Talk:Mount Rushmore/Archive 1

Movie Appearances

I haven't seen any of the movies listed here, but surely the notes here should be short and to the point? Film trivia (like where the Hitchcock film was shot) should be under the actual film. The summaries of the Team America and Trail Mix-up were completely incomprehensible if you hadn't seen the movie so I took them out. Feel free to rewrite. --Tedneeman 07:27, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Considering 'Mount Rushmore' is how this monument is commonly known, wouldn't this article be better placed at Mount Rushmore? --Gabriel Beecham/Kwekubo 01:03, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

maybe you can add this: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bild:LocMap_Mount_Rushmore.png

I remember that something very similar to Mt Rushmore is also featured in the movie Richie Rich, though I am not very sure of it...

Susan B. Anthony?

A little-known fact about Mount Rushmore is this: In 1937, a bill was introduced in Congress to add the head of Susan B. Anthony, but a rider on an appropriations bill in Congress was passed to require that funds be used to finish only those heads that had already been started. (Source)

Is this true? If so, why is this missing from this article? --Klaws 21:20, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

I think the Library of Congress is a reliable source. I added it to the article (with citation). Cmadler 19:52, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Sacred Mountains?

Shouldn't there be a comment on this page about how the Sioux think about having huge faces carved into mountains sacred to them? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.128.127.64 (talk • contribs) 08:21, 29 December 2005.

Yes, if a verifiable source can be cited. See WP:V. It should be made clear whether it is this particular mountain that is sacred, or the Black Hills in general. What do they think of the Crazy Horse sculpture? Is this a consistent viewpoint? Also, see WP:NPOV. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 16:32, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

This is one source American Vertigo : Traveling America in the Footsteps of Tocqueville; I will try to find more.

Appearances section

My reading of the WP:MOS is that the subsections of Appearances should contain short representative lists of the most notable instances of Mount Rushmore in film, print and games. These sections should not include every instance since the lists would become so long as to have little or no value and would give the impression that such uses are more important than its history or geology.

There is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are famous because they are associated with or significantly contributed to the list topic. Wikipedea is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedea is not a mere collections of internal links.

Consequently, before adding to this section, please take the following steps:

• be sure that the article that you are linking mentions Mount Rushmore. We should not be sending readers that are looking for information about Mount Rushmore to articles that do not mention the term.
• verify that your entry is famous because it is associated with or significantly contributed to the notability of Mount Rushmore.
• verify that your addition is as notable as the examples already listed and that Mount Rushmore plays a major, not just a tangential role in the work.
• consider replacing an existing less-notable entry.
• justify your edit on this page.

Finally, if you disagree with my reading of the manual of style, leave your comments here. Please don't edit the article to make your point. --Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:09, 29 December 2005 (UTC) [edit]

GA?

I'm wondering about whether or not this article should be listed as a GA, considering that:

• Lead is too short
• Only 1 footnote and 2 references?
• Weak, short sections (and paragraphs)
• I'm assuming that there are definitely more appearences than those few listed there?
• Ecology: At least some of the usual animals and plants should be incorporated into the text.
• The short list in the Geology section should be removed and switched w/ prose

Perhaps if the article becomes USCOTW, these issues should be addresses. Personally, I don't believe this article is good enough for Good article status, but I'm open to other opinions about this article. AndyZ 01:16, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

There was some vandalism done on the article, mainly in a caption which dubbed Washington "Amazingface" and also called the other three presidents "Brenda Stimson." There was also a meaningless paragraph alluding to the aforementioned Brenda Stimson. I assume that the vandal was motivated to deface the page because of a juvenile interpretation of the word "bust," as there was also a reference to bra sizes. Hrkool 00:13, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Mount Rushmore is a fairly frequent vandal target. It isn't as bad as Global warming or George W. Bush, but is worse than Polar Bear. Thanks for reverting the vandalism (WP:RV). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wsiegmund (talk • contribs) 01:30, 2 February 2006.

Full height?

Wasn't Mount Rushmore at first going to be carved larger... down to the waists of the presidents? If so, that should be covered in the article.

• Good point, I added it into the article. AndyZ 16:45, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Why?

As in, why did they build it? Does anyone have any insight on the proposal to build it? Was it a make work project during the great depression? When was it first proposed? Why is it in South Dakota instead of somewhere else? I'm hoping that someone who is much more knowledgable on this topic can help answer these questions that I had after reading the article. Thanks! ClarkBHM 16:52, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

• I added why they built it- the incentive being by Doane Robinson to attract people to go to the Black Hills area of South Dakota (without even noticing your comment at first!). It was proposed first in 1923. AndyZ 23:08, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Who decided?

In the TR article it states:

Roosevelt, together with George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln, was chosen by President Calvin Coolidge to be depicted in stone at the Mount Rushmore Memorial.

This article makes no mention of that, only that

Congress authorized the Mount Rushmore National Memorial Commission

It should be clarified how it was decided who would be on Mt. Rushmore.

