Talk:Liberty Bell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Philadelphia
Philadelphia Portal
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Philadelphia, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopedic coverage and content of articles relating to Philadelphia, its people, history, accomplishments and other topics. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.
This article is also supported by WikiProject Pennsylvania.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
United States Portal
This article is within the scope of the United States WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to United States-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Peer review Liberty Bell has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Contents

[edit] Photos

I uploaded 3 photos:

But all need work (two can be cropped to remove people easily). Not sure if they'd be better than the picture here -- better lighting I think, though. Perhaps someone can offer some input and/or doctor up the pictures as necessary. CryptoDerk 09:58, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)

My daughter and I agreed that the picture was too dark, so we lightened it up.--Bcrowell 17:10, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] removed non-notable "References to the Liberty Bell"

I removed the "References to the Liberty Bell" section, which had contained the following text:

  • Liberty Bell is the title of the fifth track of The Gathering's album "How to measure a planet?" (1998). The song is actually about the Liberty Bell 7 space capsule.
  • The Disney movie National Treasure (2004), starring Nicolas Cage, mentions the Liberty Bell among many other elements related to the Independence of the U.S.A..

Neither seems at all notable to me. The first one isn't even about the liberty bell itself, and the second one is about a movie that, AFAICT, only mentions the liberty bell. Lists like this always tend to turn into hairballs. I think the standard to keep in mind is that the information shouldn't be there if it's not going to be relevant or of interest to more than a tiny fraction of a percent of all readers.--Bcrowell 17:05, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

I also removed the following, as non-notable. Alphageekpa 16:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
  • In the song "Down Go Down" from his posthomously relased album From A Basement On The Hill, Elliott Smith sang: "She was hard and as cracked as The Liberty Bell" refering to the state the bell is in.


This article needs updating, it has no reference to when the second crack first appeared, just when it was repaired. - 12-27-05

[edit] Demanding a refund?...

I don't know if this should be added to the article, so I'll submit it here as a more lighthearted anecdote in the history of the Liberty Bell:

As confirmed by a page on the Whitechapel Bell Foundry (http://www.whitechapelbellfoundry.co.uk/liberty.htm), in 1976, the Procrastinators' Society (http://www.procrastinatorssociety.com/) staged a protest demanding the foundry refund the cost of the bell, as it was defective. The foundry, keeping with the tongue-in-cheek nature of the request, replied that they would cheerfully accept the return of the bell provided it was returned in the original packaging.

I don't know how widely the story is known, but it might be worth including as a lighter element in the history of the bell.

dafydd 04:11, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "The Crack" section

The text states that "this flaw grew to its present size on February 22, 1789, when the bell was tolled for several hours in the bell tower of Independence Hall in honor of George Washington's First Day of presidency." However, Washington's first day of presidency was in either March or April (depending on where it is counted from) according to the George Washington article. February 22, however, is Washington's birthday (according to the calendar in use at the time). So, was it rung in February to celebrate his birthday, or rung in March or April to celebrate his first day of Presidency? Either way, the article has to be changed ...--Canuckguy 02:44, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, did my own research based on one of the links provided in the main article and found that the Feb. 22 date is right, but it was 1846. Further mentioning that the bell was rung numerous times in the 1790s when Philadelphia was the capital woudln't make sense with the text as it was in the article (why would they ring a bell with a huge crack in it), but it would if the crack appeared in 1846, as the ushistory.org article states. --Canuckguy 02:27, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LINK

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_of_Government_of_Pennsylvania

[edit] Casting and Early History

http://www.constitution.org/bcp/penncharpriv.htm

[edit] Perception abroad

A while back I added the bit about the Liberty Bell being much less known outside the US than within. I know that's a difficult to support with an objective citation. But it's true nonetheless. As a Brit who's lived in the US, I have some idea of how each country views the other. In the UK, the American flag and the State of Liberty would both be instantly recognised. The Liberty Bell, for whatever reason, would simply mean nothing to the average Brit. This perception is only more so once you leave England and go to France or Germany.

I guess the same parallel might be asking Americans to recognise certain French things. Yes, they'd know the Eiffel Tower, but would they know who Marianne is? For the French, the latter symbol is much closer to their national identity than the former, but that doesn't change the fact that the Eiffel Tower remains one of the most famous buildings in the world.

Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 15:31, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Look, if this article is going to include broad statements like the Liberty Bell is the "most familiar symbol of liberty" abroad, this has to be justified. I know it isn't true for England because no-one hear learns about it or cares about it. It is familiar in the US, and you can cite all kinds of examples from Taco Hell to the Liberty Bell March, so that's a fair encyclopaedic statement. But to say it is worldwide in fame needs justification. Medals awarded by American institutions don't count, obviously. I found half a dozen examples of replicas. One in Germany given immediately post WW2, so that one's propoganda. Two in Israel, no real surprise there given the very close social ties between those countries. The Japanese and Belgian ones are interesting and given the timings involved can't be easily dismissed. But how about some more, in countries with little to no political ties to the US.
It's easy to stand within your country and think something is world famous. I can't imagine people not knowing who the Queen is or who John Bull is or what's meant by the Mother of Parliaments. But someone in Lesotho might not know. Or in Iraq. Or Guyana. So, I have to temper my judgements with the experiences of others. If someone in Lesotho tells me she has no idea who the Queen is, that doesn't make her stupid, it just means the symbols important to me aren't important to everyone else.
Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 15:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
  • I hear you. Anyone else? --evrik 15:49, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
Why are we preoccupying ourselves with this issue? Trying to qualify the Liberty Bell's importance world-wide is unimportant. It is an important symbol in the U.S., with a unique history. That's enough. The article gains no credibility by including vague statements that cannot be supported by citations. If it's a FACT, and adds something to the article, fine. If it is your opinion, don't add it. If it's irrelevant, perhaps it belongs in another article. Let's move on. Alphageekpa 16:43, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
I agree. The question isn't about preoccupation over trivia but whether or not vague and unsubstantiated statements can be left alone. Anyway, it's gone now, so I'm happy. I've moved the foreign bells bit to the Replicas section. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 16:52, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
I could have also cited:
I'm going to add the sentence fragment back in with this reference:

--evrik 17:05, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Those are all American sites from an American perspective! Anyone can do a Google search for "Liberty bell" and "international" and come up with all kinds of stuff like that. Find me a British site, or a Brazilian one, or a Bangladeshi one, where the Liberty Bell is being used as a shorthand emblem for liberty without explanation because it is the "most familiar symbol of liberty". That's the key -- while it may be incredibly familiar within the US, there's no reason to assume it is outside. So why keep adding a trivial, unproveable point to the introduction of what is otherwise a good and interesting article? It's great you're proud of the Bell and see it as a potent symbol for your national values. But to extrapolate out from that and assume everyone on Earth sees the Bell in the same way is un-encyclopaedic at best. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 17:53, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Dude, I have the facts behind me, and I've added the citation. --evrik 18:02, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
We've agreed to split the difference, and are going with "has been used as an international..."; I think this satisfies both recognition of its use abroad while leaving its precise level of familiarity undefined. Cheers, Neale Neale Monks 07:39, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

I am European, but have lived in the US most of my life. I like to think I am well-rounded, but I must admit, I had NEVER heard of the Liberty Bell before moving to the US. I often have casually polled my EU friends about it, and I have yet to meet somebody from Europe who has heard of the Bell outside of the US. For what it is worth, a colleague of mine from Switzerland (college professor) has just been offered a job at U Penn in Philly. When I told him "You should visit the Liberty Bell", he had no clue what I was referring to. And this is a rather very well cultured 45 year old man... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.72.93.5 (talk) 16:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Disambiguation

I added the topline disambiguation because I arrived here looking for the article on the march. I searched on The Liberty Bell, which redirects here, thinking that that would be where the music article would be with the actual bell being at Liberty Bell. I will readd the disambig as I feel it is very useful, not so much for people getting confused, but to help people find the article they are looking for. Please discuss it here if you disagree. Thryduulf 11:52, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I was the one who removed the disambiguation. I don't believe it is necessary. The two don't share the same name, "Liberty Bell" is distinctly different than "Liberty Bell March." And the link to the "Liberty Bell March" already exists in "See Also", which is more than sufficient...no need to have it on two places...redundant... In my opinion, inclusion in "See Also" is not only sufficient, but it is the correct place for this type of cross-linking... Alphageekpa 12:13, 3 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Vandal

Someone at this IP address 71.60.11.125 is vandalizing the article, how do we get the IP banned?

