Talk:Espacio Solo

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Consensus supporting Espacio Solo instead of proposed caps. (closed by non-admin page mover) EggRoll97 ^(talk) 04:21, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Colección SOLO → Espacio SOLO – This article is about a private contemporary art museum in Madrid. The museum is called the Espacio SOLO, which houses the Colleción SOLO. Other articles about private museums defer to the name of the museum (Rubell Museum, Glenstone, Mori Art Museum, etc.) even when the private owners distinguish their collection with another name. This article should be renamed - and edited - to reflect the style for articles about private museums, rather than being named for the museum's collection. I can find no other examples of articles about a private art collection in lieu of the private museum that houses the collection. 19h00s (talk) 02:13, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Why the WP:all-caps for "SOLO"? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 06:01, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  As far as I can tell that's how the museum/collection stylizes their name - I don't think it's an acronym, but I'm not sure. I just went with the style the page had when I found it and kept the name change in line with how the museum stylizes it. 19h00s (talk) 14:30, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Move to "[Something] Solo": Drop the all-caps styling per WP:TITLETM, MOS:TM, MOS:ALLCAPS. Many of the cited sources do not use the all-caps formatting ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]; I didn't check all of them). —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 10:43, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Espacio Solo – News shows the all-caps not needed. Dicklyon (talk) 01:08, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The artistic project is called Colección SOLO. The project includes an art collection but also several venues, the main one is the museum Espacio SOLO. But it's just a part of a hole project called Colección Solo. Namile17 (talk) 13:59, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Are you saying "Colección SOLO" is something materially different from "Colección Solo"? (or "Espacio SOLO" and "Espacio Solo"?) Can you provide an WP:independent reliable source that shows evidence of that? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:17, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No. I am saying that the entry talks about the SOLO Collection project, which goes beyond the SOLO Space museum. That is why I advocate that the opening text talks about the SOLO Collection.

Their main museum is Espacio SOLO, but they also have another one in a small town in the north of Spain and in 2024 they will open a bigger one in Madrid (https://www.revistaad.es/arte/articulos/coleccion-solo-madrid).

They also organise many exhibitions all over the world, for example in Tokyo (https://hypebae.com/2023/4/filip-custic-human-product-exhibition-parco-museum-tokyo-interview) or Paris (https://fuckingyoung.es/grip-face-miju-lee-announce-paris-exhibition-find-an-offline-shelter/).

For these reasons, I ask to keep the name and the introductory text referring to the whole project: SOLO Collection. And not the museum, which is a part of the whole project.

The difference between SOLO and Solo is a typographical error, it can be written in both ways but it is really rigorous to use capital letters. But the project is the same, whether it is called in lower or upper case. Namile17 (talk) 12:20, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the issue here is that you want this article to reflect how the owners of the museum would like to brand their project. But, functionally, the main way people interact with the Colección Solo "project" is by visiting the museum that houses the majority of the collection, Espacio Solo. It is totally appropriate to create a separate article for the nonprofit entity that is Colección Solo, but this article as written is mainly about the art collection itself, which is housed and shown at Espacio Solo. There are other examples of private art nonprofits that have separate articles for the foundation vs one of the foundation's museums (Dia Art Foundation vs. Dia Beacon), but given the newness of Colección Solo and Espacio Solo, I don't think that really makes sense. I believe this article should be rewritten to emphasize Espacio Solo and the art collection, with a subsection dedicated to the Colección Solo foundation and its other activities. 19h00s (talk) 15:02, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I completely disagree. I have included a text in different parts recounting the different elements of the project, with their respective references. Lectures at the Ca Foscari University in Venice talking about this project (quite singular in Europe), news explaining different exhibitions of the SOLO Collection in public museums in Madrid that have nothing to do with Espacio SOLO. And references to exhibitions in private museums in Japan such as Parco Museum or in the Joseph Gallery in Paris.

But this article has to be turned into an article about a museum? Let's do one thing, I make an article about the museum, but I don't change the title of it to Espacio SOLO. Namile17 (talk) 15:42, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Again, I think you're deferring too much to the museum's owners and the way they want to brand this project. The core of their project is the art collection, which is called the Coleción Solo. Prior to the opening of their own museum space, they used the collection to send traveling exhibitions to other museums and institutions. Now that their main museum space, Espacio Solo, is open, they host temporary exhibitions, permanent collection exhibitions, and continue to send exhibitions to other museums. This is how most other private museums also operate when they first develop. It is not novel that the foundation that owns the museum has had other exhibitions in other spaces - that doesn't mean the museum is somehow tangential to the foundation. From my perspective, this article would be most useful as a description of Espacio Solo and the collection it houses, with a subsection about the Colección Solo's broader goals and outreach efforts. 19h00s (talk) 16:34, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think I understand the point better now. However, I disagree with the idea that "The difference between SOLO and Solo is a typographical error". As far as I can tell, it is not an "error" to choose a capitalization styling that differs from that of the project's promoters. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 18:40, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Support "Espacio Solo" per nom's reasoning to change the first, and per WP:TITLETM, MOS:TM, MOS:ALLCAPS as to the SCREAMING ALL-CAPS. It's just marketing capitalization, and there is no evidence this is an acronym.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  23:23, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]