From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Museums (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Museums, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of museums on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject California / San Francisco Bay Area (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the San Francisco Bay Area task force (marked as Mid-importance).

wave organ[edit]

The Wave Organ is kaput, dead, gone. The site is still there, out beyond the Yacht Club, but the tubes no longer produce sound, having been filled with silt or sand, and the wonderful old graveyard stones used to build the site have been covered with tagging and trash. Very sad. Maybe the article should be updated to reflect this? --ILike2BeAnonymous 08:34, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

Check again! —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talkcontribs) 22:55, 25 February 2006 (UTC)


Free on the first wednesday of every month I think. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 21:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC).

Merge suggestion[edit]

I concur, the Tactile Dome article is too short, and by itself probably not notable (though memorable). Best make it a section of Exploratorium, e.g. "Notable exhibits since opening" or some such. -- (not the original proposer) David Spalding (  ) 16:51, 9 April 2008 (UTC) (

I'm going to be "bold" and just merge it. It doesn't make sense not to considering the Tactile Dome is inside the Exploratorium and operated by them. Besides, both articles are rather anorexic as is. -- (talk) 17:05, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to create subsection with the Exhibits section and include short descriptions/photos of some of our more popular exhibits. Vansau (talk) 22:52, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Notable Exhibits[edit]

This article seems kind of short and doesn't really do this amazing place justice. Anyone that knows more about the place care to add information on some of the more notable exhibits? I'd take this up myself, but I only really know what any visitor of the place does.

If not that, at least some information on the different sections that have exhibits of a related theme, so someone looking this up could get a feel for what the museum contains. IIRC they cover light, sound, gravity, etc. If someone can find out which sections exist and perhaps list a few examples of each, it would improve the article a lot I think.

Also missing: Is this entirely private or does it receive any funding, and from who? Admission there is pretty cheap IIRC. Are there any other comparable science museums in other parts of the country?

If I get time I'll trawl their website for more information, but it'd be cool if someone that actually knows helped with this stubbish article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:04, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

like an advertisement[edit]

The our in It provides "real" experiences for our online audience. suggests the article may have been, at least in part, written by people at the institution. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:42, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with what was stated on my talk page, which I will post here as I feel there is some confusion of identities: "The text on the page was explicitly put into Creative Commons Attribution ShareAlike 3.0 by the Exploratorium for use in Wikipedia. See Yes, the text was supplied by the Exploratorium. However the article that was there previously was highly uninformative. I resent the implication that because the information is supplied by the institution involved, that it is SPAM or advertising. If you want information about the Exploratorium, this is good information that describes the institution and its activities." However, even when the fact that much of this article is copy-pasted from the subject site is completely ignored, this article is still written like an advertisement - or at least strongly biased. It also lacks much of the proper Wikipedia style. This quote is an example: "Be it mouse stem cells beating like heart cells or worms glowing green with the implanted phosphorescence of a jellyfish gene, or having your head encased in a giant bubble -- the first response to any exhibit, is often the word WOW!". I suggest that the entire article be reviewed. Gentleman Walrus (talk) 01:37, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Article needs updating[edit]

I read in an article today that the Exploratorium is planning to move to Piers 15 & 17 and recently received $90 million in two anonymous donations to help with this move. I could find no mention of the plan top move the Exploratorium in the article so it needs to be added. Here is a link to an article to help anyone with time to take on this task: --Cab88 (talk) 01:55, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Also, the photograph in the Infobox is misleading -- it is not of the Exploratorium per se, but of the rotunda and lagoon of the Palace of Fine Arts. --SciCorrector (talk) 18:37, 18 March 2010 (UTC)


I'm going through and revising a lot of this page, mainly to make things more neutral and less redundant. Here are the changes I've implemented:

Intro: Removed loaded language
Early History: Removed superfluous info about Oppenheimer and loaded language from the section
Recent History: Removed the picture of Dennis Bartels. Removed loaded language. Added some more information to the section about the Pier 15 move
Exhibits: Cleaned up both paragraphs for readability and removed loaded language. Am going to add in a table with some popular exhibits and photos once I get approval from Wikimedia

In the interest of full disclosure, I'm the new Public Information Assistant at the museum, but I have a journalism background. I'm making a determined effort to restore a tone of neutrality to the page, and I'm happy to answer any questions/concerns you folks have. Vansau (talk) 23:03, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Updated the "PIE Institute" to the "Making Collaborative", which is a new label the museum just noted. 22:49, 22 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ExploratoriumPI (talkcontribs)

Remove Neutrality Tag?[edit]

A number of neutrality-improving edits have been made since the tag was added, including a number I made over the last hour or so. It seems to me that the problem was simply the wholesale transfer of promotional text from the Exploratorium without carefully "encyclopedicising" it first. No big deal, it happens all the time. It looks like the problem is now largely fixed and the tag should be removed. If others concur, then someone please remove it. I'll check back in two weeks or so, and if there is dead silence, I'll consider that a "concur" and remove it myself.

Incidentally, I went to the Exploratorium in 1989 and 1991 (as an engineering-degreed adult) and I loved it. I was inspired in a number of ways. I am constantly making references to this or that thing I "saw at the Exploratium". The things I saw way back then continue to kick-start my thinking. I have in front of me this very moment, an Exclusive-OR gate I made out of popsicle sticks with my nephew. We intend to make an ALU out of them. I remember seeing a similar thing out of switches and relays at the Exploratorium. I think it's how I knew the simple fact that it could be done! And, that's all that was needed.

I was dismayed to see this article in such a biased state which reflected poorly on the institution itself, that's why I was moved to act. (talk) 18:31, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't look like anyone has a problem with the neutrality tag being removed. However, I wanted to check in and make sure it was OK to take it down before I went and did so.

ExploratoriumPI (talk) 17:08, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

10/04/11: i think the tag could be removed, but as a former employee (and still a big fan) of the Explo, i have to say this article doesn't "read" neutral to me. I appreciate the successful effort by the PI office to tone down loaded language, but i would also like to see the article reflect (neutrally) the perceptions of its public, professional colleagues, and funders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:13, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

10/05/11: Thanks for the vote of confidence! What would you change to make it more neutral? I'm about to do another round of edits, so I'd be happy for any comments/criticisms. (talk) 19:39, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Move Updates[edit]

1/9/13: Hi folks, here from the Explo to make some updates reflecting the move to Pier 15, continued removal of loaded language, etc. I've tried to add more in the way of citations (hopefully not overkill - I'm new at this) and generally spruce things up a bit. Please let me know how you think it looks. Suggestions for improvement welcome. ExploratoriumPI (talk) 23:48, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

5/20/13: Following the relocation to Piers 15/17, the entire page is in need of a fairly radical rewrite. Although I work for the museum, I have independently researched and sourced the content for all changes I am making to the page and am endeavoring to maintain neutrality at the same time as improving the depth and quality of the content. ExploratoriumPI (talk) 23:12, 20 May 2013 (UTC)