Talk:Zentralinstitut für Kunstgeschichte

[Untitled][edit]

Some examples for major art libraries:

Though the Metropolitan has several libraries, the Watson is its main research arm and one of the world's largest art libraries. The New York Times on The Metropolitan Museum of Art This library of over 200,000 volumes, the largest art library in the Western hemisphere, covers many subjects in great depth. Gerd Muehsam, Guide to Basic Information Sources in the Visual Arts, p. 41.
We’ve just made it easier to find research resources in the collection of the Research Library at the Getty Research Institute, one of the world’s largest art libraries. Last week, we launched a restyled and updated interface for the online catalog of the library’s holdings, which include over one million books, periodicals, and auction catalogs… Research Institute Launches New Search Interfaces for Library Catalog and Photo Study Collection
The library, which at 230,000 volumes is now among the five-largest art libraries in the country... The New York Times on the STERLING AND FRANCINE CLARK Art Institute
Most helpful in the Museum's research work is the Hermitage Library which contains about 350,000 books, pamphlets, periodicals, and reference material and is one of the largest art libraries in the Soviet Union. L. Voronikhina, Art Treasures of the Hermitage

In comparison, the ZI’s library with its more than 500,000 volumes, as well as about 1,250 current periodicals and over 50,000 auction sales catalogues, indeed ranks among the largest art libraries worldwide. Wikiwiserick (talk) 19:46, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's OK to say that they have a large collection, but it is not appropriate or necessary to make a lofty comparative statement (i.e., one of the largest) based only on the primary source (in fact, as I've already pointed out, the entire article is built on primary sources connected with the subject, which is a problem that remains to be addressed). Please read WP:BRD and adhere to it -- don't engage in edit wars. Rhode Island Red (talk) 20:07, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All that is needed here is some 3rd party reliable sources who state a position and can be cited in the article. That's all. There is no point in going back and forward. If it is important, if it is the biggest, or whatever, someone else must have said so. AllyD (talk) 20:19, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. Rhode Island Red (talk) 20:22, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Did you realize that two sources were given? Wikiwiserick (talk) 20:25, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and one of them is fine for supporting basic information about the size of their holdings. That was never an issue; the issue was about using a primary source to make a lofty comparative statement about the size of the holdings, but that statement is no longer in the article so it's no longer an issue. Simply describing the number of volumes in the collection bypasses the issue completely and keeps things neutral and objective, The other link that was added, however, was basically useless, as I addressed in detail in my edit summary just now when I removed the link.[1] Anything else? Rhode Island Red (talk) 22:09, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, here is the Art Libraries Journal, the main international forum of the art library profession worldwide, on German art research libraries in Florence, Munich, Rome and Paris:

"The library of the Zentralinstitut fur Kunstgeschichte, although the 'youngest' of the three big German art libraries, is today one of the most comprehensive art libraries in the world."

See Art Libraries Journal, Volume 30, Number 4, 2005, pp. 10-15. Wikiwiserick (talk) 02:06, 9 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Zentralinstitut für Kunstgeschichte. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 10:59, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]