Talk:Eisenhower Executive Office Building

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Date built appears to be wrong[edit]

As I recall, this building was constructed in the late 1700s, not the late 1800s. It really is a relatively old building by U.S. standards. I will try to check on this. Yours, Famspear 16:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. This site[1] indicates late 1800s may be correct, which looks pretty official. I don't know. Yours, Famspear 16:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well. Based on that White House web site, it appears I'm wrong. I just thought the building was a lot older. Yours, Famspear 16:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 16:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

fire [edit]

  • msnbc: "electrical fire"; "electrical closet"; "vice presidents' ceremonial office";...: I did not hear "papershredder".

Thank You,

[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 15:00, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Water cascading over one wall.

[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 15:17, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

During this incident was a signing ceremony:

[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 17:20, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why was fire subject removed[edit]

Cumulus Clouds why did you remove the fire subject from the article? 69.154.77.184 (talk) 19:05, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also believe this removal is a curiosity - fires in major buildings do typically merit a sentence.--CastAStone//(talk) 19:11, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If the building burned down or if somebody died in the fire, that would be one thing, but this is a subject dedicated to water damage in an office which is only being covered because of the man that sits in it. The addition of such material contradicts WP:RECENTISM, since it isn't put in a historical context and since it is only being included because of the newsmedia's current widespread coverage of the event. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 19:52, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I must disagree what you just stated. It does not matter who sets in this building, but that this is an American historical building. This fire did damage the building and will always be part of it history. That is why it is news. Also when deleting a part of the article it is always a nice thing to type comments why that change was made. AdmRiley (talk) 16:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

the dude minds[edit]

Why nobody says that in this building there's a bowling alley? i know becouse in the movie "the big lebowski", in the dude's livingroom there's a giant photo of Richard Nixon playing bowling. this photo was taken in 1970, and i think that there was a "white house bowling tournament" too(or something like that) that took\take place in that building. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.10.210.188 (talk) 17:15, 13 February 2008 (UTC) I've seen the same photo. I agree. Its an important part of the building's history. As I recall its got some pretty funky wallpaper in the background. Not very presidential. —Preceding unsigned comment added by VonEzdorff (talk • contribs) 01:15, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure the bowling alley is not in the basement of the White House itself? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.16.201.83 (talk) 12:51, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to Dick Cheney[edit]

The article contains this curious sentence: "The main office of the Secretary of Navy was restored in 1987 and is now used as the ceremonial office of Dick Cheney." This suggests that VP Cheney's use is unique for vice presidents. Wouldn't it be end the sentence with "... and is now used as the ceremonial office of The Vice President." Or better yet, "... is now the ceremonial office of the Vice President." --MiguelMunoz (talk) 20:14, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest Deletion and Replacement[edit]

The title of this page is still "Old Executive Office Building" - yet the very first line of the article makes it clear that this is no longer the name. Unless the article can be renamed appropriately, I'm going to suggest we replace this page with one with the correct naming. Mburn16 (talk) 01:37, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree - according to the General Services Administration, the official name of the structure is the Dwight D. Eisenhower Executive Office Building (official building page is here). The article should be so titled. bd2412 T 03:58, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Twain quote[edit]

"The OEOB was referred to by Mark Twain as "the ugliest building in America." Harry Truman called it "the greatest monstrosity in America."

Both quotes seems to come from a website created by high school seniors and have no further attribution. They are repeated in press articles -- but that might be because the quotes are on this very Wikipedia page. The University of Virginia has a Mark Twain search at http://etext.virginia.edu/railton/about/srchmtf.html -- both results for "ugliest" have nothing to do with the EEOB/OEOB. Should this really stay in there? 82.83.102.57 (talk) 23:22, 25 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Eisenhower Executive Office Building. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:01, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Eisenhower Executive Office Building. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:45, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Floor space world record seems unproven[edit]

"It was for years the world's largest office building, with 566 rooms and about ten acres of floor space."

The [City Hall] was built at about the same time

"A total space of about 113,000 m2 (1,220,000 sq ft) is spread over six floors and two basements with 1,575 rooms."

With 28 acres, that is just an example I know, but in any case the above statement seems quite wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.119.129.80 (talk) 15:37, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The current quote is even worse, claiming it held the record until the Pentagon was built. Just as an example, the Empire State Building is 10 years older than the Pentagon and at least four times larger than the EEOB. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:4040:77DD:6000:C92D:A40E:C260:6800 (talk) 16:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Eisenhower_Executive_Office_Building&oldid=1194904214"