This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

June 2008 Information

The Merrill is proposed for delition. I'm goning to go ahead and remove the tag. Alaskan assassin ( talk) 17:49, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I recently put a meesage here saying I disagred with the creation of pages for the stale propsals. I removed it decding to go ahead and create them, but I have changed my mind again. Why should wikipedia have pages about buildings that aren't going to be built. Besides, they'll just get deleted, like Evolution Lofts, which was deleted two mineutes after I saved it, but the editor decided to reinstate it with a delition tag. But besides that, I guss thats it for article creation on the FTD? Alaskan assassin ( talk) 00:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I have expanded the lead on List of tallest buildings in New York City. Can you make the changes to bring it up to FLC? Alaskan assassin ( talk) 02:02, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

I see the FTD has progressed alot during my leave. I guss I will get started on Tampa. Alaskan assassin ( talk)

Did you miss my message above about Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)/1? Maybe I should have made a new section.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 20:27, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

What do you think about nominating List of tallest buildings and structures in London to be delisted? It currently has only 6 references and no timeline of tallest buildings. Alaskan assassin ( talk) 00:10, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I have nominated it. Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of tallest buildings and structures in London. Also, what about putting List of tallest buildings and structures in Croydon up for deletion, scine it's part of London? Alaskan assassin ( talk) 02:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Can you explain definitional differences that would cause a building to be the world's tallest according to List of tallest buildings in Chicago and never be listed on the timeline of U.S. tallest.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 14:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I started to add a paragraph to the WP:LEAD, but am not sure what to say now.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 14:57, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying that. That kind of detail would still be interesting for the WP:LEAD I think.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 21:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Should we add a column describing what area each building is in?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 02:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Maybe this discussion should be archived at Talk:List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Chicago#Community_Areas.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 21:37, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

See Talk:List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Chicago#Community_Areas.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 08:40, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

More food for thought. Come revisit.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 22:24, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

What is going on with the links to Michigan Plaza South and Park Millennium. They are sending me to the Illinois Center neighborhood without explanation.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 00:01, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

It seems to me that the redirect is to a neighborhood and not the complex. It is very confusing to me and I understand WP well. I can not imagine what your average reader feels like.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 05:33, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey, just an FYI, but Emporis almost always tends to be wrong and Skyscraperpage is honestly not much of a reliable source. Just look at the dates they have for say Met 3, which says it'll be completed in 2009 and it hasn't even broken ground. I know it's hard to find reliable sources sometime, but I think information on these pages should be taken with a grain of salt. :) -- Comayagua99 ( talk) 18:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I thought you should know that Equitable Building (Atlanta 1892) was moved shortly after being created (on 31 May) to Equitable Building (Atlanta, Georgia) on the basis that it is a "better dab." Should we request for the page to be moved back? So now we have Equitable Building (Atlanta) and Equitable Building (Atlanta, Georgia), which to me seems to be a worse disambiguation. The original title was clearly better and more discerning between which building/article was which. What are your thoughts? Leitmanp ( talk | contributions) 22:57, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

