Talk:List of statues of Queen Victoria

Many still missing
Here's a forum thread with a bunch of other examples that aren't (at this writing) included yet. Herostratus (talk) 07:04, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Could someone please add the statue outside the Royal Victoria College in McGill's University, Montreal, Canada. It was erected in 1899 and sculpted by Princess Louise, Victoria's daughter. See http://cac.mcgill.ca/campus/buildings/royal_victoria_college_early_years.html for more details. I tried to do it but didn't manage it. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.180.163.217 (talk) 17:40, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, someone will get to that presently. Thanks for the link! It is hard to add data to lists.... try editing some regular prose articles to get started! Herostratus (talk) 14:31, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

A proposal for a couple changes
A couple changes that I'd like to see are 1) Only one link in the "location" column, and 2) some way of indicating those statues which have individual articles (or sections of articles).

Too many links is confusing and not helpful I think; I propose that that the lowest available be linked to, that is:
 * Link to the town, if there's no link for a more precise location.
 * If there's a link for (let's say) the particular square, or particular section of town, or museum, or whatever, where the statue is located, link to that instead.
 * If there's a link for the actual statue, link to that instead.

My guess is that most people who want to drill down on the location probably want to see the lowest level of detail they can get to, and if not, the higher entity is easily available (that is, "Glasgow" is probably linked from the first sentence of "Glasgow Royal Infirmary", etc etc).

For the instances where there's a entire article for the individual statues, I guess putting it in boldface and telling the reader might be best.

Any objections? Herostratus (talk) 02:36, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Unwieldy
There's a whole honken lot of columns here, such that (on my more-or-less-typical-I-guess) computer screen you have to scroll right and left as well as up and down.


 * 1) Image
 * 2) Location and Coords
 * 3) Date
 * 4) Artist
 * 5) Type
 * 6) Material
 * 7) Dimensions
 * 8) Designation
 * 9) Wikidata
 * 10) Notes

Originally I only had three (Location, Date, Sculptor). I mean fine add more, but it seems a but much at this point.

So, there are two kinds of entries here, those statues that do have articles and that those who don't. For those that do, all the details -- which direction it is facing, what the inscription is, how tall it is, whatever -- you can get that from it article. For those that aren't notable enough to have articles, I wonder how much detail we need to provide. If screen space wasn't an issue, then we could provide all we want within reason. But it is.

So here's some columns that I am proposing to delete:


 * Wikidata, I've never seen this in a list article and this seems a bit closer to raw source data, which except for the image (which we already have in a separate column) doesn't seem necessary. Most of the entries are blank.
 * Designation, which I suppose that means if it's got some legal status as a monument maybe? Most of the entries are black, there are a few that say "Grade II" etc which is some British thing
 * Dimensions, which we are mainly interested in the height I guess, I mean fine, but if we're going to cut anything... and only one entry has a value I think

Two that are more arguable and it depends on on how the material fits:


 * Type -- whether its seated or standing, pedestal or not, and like that. Most of the entries are filled. But if there's a picture you can see the type. If there isn't, is it critical info? Again, if we're going to try get to this fit on the width of one page...
 * Material. Most of the entries are filled in, and it'd be use to some readers I guess. Herostratus (talk) 03:47, 5 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Couple of points in reply.

First, I'm reading this on a fairly small lap-top, with a 12in screen, and the page displays without the need to scroll left and right to view all the columns, so I would question if screen space is a valid issue.

Secondly, I would say there are good resons to retain the three columns you question. If the item has an entry on Wikidata that will list any articles on the statue in other language Wikipedias and other relevant sources. Designation refers to a national heritage or cultural designation which many countries, not just Britain, have in one form or other. Not many countries, as yet, have that data on-line or as easily accessable and searchable as the Scotish and English versions do, but surely that will change. I would have thought that 'Dimensions' would be among the most basic of descriptive features for a statue but that detail is often lacking from sources. Instead terms like 'life-size' or 'twice life-size' are commonly used and it may be worth using these in this article. Best regards. 14GTR (talk) 19:57, 6 July 2022 (UTC)