Talk:Monument Avenue

Remove or truncate monuments breakdown section?
Is there a need to keep the detailed breakdown section on every monument that is now gone from the Avenue (all except Lee and Ashe at this point)?
 * Yes. Carptrash (talk) 17:35, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

More Sources; More Detail
I just undertook a clean-up of this article that addressed style, grammar, spelling, sectioning, NPOV issues, and factual issues. I tried to keep the facts to what I as a former Richmond resident would consider to be 'common knowledge'. The article needs citations however, and hopefully more insightful detail, which a Richmond civic historian would be better positioned to research and write than I am.

If there is going to be a separate write-up for the monuments to Maury and Ashe, shouldn't there also be detail given for the other four? I removed anything from the original write-up of Maury's statue that sounded more like Maury's bio than it did info on the statue. I didn't check Maury's article to see if that stuff should be moved (I can only do so much in one evening!), so if an editor wants to check the previous versions for stuff to include in the bio article, have at it.

I also took non-NPOV out of the section on Ashe's statue, and will revert any reintroduction of bias. I resided in Richmond at the time that Ashe's statue was unveiled, and I think that controversy deserves more detailed treatment in this article since it was such a big part of Richmond's civic history in the 1990s. I am not the best person to do the research needed to write this properly, since I am not too familiar anymore with the potential reference sources. I hope someone takes this on.

I changed the rating of this article from Stub to Start because it includes quite a few broad facts on the topic (enough to warrant complex sectioning), but not a lot of detail yet. I personally contributed few facts to the article; nearly all of what's there after my revision was there before, I just prettied it up a bit.

--Erielhonan 08:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I added most of the basic info about the statues - (including stubs for the artists) and most of the pictures and whar reference there is, but that was after driving through Richmond in one afternoon. I'm now 2,000 miles away.  The book/pamphlet probably has more info on how the statues came to be.  As I recall, the Maury article is a mess - seemed to be written by his Great-great-grandson as a 7th grade history project - but it might be better now.  Carptrash 14:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Abraham Lincoln Memorial statue
The following text was removed:
 * Sculptor David Frech of Newburgh, N.Y was commissioned by the The United States Historical Society of Richmond to commemorate the arrival of Abraham Lincoln and his son Thomas Lincoln in Richmond Virgina, April 4th, 1865. The statue, much like the Arthur Ashe Monument, received a wide array of criticism for its placement, traditionally reserved for statues of key figures of the Confederacy. Protests were held at the unveiling April 5th, 2003 namely by the Sons of Confederate Veterans. Robert H. Kline, chairman of the historical society, the Richmond-based nonprofit company that commissioned the statue stated that the statue was for the purpose of reconciliation "He came on a mission of peace and reconciliation and I think the statue will serve that purpose for a very long time" Opponents of the statue claim that the statue commemorates Lincolns arrival into Richmond a proud victor. Bragdon Bowling, Virginia division commander of the Sons of Confederate Veterans was among the speakers protesting the statues unveiling stating that "As a Southerner, I'm offended. You wouldn't put a statue of Winston Churchill in downtown Berlin, would you? What's next, a statue of Sherman in Atlanta?".
 * The statue depicts Abraham Lincoln and his son Tad sitting on a bench, Lincoln's arm over his sons shoulder both parties looking at one another with the words 'Bind the nations wounds' carved in granite behind them.

The Lincoln statue is not on Monument Avenue, which is the subject of this article. Hal Jespersen (talk) 02:04, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://pauldipasquale.info/ashe.htm. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:36, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 00:24, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Fork out content about Robert E. Lee monument
I propose forking out content to create a standalone article for the Lee monument. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:09, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
 * why? This page is not too large and many of the sources discuss the monuments together. Lee will be covered eityer way on this page so why create a fork that has to be maintained as well. Legacypac (talk) 16:31, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Further, we have no sources for the one monument and no details at all on three monuments. That is a bigger issue to fix. Legacypac (talk) 16:34, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I think this is a fine monument to have its own article. A notable subject, a notable sculptor and it's in the news. Carptrash (talk) 00:03, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

I agree it's notable, the question is if the info is best presented standalone or in the context of Monument Avenue where the reader gets a broader picture. Legacypac (talk) 01:45, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * In my opinion there is no reason not to do both. I, for example, would be glad to see that info box on it go somewhere else. Sort of like there is a Beatles article and a Ringo Starr article. Sort of. Carptrash (talk) 01:51, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

I was bold and went ahead and forked the content to Robert E. Lee Monument (Richmond, Virginia). --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 02:52, 17 September 2017 (UTC)


 * What was the point of creating a discussion for if you are just going to do it when no one else agreed with you anyway? One person totally disagreed, and another stated would be good idea to have its own article as well as on this page. It just looks silly now to have the first and most important statue having one simple line, with the two least statues having lots of info. I actually do not see the need to even fork it to begin with, however I also do not object to Carptrash opinion either by having both its own article plus being listed here where most readers can get the entire context of Monument Ave. I will give it some more time for others to chime in, but in meantime will add more info sources and more info about rest. Maybe we can just transclude all Lee Monument info back to this page so as not needing to manage both pages? Kevin &#34;Hawk&#34; Fisher (talk) 16:31, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

I just cut this out and moved it here
"This statue originally was to have been placed in Washington, D.C., but was rejected because Maury, along with many other military leaders from Virginia, abandoned their careers with the Union military to support the Confederacy. The monument was placed in Richmond instead." The info I have on this statue has a very different, and more (to me) believable story. I will write that out shortly✅. It is interesting being back at this article after 10 years. Time does fly. Carptrash (talk) 17:23, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Monument Avenue. 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/20121006161537/http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1209891467&ResourceType=District to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=1209891467&ResourceType=District
 * Added tag to http://www.planning.org/greatplaces/streets/monumentavenue.htm
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20070823052421/http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/news.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2007-10-03-0161.html to http://www.inrich.com/cva/ric/news.apx.-content-articles-RTD-2007-10-03-0161.html
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130204094812/http://www2.timesdispatch.com/lifestyles/2007/sep/29/-rtd_2007_09_29_0149-ar-181566/ to http://www2.timesdispatch.com/lifestyles/2007/sep/29/-rtd_2007_09_29_0149-ar-181566/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041231061201/http://www.ibiblio.org/uncpress/chapters/driggs_richmonds.html to http://www.ibiblio.org/uncpress/chapters/driggs_richmonds.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:38, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Monument Avenue. 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/20070203051437/http://www.citycelebrations.org/easter/easter6.htm to http://www.citycelebrations.org/easter/easter6.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 05:32, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Sentence about Legality of Removing Monuments
I'm not well-versed enough in Wikipedia's rules to know how to go about making this change myself. But there's a statement under the History section that is a little misleading.

Specifically, the article says:

"...Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney announced that the city's Monument Avenue commission would include potential removal of the confederate monuments, which is illegal under Virginia law, as an option...."

But this is making a legal conclusion that is actually very much up in the air right now. There's currently an ongoing lawsuit about whether a city may do this. A judge in that case made a preliminary ruling on one of the issues, but there are others that remain to be litigated, and no final decision has been made. In addition, the judge's conclusions in that case have been disputed.

Meanwhile, the Wiki article doesn't cite to any authority in its conclusion, only a state statute that may or may not apply. Wouldn't this count as non-NPOV and/or original research?  this name is also in use  20:28, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

I believe that the state legislature recently repealed that law in the wake of the current George Floyd situation (June 2020). Ba2kell (talk) 02:03, 12 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I fail to see how this is a dubious claim. As that IS the current ruling, which you even admitted. I could possibly see adding a phrase that this verdict was being challenged and disputed maybe with provided sources. However, apparently there was felt to be a need for a specific amendment law to be passed in order to allow localities the ability to decide on such matters. Including the city mayor Stoney holding plans to introduce ordinance until after July 1 when that law comes into effect. It all sounds like a mute point now considering the new recent amendment law, but did not even see how it was dubious to begin with considering the current ruling you even quoted. Kevin &#34;Hawk&#34; Fisher (talk) 13:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)