Talk:Statue of Liberty#Name

In the first paragraph, the statue is described as having her left foot on the shackles/chains. Several paragraphs later, we're told it's the right foot. 2605:4A80:F004:D0A0:592F:AB21:2674:2708 (talk) 01:26, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

The Statue of Liberty is represented in Unicode as an emoji at code point U+1F5FD: 🗽 159.28.79.75 (talk) 08:37, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

{{edit semi-protected|Statue of Liberty|answered=yes}}

In the "design, style, and symbolism" section there are insufficient details and references related to Batholdi's original design that included the placement of broken chains in the statue's hands instead of tablet. Recommend the following be added: When Bartholdi created the first models, the statue’s hands were holding broken chains to signify the end of slavery. American financiers did not approve the idea, so Bartholdi replaced the chains with a tablet. Bartholdi, however, left broken chains at the feet of the stature which cannot be seen by visitors as they sit atop the pedestal, however, they can be seen from an aerial view.

References: Leary, Joy DeGruy. Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome: America's Legacy of Enduring Injury and Healing. Milwaukie,

Oregon: Uptone Press, 2005.

https://www.nps.gov/stli/learn/historyculture/abolition.htm

https://www.manhattanlife.com/blog/!/428/10-things-you-didnt-know-about-the-statue-of-liberty Lushan50 (talk) 18:47, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

::What is wrong with what we have there now? And we can't source to an entire book.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:52, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

@Wehwalt I'm a little puzzled at the justification for my reversion. I'm aware the United States does not need to act upon the French politician's demands as he's not a government official, but surely it wouldn't matter irrespective of whether it were an MEP, the president, or any random member of the French public—there's never any burden on the US itself. It's not the obligation of the return that's important in my opinion, but instead the tension between the nations involved in the gifting of the statue itself. Surely that would warrant inclusion in the article? AviCapt (talk to me!) 01:49, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

:Mainly because a demand for the return of the statue from someone without any power, a MEP, isn't very important in the 140 year history of the statue. And that's the gist of it, it isn't tension between the nations, it's a MEP who is not a French official. I would think differently about it if it were Macron, or a cabinet official. If this goes somewhere, of course reassess, but right now, there's nothing there. Wehwalt (talk) 01:52, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

::There's a lot of coverage, including in WP:RS. WP:DUE isn't based on the political influence of individuals, but on coverage. Now there is no reason to go overboard of course, but a brief mention about it doesn't seem unreasonable. TylerBurden (talk) 20:26, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

:::We write for the long term here, the history of a statue that has been around 140 years. Per WP:RECENTISM, we "aim toward a long-term, historical view". Right now, we don't have that. We have one guy who got a lot of reaction, but he isn't even a member of the national parliament. Let's give it long enough to see if it has legs.Wehwalt (talk) 20:53, 19 March 2025 (UTC)