Talk:Angel of the North

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject North East England (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject North East England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North East England 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Public Art (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Public Art, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of public art 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Construction Controversy[edit]

Is this Cllr Wallace affair even worth mentioning? The BBC piece only says his vote might have affected the result.

Savvo (talk) 15:49, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Nazi or Nice[edit]

The Angel of the North aroused some controversy locally and in the British newspapers not least of all because of alleged similarities to Nazi symbols

Do we have a source for this? It's a completely new one on me (of course, I know it attracted some controversy, but I thought that was just because people thought it was an eyesore, not because they thought it bore some resemblance to "Nazi symbols"). --Camembert

The BBC has [1] describes "Nazi gigantism". A further Google search reveals not a lot more Dunc| 16:13, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I vaguely remember the stirred-up controversy in the press at the time. I think the angel looks somewhat like a luftwaffe memorial:

I can see what you mean there, but our personal opinion doesn't count for much. If somebody has a paper (or better still a dozen) which opines it is similar to "Nazi symbols", then lets quote it in the article. For now, I've taken the bit about a great controversy because of its similarities to "Nazi symbols" out until we get a source supporting it. The phrase "Nazi gigantism" seems to be a way of saying "it's big and I don't like it", whereas to say it has "similarties to Nazi symbols" suggests something rather more sinister, so I don't think that counts. --Camembert

I've added a reference to angels and fallen angels. Anecdota

Nazi or Nice again[edit]

I have added a narrative on the development of the Angel based on that in the 'Making an Angel' book. Hopefully this is NPOV. I will try and find a usable picture of the Chronicle with the 'Nazi or Nice' headline.

This comment was added to the main page, People have various views on the sculpture, both negative and positive. However, I would imagine the article makes that point, anyway. Bob 18:09, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


This section was added, but seems to be original research, so I have moved it here. Bob 19:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

The Angel of the North has many hidden subliminal meanings. The statue stands proud and two latin phrases spring to mind to those who love history.

CEDO NULLI - I SHALL NOT/WE SHALL NOT YIELD, this phrase symbolises the history of the region and its people. They are a strong and proud people who do not give in, they yield to no-one even when times have not been bad.

NON ANGLII, SED ANGELI - A lesser note saint, St Gregory (Pope Gregory I) stated that the people of the lands of Northumbria (previously known as Kingdom of Bernicia and Nord Angelen (by Germans), were not just a beautiful, fair coloured people but were angelic in their voice, looks and warmth.

The state of Man -- structurally the statue appears to be airplane wings attached to a man's body in place of the arms. Symbolically this appears to represent that man is unique because it is the only animal which can create its own wings when it has none, creating tools and manipulating nature to achieve it's dreams and overcoming it's shortcomings. In quite an irony the statue also shows resemblence to a crucifiction. In effect, paradoxically, a man's technology can also serve as a function of his own demise. Rugz 17:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure, but I think the Angel of the North marks the end of a flying-radius of the German Luftwaffe in WWII. --Bauernfreund (talk) 07:13, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Meanings of the statue[edit]

Following on from the above subsection (Symbolism), could we put in some information about what the Angel means into the article. Surely the sculptor must have made some comments in the sales pitch to the clients. Plus interesting information about what's carved on it. Right now there's none of this 'artistic' information in the article, just the plain mechanical information (how big it is, what it's made of...). I came to the article on wikipedia because I've driven past it and wondered what it all represented. Angels aren't usually portrayed as having aircraft like wings, and why the huge statue, why make it out of that kind of material? cheers --mgaved (talk) 22:09, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


"Angel of the North aroused some controversy locally and in the British newspapers when first erected, but has now come to be considered as a landmark for the North East of England."

Aroused some controversy? Why? What could be controversial about a giant angel? 00:53, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
I don't think the supposed "controversy" should be overstated. The controversy was not at all widespread and is typical of virtually all new developments. Newspapers make money by moaning about things, but I'd of thought though it would be extremely difficult to find a scientifically conducted poll showing anything but a very minute proportion of people objecting to the sculpture upon it's creation. Canderra 14:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Replicas and Imitations[edit]

Formerly Replica's and Imitation's

Are there any known replicas or imitations, i think i remember one being made for a rich Russian business man: is there any proof or knowledge since it would be an important section similar to one on The Hollywood Sign page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by T saston (talkcontribs) 18:40, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

Image gallery[edit]

What's the point of the image gallery in this article? The main image illustrates the article perfectly - surely these other images are just vanity - a way of people featuring their own, poorer images? Bingobangobongoboo (talk) 20:16, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the gallery is reasonably useful (at least some of the photos anyway):
  • It shows the real colours of the Angel (despite being a featured pic, the main image has ridiculously over-saturated colours - the gallery shows more life-like colours.
  • The main image is at an angle and does not give a good representation of just how wide the wings are, whereas the frontal pictures do.
  • One of the images is a close-up, which gives a good view of the construction of the Angel, whereas the main image does not.
  • A photo that clearly shows the angle of the wings would be useful, but the edge-on one is at sunset and shows no detail.
The sunset photos are probably not so useful --Ozhiker (talk) 20:49, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
Fair points - thanks. I'll be bold and remove the sunset ones. Bingobangobongoboo (talk) 12:32, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Is the text of the Angel of the North notice public domain or released under a GFDL-compatible licence?[edit]

I certainly can't see how using such a large quote instead of writing a proper section can be free use. In fact, I was very close to deleting it right away. How is this use justified, and even if it doesn't break copyright law, is such a large quote justified in Wikipedia in any case? --Rogerb67 (talk) 22:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Yup, you're right, it's not really justified at all - I think it was probably added by an anon ip at some point by the looks of it. I propose we just keep a few quotations for incorporating in the main text and remove the rest. Bob talk 07:23, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Since it is a copyright violation, I'm going to have to go ahead and remove it. I'm afraid I won't have time to incorporate any of the details into the text. It looks like it was cut & pasted from - the formatting changes match; see e.g. dash changed to hyphen at "The angel has three functions" (it only comes up on a Google image search, so I didn't find it before). The bottom of the sign is missing in the photo, where any copyright information would be held. --Rogerb67 (talk) 19:52, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Help for Southerners[edit]

Did you know that the wings are longer than Nelson's column is tall (51.5 m, column and statue)? I thought this might be useful somewhere, so those not willing to venture into the frozen wastelands of the North might get an idea of how big the thing actually is, especially when stood underneath it.--SquidSix (talk) 21:31, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Portrayed in British passport[edit]

The Angel of the North image is portrayed on page 23 of the new design of British passport. Might be worth mentioning somewhere in the article. Shcha (talk) 12:58, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Angel of the North. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 15 July 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:56, 5 July 2017 (UTC)


   The wings do not stand straight sideways, but are angled 3.5 degrees forward; 

I have read this sentence over and over again, but I still cannot understand what it is trying to say. Can it be made clearer, please?

Toddcs (talk) 20:07, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 02:51, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

Retitling and reordering[edit]

WP:CSECTION suggests that Sections headed "Controversy(ies)" are undesirable. Although a guideline, rather than a policy, it contains good advice, which I think is applicable here. The Controversies section dominates the article, with multiple sub-headings, even for the most trivial incidents, which are then covered in brief, often single-sentence, paragraphs. I'm planning to rename it, something like "Reception", and reorder it. Any concerns? KJP1 (talk) 09:42, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

It also has a few too many images, in the Gallery and dumped below the infobox. I'd like to trim these. KJP1 (talk) 09:53, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

For use in Reception section

External links