Talk:Soldiers' and Sailors' Monument (Indianapolis)

Diameter of the circle?

It would be nice if the chapter Soldiers' and Sailors' Monument (Indianapolis) #Monument Circle contained the (outer and inner) diameter(s) of this circle.

Steue (talk) 00:09, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestion. I have added in the total diameter with a source.--Cerebral726 (talk) 13:27, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is reference as to Circle Park containing 3 acres. This is incorrect. Circle Park was originally designed to contain 2 acres or 87120 square feet. You can calculate that a circle containing 87120 square feet would have a diameter of approximately 333.05 feet. There do exist in the Marion County Recorder's Office files, maps of the plat of Indianapolis denoting a diameter of 333 and some odd fraction. The first digit of the 333 is smeared so it's not that evident. The resulting geometries (side lot line dimensions) about the lots adjacent to Monument Circle also bear witness to the fact that Circle Park contains exactly 2 acres. 2601:803:600:C:54A3:BA45:FFE0:DBAD (talk) 07:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Accuracy Issue Dispute

I came across this article today for the first time. The second paragraph includes this statement: "The monument is the first in the United States to be dedicated to the common soldier." A broad statement like this really should have a citation, but also I know it to be factually inaccurate. The Kent County Civil War Monument (Michigan) was dedicated in 1885, 17 years before this one, and was erected "In honor of the soldiers from Kent County 1861-1865." There may be other, earlier, monuments, but I know for certain about that one. So I am adding the Disputed Inline tag. RNavigator (talk) 22:47, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, while the statement in the lede has no citation, the article body itself has the same statement with one. Given the title of that source implies that it is a "popular" treatment rather than an "academic" one, it's probably not of the highest reliability. I noticed that the claim is repeated in several government-related websites, so this may be a case in which a widely known "fact" is just assumed to be true. The problem is finding a source that states that some other monument is the first, or that any earlier monument was specifically "dedicated to the common solder". The one in Kent County doesn't seem to have make either claim. Indyguy (talk) 01:28, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]