Talk:Met Gala

Met Gala exhibit/fashion themes

I may have to remove the list of Met Gala themes unless someone can find a source for it. The list was added by what is almost a WP:SPA with minimal other activity on WP.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:05, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I haven't been able to verify online, but I have sent an e-mail to the Met's Press Department to ask if they can verify the information. Please give me a week or so to see (a) if they respond, (b) if they verify it and (c) if I can get them to do so to OTRS. BMK (talk) 21:44, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

I can likely verify 2007-present though their press archive. Here's 2013, for example. And 2011. Is more than that needed? Happy to dig when not on phone StarM 02:44, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

It seems that we have all of these sourced now. What we need now is to see if we can determine historical chairs of the day of the event. Aerin Lauder and Beyonce seem to have been the two most recent.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:36, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Event day chairs

We could use some help filling in Met_Gala#Honorary_event_day_chairs.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:10, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks fo your note. I'll check on Tuesday where I made some notes about a CI article that never got written in case I have something that would help with sourcing if not too late StarM 02:19, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Benefit Chair vs. Event Day Chair

Does anyone understand what the difference is between the chair of the benefit and the (honorary) chair of the event day (e.g., http://www.nytimes.com/1995/10/09/nyregion/chronicle-299595.html)? Should we include both?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:40, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

I understand the difference, but I don't think either is encyclopedically notable. The themes are important (and well covered) but I don't think the chairs matter to anyone outside the museum/fundraising world. I would argue that falls under whatever acronym Wikipedia is not a directory of every fact about every subject it covers, but not sure that's policy StarM 02:04, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Met Gala/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Protonk (talk · contribs) 16:50, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

This article is fairly short, well sourced and largely a good summary of the subject. I have some comments below which mostly relate to the clarity of the prose and some minor POV problems (which are sometimes unavoidable when the sources all describe the event breathlessly). They should be pretty easy to clear up and the article passed in short order. Sorry for the long wait.

• If we're going to include all the themes and event chairs in the body of the article we should make mention of them in the lede.
  • Done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:23, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• " It marks the grand opening of the Costume Institute's annual fashion exhibit. It is celebrated by an evening of fashion to match the theme of the exhibit." The sentence structure of these two should be mixed up a bit (to avoid starting both with "It *verb*"). Alternately the last sentence can be folded into the penultimate one. Other passages in the article have the same problem.
  • My response to the prior may have fixed this particular instance of this problem. Feel free to note others.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:30, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• "...for the institute's annual fashion exhibit." should "institute" be capitalized?
  • Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:31, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• "...the biggest fundraising nights of the city..." Should this be "in the city"?
  • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:36, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• "It is one of the most notable sources of funding for the Institute" I recommend splitting off the fundraising bit in the previous sentence and integrating it with this one (assuming that the bulk of the fundraising at the ball goes to the Institute)
  • I don't exactly understand what is suggested here.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:22, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
• "...which is said to have more "star power" but less fashion panache." If we're going to directly quote that we should attribute it to someone.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:41, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• "In 2014, the individual tickets cost $25,000 for those outside the official guest list..." The nymag source notes ticket prices ranged between 5 and 10 thousand. I think we're trying to stick to the facts but there seem to be three points of interest: the ticket prices in 2014 after the hike, the ticket prices immediately before the hike and the ticket prices in the recent past. Might as well spell out all three.
• "Following the event, the exhibition runs for several months." Is this better placed at the top of the section? I'm not sure, but it seems a bit odd to detour thtough the exclusivity only to return to the exhibit at the end.
  • It is now the second sentence.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• "During the cocktail hour, guests arrive to walk on the red carpet tour the years special themed exhibition and are seated..." There's a word missing here, or some punctuation at least.
  • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:51, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
• "...that includes entertainment from the preeminent entertainers of the day." Who says they're the most preeminent?
  • The sentence is clearly sourced by a WP:IC from a WP:RS. Are you asking about the name of the author of the WP:IC that is presented. I presume that since I did not include the author's name, the article was written as if by "Vogue staff".--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:54, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
    • It's just a bit much. The article is constantly straining to not wax rhapsodic about the event. The issue is mainly the tone of statements written in the encyclopedia's voice, not the literal summary from a reliable source. Protonk (talk) 23:08, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
      • Would it be sufficient to swap out the word preeminent with leading or top?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:59, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
        • We could just say that vogue calls them the preeminent entertainers of the day. Or we could list a few from certain years. This is relatively minor and it's the last remaining concern which I feel still relates to the criteria (POV), so I'm ok with passing the article and leaving this as a suggestion for you to change or not change at your discretion. Protonk (talk) 14:15, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
• I won't fight the Themes section although I don't see the value of lists like this. I do, however, want to be convinced that the honorary event day chairs are important enough to enumerate.
  • This is a tertiary resource tasked with summarizing the secondary sources that cover this topic. These are clearly covered in secondary sources that discuss the topic.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:56, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
    • Thanks for reminding me that wikipedia is a tertiary source. I'm aware the statements are sourced. I'm less convinced that we need to have an exhaustive list of them. Why are they important? What can we say about them aside from enumerating them? Protonk (talk) 23:08, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
      • This is a see and be seen type event. It is hard to summarize the whole aura of the thing without discussing the types of people who are intimately involved on the big day.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:00, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
        • But a list of who is a co-chair of a charity ball is not a summary. I passed the article, as I think this is more a matter of opinion than a GA requirement, but looking at the talk page I see Star Mississippi has the same concerns about the list as I do. It's worth considering that we may not need it. Protonk (talk) 14:15, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Protonk (talk) 16:50, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

