Colonel William A. Phillips

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Architecture Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Minnesota Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota 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.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Visual arts This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles Museums Low‑importance 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.MuseumsWikipedia:WikiProject MuseumsTemplate:WikiProject MuseumsMuseums articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Too bad I cant find a reference to the article that described this building as "a giant toaster with cancer". What a monstrosity.

You're an idiot. Whether you like the building or not, it's a unique part of the city. God forbid none of that new fangled architecture would ever set itself apart from more conventional landmarks.--outinthered 07:16, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you like it so much you can have it!! Please take it!! NOW!

Ok captain anonymous, lets be realistic: Huge building-1, Me-0. We are talking about a collective metropolis of 3 million + people! Get used to strange architecture in the twin cities because i'm sure there is more to come. If you want bland architecture, move to Utah.----outinthered 07:12, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's commonly called the ugliest building in our state. Possibly several states. And justifiable so. T-bonham (talk) 00:05, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Art museums are supposed to be different. Remember, the French hated the Eiffel Tower when it was built and now embrace it whole-heartedly. The Weisman was an eyesore to people in the mid-90s and now most citizens are used to the metallic, Gehry-created building. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.85.35 (talk) 16:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This page needs a major update. With the projected opening, you'd think it'd be worked on internally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.110.55 (talk) 03:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They are apparently having a consulting firm in to discuss internal management and communications issues called Mobius. Hopefully they'll fire the director and get someone new. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.118.110.55 (talk) 03:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone confirm this? Their director is a dinosaur, but the last I heard she's doing an ok job. Has it gotten that bad? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.157.74.160 (talk) 03:07, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The expansion should alleviate all problems. With such a spotlight, the Weisman should be alright. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.84.21.37 (talk) 02:38, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs a general cleanup and better sourcing... dm (talk) 02:03, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://edoc.hu-berlin.de/umacj/2011/king-39/PDF/king.pdf

©Geni (talk) 23:28, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]