Talk:Walker Art Gallery

Infobox Museum
I don't think the Walker should have museum infobox as it is an art gallery not a museum. I feel historic building is more suitable. If no one objects I will change it back in few days.--NeilEvans 17:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Lots of art galleries use the museum infobox, including the Prado in Madrid, the Borghese Gallery in Rome, the National Gallery of Victoria in Melbourne etc. etc. [talk to the] H AM 10:42, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well it does seem a lot of art galleries do use the museum infobox, but the could so easily use the historic building infobox. The thing with these infoboxes is that they assume that a person, building etc only falls into one category, but they don't. I'm going to leave it as it is as the infobox doesn't look bad.--NeilEvans 16:19, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Finance
It says in this book it was financed by Alderman A. R. Walker which is different to this article http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=UmKKOz_vvHEC&pg=PA284&dq=alderman+a.+r.+walker&hl=en&sa=X&ei=p6znUovsLsaH0AWvhIGwDA&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=alderman%20a.%20r.%20walker&f=false Novalia (talk) 13:20, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

The Scapegoat
This painting isn't here at all, it's in Lady Lever Art Gallery in Port Sunlight. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.213.53.15 (talk) 06:26, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Unsourced statement
This article claims (and has claimed for some time) that William Brown Street is "the only street in the United Kingdom to consist of nothing other than museums, galleries and libraries" This was added (with a load of other stuff, and without a source) in June 2010. it was deleted in December 2017 with the edit summary "That would be because there are only four buildings on it? It's also not even true—what about (for instance) The Mound in Edinburgh?" and restored almost immediately ( but still with no proof) along with the comment "Have not demonstrated untruth, merely nitpicking". So as this lacks a link to a reliable source that directly supports it (and has been challenged in the past) I have deleted it again. This should not be put back in the article (and should not have been put back last time) without an inline citation to a reliable source. I would also note that as this statement has been in the wind for about 14 years it is quite likely to be the origin of similar statements in otherwise reliable sources. Swanny18 (talk) 21:37, 11 May 2024 (UTC)