Talk:Equestrian statue of George Washington (Washington Circle)

Article title

I think that the title of this article is probably confusing to a lot of Wikipedia readers. Shouldn't it be changed to something along the lines of "Lieutenant General George Washington (statue)" to differentiate it from the person and/or his military service? Shearonink (talk) 23:46, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

Letting any interested editors know that I am going ahead and changing this article-name to "Lieutenant General George Washington (statue)". If anyone objects, revert & let's discuss. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 01:51, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Looks good! ---Another Believer _(Talk) 16:50, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lieutenant General George Washington (statue). 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/20101216023210/http://dcguide.com/attractions/statues/george-washington-statue-in-washington-circle/ to http://dcguide.com/attractions/statues/george-washington-statue-in-washington-circle/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 12:49, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 10 March 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs (talk) 19:48, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

---

Lieutenant General George Washington (statue) → Equestrian statue of George Washington (Washington Circle) – WP:VAMOS has been updated and now says: "For portrait sculptures of individuals in public places the forms "Statue of Fred Foo" "Equestrian statue of Fred Foo" or "Bust of Fred Foo" is recommended, unless a form such as "Fred Foo Memorial" or "Monument to Fred Foo" is the WP:COMMONNAME. If further disambiguation is needed, because there is more than one sculpture of the same person with an article, then disambiguation by location rather than the sculptor is usually better." There's at least one other equestrian statue of Washington in Washington, D.C. (George Washington on Horseback), hence the need for a more specific location for the purpose of disambiguation. --Another Believer _(Talk) 13:29, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose this one on historical importance grounds, and per its real name. This is the statue authorized by the Continental Congress in 1783, at the end of the American Revolutionary War, to honor the Commander of the Army who literally won the revolution through a series of major decisions which, if even one had failed, would have resulted in defeat. Reading the statue's interesting history on the page it seems that the sculpture was not brought up again until Washington's death, and even then it took decades to finally complete and erect. It's a United States national treasure, if not officially then in essence, so using its significant Congressionally approved real name and not a general descriptor for its Wikipedia title is also a common sense use of ignore all rules. Randy Kryn (talk) 19:02, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
• Support per nom. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Applying our naming conventions for articles doesn't diminish the statue's status. It's quite an assertion that the statue has a "significant Congressionally approved real name"; what is that based on? Does its appearing on the National Register of Historic Places under that name indicate official approval for that as a title, or only for the protection that comes with listing the sculpture? If the former, WP:OFFICIALNAMES applies, and the official name should not override the main WP:NAMINGCRITERIA, the most relevant of which to this case are naturalness, precision and consistency (including with the topic-specific guideline at VAMOS). Ham II (talk) 13:14, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Provides better idea. Otinflewer (talk) 22:23, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Lieutenant General George Washington" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the redirect Lieutenant General George Washington. should be deleted, kept, or retargeted. The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 March 21#Lieutenant General George Washington until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines. BegbertBiggs (talk) 19:56, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

2023 Defacement

Adding a discussion since there was some back and forth reverting just now. I'm in favor of keeping the line about the 2023 vandalism. There has been coverage of this event. Not a lot of stuff happens to statues, so the things that do happen deserve to be included. It'd be one thing if this thing was graffitied every week, but as far as I can tell this is the first time it's happened maybe ever. Points in favor of deletion could include that this coverage is recency bias, and it isn't actually notable. Not sure if I agree with that, but a discussion could certainly be had.

I think if anything, the line could be expanded into its own section, mentioning the other Washington statues that have been vandalized during the same time period. TheSavageNorwegian 16:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)