Zaui (talk) 22:54, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

• A quick search of Calvin Coolidge shows that no mention of Mount Rushmore. However, [1] (one of the references) states that Gutzon Borglum selected "subjects of a national focus", the faces of the four presidents. I'll add that to the article, and the sentence in Theodore Roosevelt should be corrected then. AndyZ 00:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Photos

Who made the decision to switch the photos of the page? Willshepherdson 03:49, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Please review the edit history of the article. [2] Walter Siegmund (talk) 04:32, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

The reason was WP:PR but when did the public review occur? Willshepherdson 05:21, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Please follow the link to Wikipedia:Peer review/Mount Rushmore/archive1 at the top of this page. Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 05:38, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh. Ok. Willshepherdson 15:56, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed the image (by the way, it is peer review). The image you added to the article imo doesn't look as good as the image that you removed, especially since Theodore Roosevelt is completely in shadow. A gallery is being proposed to add more images into the article. AndyZ 20:50, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Ok. Good idea! Willshepherdson 23:15, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Chances are the gallery will be located at Mount Rushmore/gallery, with the link being provided in the See also section. AndyZ 23:58, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

A good alternative, if the images are in commons or can be placed there, is to add a commons tag at the bottom of the article. See Western honeybee for an example. There, the commons tag takes the reader to commons:Apis mellifera gallery page. Walter Siegmund (talk) 00:48, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Actually, under the External links section there already is a link to the Wikimedia commons, though apparently there are only 5 images in that category for Mount Rushmore. Thanks anyhow though. AndyZ 01:22, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

How did I miss that? Thank you for your patience. Walter Siegmund (talk) 18:32, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Tourism facts

Drafting out a few facts to add to a tourism section as brought up in WP:FAC:

• The second largest industry of South Dakota (after agriculture) is tourism: Mt. Rushmore receive 2.75 million visitors in 2005.<ref>[http://articles.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20060317135109990018]</ref>
• A strict ban on abortion implemented in South Dakota led to an angry outcry by abortion supporters who threatened to boycott Mount Rushmore.
• Mount Rushmore is the number 1 tourist attraction
• Lincoln Borglum Museum open everyday besides Christmas (from 8 to 5) features two 125-seat theaters that show a 13 minute movie about Mt. Rushmore.
• The monument is illuminated at dusk for 2 hrs
• Grandview Terrace, above the lincoln museum, is a great viewpoint for mt Rushmore.
• From spring to fall, the Sculptor's studio built by Gutzon Borglum is open, with talks about how the mountain was built along with the tools used.
• Ampitheater, below the sculpture, includes a 30 minute program that discusses the construction of the memorial, ending with the lighting of the sculpture.
• Presidential Trail goes from Grandview Terrace through ponderosa forests to Sculptor's Studio. <ref>[http://www.americanparknetwork.com/parkinfo/content.asp?catid=69&contenttypeid=16]</ref>

AndyZ _t 17:28, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Tourism

Mount Rushmore illuminated at night

Tourism accounts for South Dakota's second largest industry. Mount Rushmore is the number one tourist attraction of South Dakota. In 2005, over 2.75 million visitors traveled to the memorial.

The Lincoln Borglum Museum is located in the memorial. It features two 125-seat theaters that feature a 13 minute movie about Mount Rushmore. One of the best viewpoints is located at Grandview Terrace, above the Lincolon Borglum Museum. The Presidential Trail starts at Grandview Terrace and winds through the Ponderosa pine forests to the Sculptor's Studio. The studio was built by Gutzon Borglum, and features discussion about the construction of the monument as well as the tools used. The ampitheater also has a 30 minute program that describes the construction of the memorial that occurs at dusk. Following that, the mountain is illuminated for two hours.

A recent strict abortion ban implemented by South Dakota caused a great outrage amongst abortion supporters. Certain of these groups urged for a boycott on Mount Rushmore and other South Dakota tourist sites.

United Sates Mint

Should'nt we mention in this article that the United Sates Mint will issue in 2006 the South Dakota commemorative quarter with which depicts the Mount Rushmore? (see 50 State Quarters for details. CG 13:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Lichens?

Does anyone know the exact effect that lichens and other types of things that live on the stone have on the monument? Should something be mentioned about why, not just that, lichens are removed by conservators?--ttogreh 07:09, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Excellent Article

This article concenring Mount Rushmore is laid out so beautifully with a clear and a critical explanation and also with excellent photos that help to high light it all. I hope this article is one day sighted on the front page for it's excellent information meritswww.geocities.com/berniethomas68 01:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I came here for information, and left with all that I needed, and a clear understanding of the site, history, and with enough media to get the visual appearance as well (atleast as best I could without having visited it personally). How do you nominate an article as a good article, according to Wiki guidelines? Ubergenius 14:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Controversy section

I felt that the last part of the History section meritted it's own subtitle in the article and duely added a "controversy" section. Others may with to move this to elsewhere within the body of the article, but I felt that this paragraph was distinct from the chronology of the "history" section... 69.140.65.251 01:23, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Gutzon Borglum's KKK associations/contradiction with other article.

In the article, it says Gutzon Borglum was a Ku Klux Klan member, but in Borglum's individual article it says he has "sympathetic connections" that were evaporated by the time he carved Mt. Rushmore. This might need to be fixed in one article or the other.

Stone Mountain confirms Klan membership without reference, and Gutzon Borglum does not contradict, but rather says he fell out with the (Stone Mountain) Association. I've added an academic article as reference here.--Carwil 17:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)