Talk:Mapparium

Untitled
And the reason why we don't show a picture of this quite difficult-to-imagine-thingie is...

http://www.schulershook.com/ld/showcase/em/emimages/em_mb1.jpg


 * It's not clear that the image you link to is a "free image," or that any freely-licensed image of the Mapparium is available. The link you give doesn't say anything about the image's copyright or licensing status. The Mapparium forbids tourists from taking photographs, and the Mary Baker Eddy Library website is fairly liberally laced with explicit copyright notices. Of course, there no reason not to include a link to their site, such as http://www.marybakereddylibrary.org/collections/gallery.jhtml?gallery=mapparium, if there isn't one already. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:55, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Is this a museum?
or an art piece? dm (talk) 03:13, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * An "exhibit" in "The Mary Baker Eddy Library for the Betterment of Humanity, a non-religious public museum and library". -- Quiddity (talk) 04:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Good, I'm glad you read it the same way I did, because I already removed the museum cats and left them on the Library. Thanks dm (talk) 05:00, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Oceans
When I visited the Mapparium quite some time ago (it was definitely in need of renovation), the guide talked about how ocean depths were indicated by differing shades of blue. The deeper a spot was, the darker the blue was. I can't seem to find any reference to this in online information, so I'm guessing that for me to quote what I personally heard a guide say would come under the category of "original research..."

RogerInPDX (talk) 03:06, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Image to illustrate this landmark
Some time ago I added an image to this page, but that image has since been deleted. I agree with the point below that this landmark is very difficult to imagine without a picture. I don't know the circumstances for why my earlier picture was deleted, but I'm happy to share it again under a Wikimedia Commons-compatible license if desired. Here's the picture as originally uploaded, and here's a more recent edit. --Misterbisson (talk) 18:52, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Excellent idea, but the Mapparium says photography is not allowed inside it unless approved in advance, and they license them for one-time publication.https://www.marybakereddylibrary.org/about/press/ Unless they've given you permission you couldn't release a photo, even one you've taken. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 19:04, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I sent the MBE Library an email asking if they'd be willing to license and/or release a photo for the article's use. We'll see what happens. - DavidWBrooks (talk)


 * UPDATE: They never responded. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 14:54, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Update on Mapparium affiliation
Due to the August 2021 launching of a new series of exhibits on the first floor of the Christian Science Publishing House, which includes the Mapparium and much more, there are a few details in this article that would need to be updated in order to remain fully accurate. The second sentence of the article currently states that the Mapparium “is an exhibit at The Mary Baker Eddy Library in Boston, Massachusetts.” Something along the following lines would be more accurate to say: The Mapparium is an integral part of the “How Do You See the World?” exhibit of the Christian Science Publishing House in Boston, Massachusetts.

The “Design and Construction” section of the article currently includes the following observation: “The Mapparium was closed in 1998 for a four-year cleaning and renovation. It reopened in 2002 as an exhibit of The Mary Baker Eddy Library, and now features a light-and-sound-show that illustrates how the world has changed since 1935.” This is accurate but no longer up-to-date. Perhaps a sentence, more or less along the following lines, could be added at the conclusion of that paragraph: As of August 2021 the Mapparium is no longer an exhibit of the Mary Baker Eddy Library, but is an integral part of the Church’s ‘How Do You See the World?’ exhibit on the ground floor of the Christian Science Publishing House.

Final note: the link in the first reference on this article brings the reader to a location on Christianscience.com that actually corresponds with the updated information we are here providing.

FirsthandPOV-CCS (talk) 15:43, 10 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Done - thanks. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 15:50, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Image needs permission
This article desperately needs a photo, yes - but the Mapparium is very strict about copyright and has not released a version that wikipedia can use. Maybe editors can badger them for one; it didn't work when I tried (see comment above). I've just removed a photo that had no indication of permission - it should be removed from the commons, too. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 00:53, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I nominated it for deletion on commons. But perhaps you could upload a copy here on enwiki as fair-use? That's pretty typical for an image of a piece of protected art in an article specifically about the piece of art. DMacks (talk) 03:58, 2 December 2021 (UTC)


 * The Mapparium is very strict about no photos - I don't think there is a "fair use" in that case. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 12:53, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:Fair use is not controllable by the owner. The "fair" talks about a limited situation where the public benefit outweighs the owner's wishes. It doesn't mean they have to let you or make it easy for you to take a picture, and if you do it anyway in violation of whatever visitor/access policy it's between you and them if there are any other repercussions such as being ejected from the museum with no refund or excommunicated. DMacks (talk) 14:50, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Not me and them - it would be between them and Wikipedia if they threw a legal hissy-fit. That's why Wikipedia has long erred on the side of caution when it comes to photos; you can image how many lawsuits they could face. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 18:34, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The Mapparium could sue if they like, but WMFLegal agrees with WP's policy on accepting non-free/fair-use content in this sort of context. If someone took such a picture and uploaded their photo here, it would likely meet all 10 requirements of WP:NFCCP. Obviously it's up to whomever might take such a picture to weigh their personal risk in doing so. DMacks (talk) 19:06, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree with DMacks, It doesn't matter what the Mapparium thinks if they have no legal grounds to stand on. For what its worth though, I don't see any evidence that the Mapparium would not want a photo on the wiki page, and them not replying to an email is hardly evidence they would sue. For one thing there are plenty of photos already on the internet, so either they give permission more freely than you think or they don't care enough to try to take them down. If you like though you can ask FirsthandPOV-CCS who commented in the section above, they may be more responsive, and you might get a better photo than the one in question. WestCD (talk) 06:37, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

It certainly would be nice to have a good photo on this page. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 13:21, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

img rq
--Mateus2019 (talk) 02:19, 13 May 2022 (UTC)