When I request the move at Wikipedia:Requested moves, should I treat it as controversial or uncontroversial? I am assuming it is uncontroversial due to our discussion (even though it is rather short) and the fact that another article has such a similar title. But, I am unsure whether other people will see it as controversial or not. Leitmanp ( talk | contributions) 03:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I am curious to know how you moved that article over a redirect? I thought that only administrators could do that. I always use WP:RM because I do not know any other way to do it. Do you have some administrator "powers" or is there something that I do not know? Leitmanp ( talk | contributions) 01:06, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining that to me. I wonder how many others tasks on Wikipedia are still unknown to me. Well, it is good to that you know all the shortcuts. If I ever need any help, I know where to go. Thank you. Leitmanp ( talk | contributions) 23:18, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter Volume I, No. 8 - June 2008 May issue | July issue Project News There are currently 4,266 Good Articles listed at WP:GA. The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 157 unreviewed articles. Out of 215 total nominations, 44 are on hold, 13 are under review, and one is seeking a second opinion. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance! The oldest unreviewed articles are: Choctaw, One Night Stand (2007), Justin Tuck, Tristan Tzara, The Stake Out (Seinfeld episode), Impalement arts, Backlash (2007), Adelaide Rams, and Sam Cowan. The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film and drama (31), Sports and recreation (31), Transport (24), Music (13), and Art and architecture (11) The backlog at Good Article Reassessment currently stands at 4 articles up for re-review. GA Sweeps Update The GA Sweeps process is progressing nicely! During the month of May, a total of 82 articles were reviewed. Of that total, 71 were found to continue to meet the GA criteria, and 11 were delisted. There are currently 15 articles that are still on hold in this process, awaiting revisions. We are once again recruiting new sweeps participants. Candidates should be very strong and comfortable in reviewing GA and familiar with the GA processes and criteria. If you are interested, please contact OhanaUnited for details. GAN Reviewer of the Month Giggy ( talk · contribs) (a.k.a. Dihydrogen Monoxide ( talk · contribs)) is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for May, based on the assessments made by Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Giggy had a whopping 45 reviews during the month of May! Congratulations to Giggy ( talk · contribs) on being May's GAN Reviewer of the Month! Other outstanding reviewers during the month of May include: Ealdgyth ( talk · contribs) Eustress ( talk · contribs) GaryColemanFan ( talk · contribs) Ice Cold Beer ( talk · contribs) Juliancolton ( talk · contribs) Nikki311 ( talk · contribs) ThinkBlue ( talk · contribs) Yllosubmarine ( talk · contribs) Also, with 19 nominations, Mitchazenia ( talk · contribs) is the nominator of the month, followed by TonyTheTiger ( talk · contribs) with 8 nominations submitted. Member News There are now 216 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to the 6 new members that joined during the month of April: Jack Bethune ( talk · contribs) Jordan Timothy James Busson ( talk · contribs) Limetolime ( talk · contribs) Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim Fan ( talk · contribs) Mm40 ( talk · contribs) Redmarkviolinist ( talk · contribs) This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all! New GA Review Process - Review Subpages In case you haven't noticed, we initiated a new process for GA Reviews at the end of last month. The {{ GA nominee}} template was modified to direct new reviews initiated on an article to begin on a subpage of article talkspace (e.g. [[Talk:Article/GA#]], where '#' is the current number of GA reviews conducted for the article, incremented automatically, starting with 1). The primary reason for this change is to address some concerns made by several Wikipedians that previous GA reviews are not easily accessible in archives, the way that featured article reviews and peer reviews are, since the review is conducted on the article's talkspace, instead of in a subpage of the featured article space or peer review space. The reason we opted to move GA reviews to article talkspace (instead of GA space) is to better maintain the personal relationship between editor(s) and reviewer(s) by keeping reviews done in an area where editors can easily access it. Nonetheless, we still desired to have better archiving and maintenance of past reviews, so that GA ultimately becomes more accountable. When an article is nominated, the nominator adds the template using a substitution, by adding {{subst:GAN|subtopic=<name of subtopic for article at GAN>}}, as well as lists the article (as usual) at WP:GAN in the appropriate category. When a reviewer initiates a review of an article, all that needs to be done is to read the template on the article's {{ GA nominee}} template on its talk page, and click on the link to start the review. When the reviewer clicks on that link, they will also see some instructions on how to start a review of a GAN. For new reviewers, there's also a link to the Good Article criteria, as well as to the Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles page and the mentors list. Once an article is reviewed, the GA review page should be transcluded onto the main article talk page, by adding {{Talk:Article/GA#}} to the bottom of the talk page. This is to ensure maintain the transparency of the GA process, as well as to make editors of the article in question aware that the review is taking place. When an article is either passed or failed, there's really nothing different to do in the process, although reviewers are encouraged to utilize the {{ ArticleHistory}} template, linking to the GA review subpage with the 'action#link' parameter. Did You Know... ... that there are slightly more than twice as many Good Articles (4,266) as there are Featured Articles? ... that Giggy has some really neat and useful tools to assist reviewers in conducting their reviews? ... that there are ten experienced reviewers listed on the GA mentors list that can offer assistance or a second opinion in reviewing articles? From the Editors A GA working party has initiated discussion on ways to improve the Good Article project and processes. The goal of the working party is to come up with suggestions for improvement based on recent issues and concerns raised in the past, primarily in the wake of the Great Green Dot Debate of May 2008. The discussion can be found here. Members of the working party include: Dank55 ( talk · contribs), Derek.cashman ( talk · contribs), EyeSerene ( talk · contribs), Giggy ( talk · contribs), Gwinva ( talk · contribs), LaraLove ( talk · contribs), Nehrams2020 ( talk · contribs), and OhanaUnited ( talk · contribs). Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue here. Contributors to this Issue Dr. Cash (Lead Editor) Giggabot, Giggy (Distributor) Improving Wikipedia one article at a time since 2005! WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia. Nominations: Madame X (album) ( talk | history | start review) • Gedling Town F.C. ( talk | history | start review) • Reggie Barnes (skateboarder) ( talk | history | start review) • Exile (American band) ( talk | history | start review) • Jude Law ( talk | history | start review) Reassessment: Louie Caporusso • Northallerton • Patrick Omameh • Task forces: Project quality • Sweeps • GAN Backlog Drives • GA Cup WikiProject Good articles newsletter (last updated January 2013) Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations list |