So how does it raise money?

Okay, so a bunch of famous people attend the event, but how does this translate into the millions that are raised? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 16:31, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

...and what charities get that money? 2601:58B:C00:6853:A1CE:98B5:4E57:2BD3 (talk) 10:41, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

The money raised goes toward the MET's Costume Department (I think). GoldRomean (talk) 01:23, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Someone/the famous people have to buy the $75,000 ticket to attend. GoldRomean (talk) 01:26, 7 May 2024 (UTC)

Gallery

I added a gallery to the section on the yearly themes of the gala.

Met Gala Start Date

Hello,

I would like to suggest the The Met Gala infobox have the beginning date corrected to 1948. This can be referenced from the Costume Institute's department page .

Thank you.
Valdel10 (talk) 20:57, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

References

Reply 05-MAY-2018

 Implemented The date was changed as requested, however, I have appended the Chronology citation needed template to the date. According to the Wikipedia article, the Gala event "themes" are listed going back to 1971, but there are no Galas listed before this date. That means one of two things: either the tradition of having themes for Met Galas began in 1971, or the Galas themselves only began in 1971. The reference provided does state that the department for which the Galas are intended to celebrate became a part of the Met in 1948, but what it does not specify is whether that was also the year that the Galas began. As this article concerns the Galas, and not the department itself, I believe that is what is being asked by the infobox's date parameter. A source should be located which settles this question. Regards,   spintendo          09:25, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

@Spintendo: Thank you for updating the date. In the same link previously provided, there is a paragraph near the end of the page which states the following: "The brainchild of publicity doyenne Eleanor Lambert, the benefit was introduced in 1948 as a midnight supper and dubbed "The Party of the Year." Co-chairs in past years included Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis (1977–1978) and Patricia Taylor Buckley (1979–1995)." You are correct in that the themed events don't start till 1971, however it is stated that the benefit event does begin in 1948. Hope this gives more clarity and thanks again.

Individual reassessment

Met Gala

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: delisted – Muboshgu (talk) 00:54, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

I saw Ocean's 8 on a plane this weekend. It's a major Hollywood picture based largely on the Met Gala, and it's not mentioned in this article. This is a short article for such a publicized event. There's a one paragraph lead that doesn't sum up the article and three paragraphs of it are "controversy" (see WP:CSECTION). The article is a third as long as the Ocean 8 article and hasn't been updated since it was promoted to GA four years ago. Also, the red carpet is a big deal, and we have no pictures of the event? This article fails WP:GAC #s 3 and 6. – Muboshgu (talk) 01:01, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

100% agree, this page needs a lot of work. It's not broad enough in its coverage and doesn't properly convey just how major an event this is. Ohwowchow (talk) 02:30, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Nothing has happened in over a month, and I think that's a fair amount of time. I'm delisting this article. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:54, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 April 2023

Norashenyh (talk) 05:42, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

In 2015, the Met Gala's theme was "China: Through the Looking Glass," which aimed to explore the influence of Chinese culture on Western fashion. However, the theme drew criticism from some who accused the event of cultural appropriation and perpetuating stereotypes of Asian cultures.

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Lightoil (talk) 09:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC)