published by TLC? I don't see any mention of this on the website's about section, and the website's copyright info lists HowStuffWorks as a division of InfoSpace Holdings LLC. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 05:11, 6 January 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

@Lord Bolingbroke: According to HowStuffWorks, "The website was acquired by Discovery Communications in 2007, but sold it to different owners in 2014." I guess I'll remove mention of TLC. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:26, 6 January 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

I've replaced TLC as the publisher with HowStuffWorks as the website, and updated the access date. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:37, 6 January 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

I'm on the fence, if this is a lumino kinetic artwork that uses lights to display information, should Category:Light art be included? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:47, 6 January 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

This picture clearly has insufficient contrast of subject and background: it adds no understanding to the article and does nothing to illustrate the article. At present, it serves no purpose beyond demonstrating the poor supply of better pictures, and the inexplicable willingness of Wikipedia to put something of this standard on the Main Page. No picture is better than a bad picture. Kevin McE (talk) 17:10, 10 January 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

I disagree. Weather Machine is a contemporary work of art, which means our options are very limited (see commons: Category:Weather Machine). However, this image was kept after being nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons (see commons:File talk:Occupy Portland (Downtown PDX).jpg). You're right, this is not the best photograph for illustrating the machine/artwork, but IMO having this illustration is better than having none at all. The image at least shows some context w/r/t scale and where the machine is installed within the square. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 17:30, 10 January 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

Its location within the square is relevant only to those who already know it: those who know that square. As to there being no alternative, we already have two much clearer images in the article, so it is nota case of this or nothing. I note that the rationale for keeping it is that as a picture of the Weather Machine, it is a pretty hopeless picture that scarcely shows it. That is an admission that it really doesn't merit the bandwidth. Kevin McE (talk) 18:14, 10 January 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

Agree to disagree, and let's just let others weigh in. I've posted a note at WikiProject Oregon. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 21:44, 10 January 2019 (UTC) [reply ]

I would say three pictures of the same thing, which all have to be fair use to an extent, is problematic as a side issue. From an article standpoint, it also adds little to have three pictures of it. I would suggest taking the one from the history section and moving it to this spot, and replace the history one with an image of Willard Scott. It would be relevant given the dedication, and that way not three of the same thing. If you want context, I think a map of the square and its location in it does a better job. Aboutmovies (talk) 21:42, 14 January 2019 (UTC) [reply ]