Delivered by the automated Giggabot ( stop!) 02:11, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I have nominated Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago) at FAC.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 19:35, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

On the talk page I noticed that an IP requested an image. I am wondering if the fourth page here] would be suitable. Have you ever requested permission to use such an image.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 16:25, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I will be getting out of school soon (Thursday, 5:30 pm) so which list should we work on? I say we target the BIG THREE skylines (that is, NYC, Chicago, HK), a goal that fell off the radar. How should we write the intro for those cities? Each of them has a rich history of skyscrapers and if we follow the format, it might get a bit too long. And also, where should we go next when the US cities are done? Canada and China seem like good places. See you in a couple of days. Cheers. _{Trance addict - Tiesto - Above and Beyond} 06:04, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Great work on the Chicago list; do you think we should nominate the list for FL-status? And also, the Waterview Tower seems to be on hold status. As seen here, the building hasn't risen at all since major work stopped a couple months ago. Cheers. _{Trance addict - Tiesto - Above and Beyond}

One question about the FTD drive: Should we include Honolulu in the drive? The city ranks fourth in number of highrise buildings in the United States at 429 (NY 5,536, Chi 1,074, LA 477) and it has almost as many buildings as Los Angeles, a city more than 10 times as big (population-wise) as Honolulu. It even has more completed buildings than SF! However, due to strict building codes, none of Honolulu's 429 buildings even come close to breaking the 500 foot limit. The First Hawaiian Center is the tallest in Hawaii at 431 feet. See here for yourself. Cheers. _{Trance addict - Tiesto - Above and Beyond} 05:56, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I remember that you said FL-review doesn't like it when we "spam" them with FLCs, so I guess we should wait a bit until one of those FLCs pass. (Work on Tampa, etc.) For the Columbus list, I think the Buggyworks project needs an article; a Google Search, provides several references to the project. Overall, for the FTD, I wouldn't mind a change in the scope, even though that means working on four more lists. Cheers. _{Trance addict - Tiesto - Above and Beyond} 18:03, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Great work on the Tampa list! Sorry, I went swimming and watched the Celtics rape the Lakers today (Game 6: BOS 131, LAL 92, 17th championship banner). One minor issue I have with the list is that there are proposed projects over 25 stories tall in Tampa (40, 33, 26 and 25, see here and here). Oh yea, one important question: What should we do about completed buildings with no height listed? You will see that there is a completed 32 story tower in Tampa without a height given in the first link above. I suspect we will see many completed buildings with no height figure listed in cities overseas, (Latin America, Middle East, Asia, maybe Europe). Cheers. _{Trance addict - Tiesto - Above and Beyond} 04:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

I'd say we create a new section called Tallest buildings by floor count or something similar to that. If we do have a section like that, let's list everything that doesn't have a height figure in that section. In addition, what should we do about projects that don't have a height given that are nearing completion? Put them into this new section?

Just a note about the estimation method using SkyscraperPage diagram, the drawings are sometimes out of scale or outdated. You will see sometimes that a building is listed at (for example) 600 feet tall, but the diagram of that building reaches to only 550 feet tall. Cheers. _{Trance addict - Tiesto - Above and Beyond} 05:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Yea, we should go with that. The only possible problem with placing buildings with only floor counts along in the main list that the list could get too long. There are some cities with 100 buildings that are 40-50 stories tall. We could solve this by setting a higher cutoff for buildings w/o height figures. Oh yea, is there a better format for the building rankings, such as using #, rather than typing in numbers as it is now. It would make maintaining long lists easier. Cheers. _{Trance addict - Armin van Buuren - Oceanlab} 18:57, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Should we add coordinates to the building lists? Just like adding coords to articles, a link from Google Earth will appear (at most, one or two months after the addition of the coords). Cheers. _{Trance addict - Armin van Buuren - Oceanlab} 01:26, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I am already watching Columbus and Tampa. I think I will be able to adress any prblems that will arise. We might be able to find another souce for mobile. Why dou you think it is barly covered on emporis or skyscraperpage? Alaskan assassin ( talk) 03:09, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

(Late response) I meant coordinates for the city list only, not for each and every building listed. Cheers. _{Trance addict - Armin van Buuren - Oceanlab} 22:29, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Do you think we can nominate the HK list for featured status tonight? Or is there still a lot more work to be done? Cheers. _{Trance addict - Armin van Buuren - Oceanlab} 03:01, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Well, many of those redlinks link to a building complex, so creating five or six articles about these complexes would eliminate many of the redlinks. I still think we should still use "m / ft" for building lists; using the {{ Convert}} template doesn't work out that well sometimes (e.g, 367 m coverts to 1,204 ft, but we want 1,205 ft for the Bank of China Tower).

However, I have one issue with the source information regarding Hong Kong's number of skyscrapers over 500 feet and 200 m. Currently, Emporis states that there are 228 buildings over 150 m (1st in the world) and 45 over 200 m (should be 47 since the Cullinan Towers are complete, this is second behind New York, as confirmed by DiSerio's skyline ranking site). As you could see, I found height figures for many building entries in Hong Kong that only had floor counts on Emporis, seen here, here, and here. It turns out, many of these building entries (ranging from 45 to 63 floors) are over 500 feet tall and a few of them are taller than 200 m. This raised the number of buildings taller than 200 m to 52 (proving DiSerio wrong) and the list has ballooned to 106 entires. Should I add these skyscrapers (that I found the height for) to the count of 228 buildings >150 m? The trouble is, there are more buildings that are over 150 m tall with just floor counts listed in Emporis (as verified by Skyscraperpage diagrams) and it's quite a lot of work to seek out which of those building entries with only floor counts exceed 150 m in height. Or should we just go with what Emporis states and add a note that there is more? Cheers. _{Trance addict - Armin van Buuren - Oceanlab} 03:41, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Grettings. FL directors Scorpion0422 and The Rambling Man have decided to run a contest for FL contributors. We are trying to get some interest in the process and get some FLs for the under-represented topics. If you would like to learn more about this contest, you can find such information here. If you are uninterested in it, then you could still help out by reviewing FLCs submitted by the entrants. Thanks for the time, Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 18:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/voting/200807 is underway.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 08:10, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Re: List of tallest buildings in Denver, let me know if you want it, and if you do, which ones are which. Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 05:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Okay, here it goes. Again, thank you very much for doing this! The tallest building on the left, brown in color and labeled with "Qwest", is 1801 California Street. The farthest building to the left, also brown in color, is 17th Street Plaza. To the right of that, the white building with horizontal black windows is Denver Place South Tower. Behond that, the taller yellow-white building with blue horizontal windows is 1999 Broadway. In the very foreground of the image, between 1999 Broadway and 1801 California, the shorter white building with windows that look like "horizontal stripes" is Bank One Tower. The building to the right of that, the black and white vertical-striped one, doesn't have an article. But directly to the right of that is One Tabor Center, which has a light yellow facade on one side and a blue glass on the other that reaches above the yellow facade. The building near the center of the image with a black glass facade is 555 17th Street, and to the left of that, the building that is mostly hidden by the short white building and the red brick apartment building (which both don't have no articles) is the US Bank Tower. It has a small red and blue "US Bank" sign near its roof. Behind 555 17th Street, the very tall "cash register building" is the Wells Fargo Center. To the right of that, the stepped light brown building is Dominion Plaza South. To the right of that, the tallest building in the image, the one with the gray facade, is Republic Plaza. The shorter building directly in front of that, which also has a gray facade and almost "blends in", is 621 17th Street. The two shorter, black buildings to the right of that, and somewhat in the distance make up the Denver World Trade Center. Finally, the building at the very right of the image is Brooks Towers. Thanks! Cheers, Rai• me 23:06, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey, great work with those Denver skyscraper pages! FYI, a left a comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of tallest buildings in Denver that doesn't seem to have been addressed. Is Emporis wrong about the Ritz Carlton? Zagalejo ^^^ 05:09, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks! Everything looks good now. Zagalejo ^^^ 21:06, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi my name is SRX, I saw that you are an experienced editor in WP:SKY, and I was wondering whether me and you could work on a list of tallest buildings article?-- SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 01:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Of course, FL status is what I am aiming for. I only worked with WP:PW and I want to work on something else, so I thought this would be a good start. I was thinking doing one in the United States, mayby Arlington, Virginia? Baltimore, Maryland? Dallas, Texas? or if you could think of any?-- SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 14:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh ok, I'm good with Baltimore, if it's ok with you.-- SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 14:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I will work on the tallest buildings under construction, approved, and proposed. I will also attempt to work on the lead. SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 14:58, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh ok, I get it now. I'm still learning, as this is my first list. SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 16:07, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'm done. I hope it looks okay. SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 16:45, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I will do that. Sure, I'll start creating those redlinked articles, but how good should it look? or what should it contain? (each article?) SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 22:55, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

I am planning to do so. I just created 414 Water Street. I plan on doing more. SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 23:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

