Talk:Jefferson National Expansion Memorial

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
To-do list for Jefferson National Expansion Memorial: edit · history · watch · refresh
  • add section on history of the park: what it all was before designation, how it became a national park, etc.
  • flesh out Old Courthouse mention
  • any significant events at the park? if so, please mention
  • discuss broader cultural significance of Old Courthouse and/or Arch
  • Discuss history of funding for the Arch (find source). IIRC Locals had to match the federal funding to build it. The "giant hairpin" design was so unpoplar with voters the tax measure for the local half of financing would have failed if civic leaders had not resorted to ballet stuffing.

Contents

[edit] Security Measures

I seen the Arch in December of 2004. Since this was my first time back to the Arch visitor center since 2000, several security changes had been made. It used to be that people would only be screened if they took the tram, now everyone is screened before entering the visitor center. jessica was here I did want to make people aware of this, because the design of the visitor's center and the placement of the metal detectors will mean that people will have to stand outside in all sorts of weather - it does take time to process visitors. Especially those who are more vulnerable health-wise should be aware of this.

JesseG 03:42, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Clarification

The article says, "Its legs are equilateral triangles". I don't know what that means, and I don't even see how that could be meaningful. Can anyone clarify, or should I remove it?

James barton 12:48, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Could it have meant the cross-sections of its legs? Michael Hardy 20:06, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Based on the pictures, it seems likely that cross-sections are what was intended. I've edited the article accordingly. Michael Hardy 20:22, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Confusingly stated equations

The article said:

this set of parametric equations:
Y=A \left ( \cosh \frac {X}{L} C- 1 \right )
X=\frac {L}{C} \left [ \cosh^{-1} \left ( 1+ \frac {Y}{A} \right ) \right ]

Calling it a "set of parametric equations" leads one to expect that it expresses both X and Y as functions of some parameter -- the same parameter for both. Having read that, one immediately sees:

Y=\cdots\,
X=\cdots,\,

and that's just what you expect when you read the words "set of parametric equations", and you expect to see, to the right of "=", expressions of X and Y in terms of some paramater independent of both. Then you actually read what they say, and that's not it at all.

Hence my recent edit. Michael Hardy 20:13, 5 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Incidents of flights through the Arch

According to http://www.nps.gov/jeff/adhi%20Folder/adhi2-13.htm , there have been no less than eleven incidents of aircraft having been flown under the arch, not four as stated in the article.

Leebert 02:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

The count of four came from the arch timeline on the P-D website. The NPS page's footnotes thoroughly document the eleven, so I've updated the page, and added the bit about the aborted attempt to scale it. --Kbh3rdtalk 03:36, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
I changed the text to "No less than 11 aircraft" from "As many as". Perhaps a quibble, but the referenced article itself says that there were 11 confirmed flythroughs, which would set a lower boundry, not an upper boundry. Leebert 19:33, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Website Copying

The website http://www.squidoo.com/stlouisarch/ (found in a Google search) seems to have copied the Wikipedia article but there is no mention of the GNU Free Documenation license on the website. --Mosquitopsu 05:02, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Catenary and Jefferson

Shouldn't mention be made of the coincidence (or not coincidence) that the arch is a catenary, and that Thomas Jefferson coined the term 'catenary'?


[edit] Raw Facts?

I think it should mention exactly how long it took to make the Arch, the amount of materials in weight or quantity, and exactly what was built along with it.

I believe I read that actuaries had predicted that about 10 workers would perish during construction, but not a one was lost. Perhaps this fact can be found in citable form. weetbixkid 06:16, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Photographs

How many images are sufficient? Rklawton 04:16, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

It's not so much quantity as placement, imho. In most articles I've seen, picture galleries are near the bottom of the article, just above or below the external links. It'd be really good if they were on Wikicommons instead, too, so one could then use {{commons}} or {{commonscat}}. Plus they could be categorized more specifically. See what I mean:
Wikimedia Commons has media related to:

-Ebyabe 12:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

i have been to the gate way arch and it is great —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.27.17.187 (talk) 15:01, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

I rearranged, changed, and threw out a lot of pictures. Most likely have stepped on numerous toes here, and I'm sorry for that, but it seems that people just kept adding snapshots. JNEM is a popular tourist destination, so many people have pictures. Unfortunately a whole lot of them were either redundant, of very low resolution, blurry/shaky, or rather off-topic. I think picturewise the article now is in a pretty good state. If anyone feels the need to add pictures, ask yourself whether the truely add value to the article, and whether their technical quality compares to the current pictures. Also check out WP:NOT (the Wikipedia is not a gallery section). --Dschwen 16:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spanning the river

Is it really a common misconception that the Arch spans the Mississippi? I have yet to meet anyone who thought that.

I thought it did when I was a kid. Rklawton 14:41, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cathedral vs. Basilica

It is a basilica with the official title of Basilica of St. Louis, King of France but it is never called "the Old Basilica". The colloqial name that everyone in town refers to it by is "The Old Cathederal", and that never changed when it was designated a basilica. No one ever says, "I'll meet you in front of the Old Basilica". (I accidentally hit enter before I fully entered the gist of this on the edit summary.) Indeed, it would be nonsense to call it the Old Basilica. The word "old" is used in this context in the sense of "former", and it is a former cathederal -- once held the Bishop's official cathedra -- but it is currently, not formerly, a basilica. --Kbh3rdtalk 21:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Whuh?PvtDeth (talk) 02:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Closed during 9/11, but for how long?

Template:Edit by IP sock of banned user removed

This is just a bit of trivia. All sorts of monuments and sites were closed at that time. It could be mentioned on the 9/11 page, but not on every single monument page. --Dschwen 23:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I agree. It's not exactly unique or notable in the longterm. Dayewalker (talk) 00:46, 5 June 2008 (UTC)