Talk:Science Gallery

Factual corrections
Hello,

I work for Science Gallery International. Whilst I'm a big fan of Wikipedia and use it all the time, I don't have any experience with editing so I have a simple question relating to this article.

There is at least one factual error in here right now, and a number of respects in which this article could be factually improved using 3rd party sources. However, I'm aware that it would not be best practice to go in and edit an article about our organisation ourselves.

As someone who works for an associated organisation, would it be acceptable for me to suggest the ways in which this article could be factually corrected and improved in this talk page, and include links to 3rd party sources confirming these facts? And how acceptable is it that an editor would use suggestions from someone working for the organisation in question as a basis to improve the article?

Thank you in advance, Fionnkidney (talk) 16:47, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I am sad to see that nobody answered this question. If you, or any other Science Gallery related people, are still reading this then, yes, you can propose changes here. It is best if you do not edit the article yourself unless the edit is minor and definitely 100% uncontroversial (e.g. correcting an incorrect date or reverting unambiguous vandalism to the article). --DanielRigal (talk) 16:57, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

How do we want to structure this?
Now that the Science Gallery is open in London, do we want to have a section for each open gallery or should they each have different articles with maybe a main article to link them? I'm thinking that the first option is best to start with but it could grow into the second option later. If the London gallery gets a lot of attention then it could swamp the article. If that starts to happen then we should definitely spin it out into its own article. --DanielRigal (talk) 16:57, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I've put the other locations in. I tried to make an infobox for London but it really didn't like having two infoboxes of the same type in one article. If anybody has any ideas on how to fix this then please have a go.
 * Also, the SGI section is now rather out of date. --DanielRigal (talk) 23:59, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

What's the latest
In late January 2022 this was stated about Science Gallery Dublin: "Over the coming months, working with the Trinity Board and others, we will keep you updated on progress as we move into a new phase of planning" – does someone have these updates, as the status now seems somewhat vague? 51.171.242.16 (talk) 22:17, 6 June 2022 (UTC)