[edit] PROVINCE OF PENSYLVANIA (sic)

Is it actually spelled "Pensylvania" on the bell? Or is it a misprint here? RSLitman 02:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that is the way it is spelled. It is not uncommon to see "Pennsylvania" spelled that way on maps, documents, etc. of the period. Alphageekpa 19:35, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Taco Bell Ad

I knew this ad was in The Philadelphia Inquirer on April 1, 1996. I wondered if perhaps the person who originally put in the item about the ad being in The New York Times had the papers confused. However, I just checked an online database which I am entitled to use as a cardholder of a local library system, and I see that the ad was indeed in the N.Y. Times that day, too. Now I wonder if it was also in other papers around the country that day. RSLitman 02:28, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

From the website of PainePR, the firm responsible for the advertisement: "PainePR helped place full-page ads in five major daily newspapers, announcing that Taco Bell had purchased the Liberty Bell. We also distributed an early morning press release announcing Taco Bell's purchase of the Liberty Bell over a national wire. A second wire release was distributed later in the day announcing the purchase was a joke." [[1]] Alphageekpa 19:39, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Possible Conflict

The second paragraph (Its most famous ringing...) creates a conflict with the US Declaration of Independence Myths section US_Declaration_of_Independence#Myths. One state's that the Liberty Bell was rung on July 8, 1776, while the other claims this as a myth from a children's story.
Clarification?
--Sam 23:18, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] top dab link

I'm restoring the dab link. I understand the perceived redundancy, but a dab link is a navigational aid, whereas the see also section is supposed to be for related/supplementary topics. That is to say, they serve completely different purposes. Additionally, as a march and especially a Sousa fan, I may very likely search for "Liberty Bell" intending to find the march and end up here instead. I imagine plenty of others would as well. The only difference between the two article names is that the other one contains an additional specifier, which is exactly the situation dab links are intended to handle. In short, top dab links may be somewhat unsightly, but they're a widely-accepted standard and serve a specific useful purpose, and removing the link only harms usability. --Fru1tbat 15:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

According to that logic, shouldn't you also have a dab link for Liberty Bell 7? Alphageekpa 11:10, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
Possibly, though because "Liberty Bell 7" is rarely, if ever, mentioned without the "7", it's not quite the same (also because the "7" is part of the actual name, not just disambiguating text). Someone would more reasonably be expected to be looking for the march by typing in just "Liberty Bell" than the capsule. I wouldn't object if someone thought it were necessary to include it, though. If there are more than two other uses, perhaps Liberty Bell (disambiguation) needs to be written, and the dab link directed there instead... --Fru1tbat 13:24, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] International

I dont see how the liberty bell is an international symbol of freedom. I'm not arguing against its importance, just its use as a symbol internationally. The white dove, candel (such as Amnesty international) are all symbols ive seen but never the liberty bell. Could we just scrap that one line? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrmisanthrope (talk • contribs)

I have to agree - at the moment the assertion that the bell is used an international symbol of freedom is backed up only by US sources; no actual example of such use is provided. "Regarded by some as an international symbol of freedom", perhaps? Anecdotally, I can provide that I have never seen it used in Britain as a symbol of freedom; but obviously I can't prove it has never been used as such (due to the difficulty of proving negatives). We seem to have no source saying that the bell is internationally regarded as a symbol of freedom; only that some (within the US) regard it as such, which is not the same. TSP 20:25, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The 20th/21st Century stuff

A lot of that (Taco Bell, the guy who hit it with a hammer, etc.) seems unnecessary. There are far more important things (Like tolling for the deaths of Marshall, Harrison, etc.) that would be better. NuclearWarfare 17:14, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Contradiction whether it was rung to announce congress in 1774

In the opening statement is stated Previously, it had been rung to announce the opening of the First Continental Congress in 1774 and after the Battle of Lexington and Concord in 1775., whereas in a section below is stated Although it is untrue, popular belief holds that the bell was rung to announce the opening of the First Continental Congress in 1774 and after the Battle of Lexington and Concord in 1775. - So, what's the truth? (and sources?) - Cheers, MikeZ (talk) 13:04, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pop culture

It might be nice to add a section about the bell in pop culture, like its reference in the movie National Treasure. --Eustress (talk) 16:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Section previous existed, but has been deleted. Tends to fall under WP:TRIV and WP:IPC and didn't really add anything to the target article. Alphageekpa (talk) 19:46, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] another replica

http://www.libertybellmuseum.com/exhibits/Womansbell.htm says there's one in the Washington Memorial Chapel. Шизомби (talk) 01:49, 12 June 2008 (UTC)