After we create all the red linked articles, what does it have to go through to become a FLC?-- SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 03:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

They do look alike, ok cool. I will work on creating the other articles tomorrow. Cheers, SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 04:07, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Update

I've created a little more than half of the red linked articles. Just letting you know, I will continue to do more later, unless you want to get to them. SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 16:04, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I finished the last 3 buildings that were redlinked, should we nominate it for FLC, or what do we next?-- SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 17:23, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok, great. Oh ok. I hope it passes, and I will make sure to address any concerns. SRX^{-- Latino} Heat 17:52, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

On 20 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1801 California Street, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- Bedford ^Pray 23:14, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Are you sure you want Image:Chicago Skyline Hi-Res.jpg mapped, rather than the Lede Image:Chicago - skyline.JPG? I'm asking simply because we've started a trend of mapping the lede image, not the panoramic view. I've looked around a little and there's two other images which might be easier to map: Image:Sears Tower from Hancock Observation Deck - daytime.jpg and Image:JHancockCtrAug2004A.jpg, though they are missing some buildings due to them being taken from the top of a building. Anyway, I don't mind either way, just let me know.. I also did Denver today; sorry it took so long. Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 05:45, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

I think you may have missed this. Matthewedwards ( talk • contribs • email) 23:01, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations List of tallest buildings in Los Angeles has been selected as a July WP:LOTD. As one of the leading vote-getters, it will appear in the WP:LOTD template for two days as a LOTD. If you have any preference on a days during July let me know before June 24th. If you have any other lists that you feel should be nominated next month please ad them at User:TonyTheTiger/List of the Day/Nominees/200808.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 20:09, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

You may want to clarify the WP:LEAD at Bank of America Tower (New York). I think it is wrong because I believe it is still a structure and not a building, but you are the expert.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 21:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

O.K. Then One Museum Park is a completed building. You should note this on the Chicago list and in its text.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 13:23, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

I had kind of hoped you might have some comments at the FAC for Trump Chicago.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 20:27, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I have added another comment on the List FLC. I hope I have addressed your concerns on the Trump building and also hope for your support.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 14:38, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the continued attention. I hope I have addressed your further concerns.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 05:35, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

As the only voter in a restarted nom, you may want to revisit the discussion.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 07:00, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Since I am here, I will remind you that support would be apprecieated.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 20:07, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Raime, recently I have been working on the List of tallest buildings in Phoenix (I know, ironic for a city that is the epitome of suburban sprawl). I am hoping to bring it to featured status. Since you are extremely skilled at this, I was hoping you could look over it to see if there are any issues that need to be addressed (other than the amount of redlinked articles).

There are also a few specifics which I would like do discuss. First of all, I added a list of the tallest buildings in Phoenix's satellite cities. I am not sure if this should be included since there are only two buildings (both of which are topped out) which are taller than the cutoff of 245 feet (75 m)). But, the main reason is because there are a total of eight buildings which are proposed, approved, or under construction above 245 feet in the suburbs (but they are all within one suburb ( Tempe); see http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/bu/sk/li/?id=101566&bt=2&ht=2&sro=1). Should this satellite cities list also contain the buildings which are approved and proposed, or only completed and topped out buildings? Also, shouldn't a policy about the inclusion of suburban buildings be added to Wikipedia:WikiProject Skyscrapers/Tallest building lists? I do not think our discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Skyscrapers#"Tallest suburbs" sections in tallest building lists ever resulted in the creation of such guidelines.

The next issue is about the images. For some reason, I think of you as an editor which is very skilled at the copyrights of images. I have reason to believe that Image:Sparkling Downtown Phoenix.jpg (which is used as the Phoenix list's lead image) is a copyright violation, unlike what the licensing information says (see http://www.wildnatureimages.com/Phoenix_Panoramic_Photos.htm and http://www.wildnatureimages.com/Phoenix_Skyline_Photos.htm). The image was moved to Commons, but it appears as though the English Wikipedia version was later recreated. But anyway, I left a message on the user talk page of User:King of Hearts (who had transferred the image to Commons). King of Hearts told me to ask User:Sonoran dweller (the uploader) about this. So, I asked Sonoran dweller to explain the copyright status of the image to me. While this user has made a few edits since I left this message on his/her talk page, I have not received a reply. I decided to leave another message for King of Hearts to inquire about what should be done if Sonoran dweller does not reply. Well, King of Hearts has also not shown any interest in this issue so I am hoping you could help in some way. Is there any way to delete an image from Commons and English Wikipedia with just those links I provided above? Or, is there some process to go through? I am sorry to dump this issue on your shoulders, but I know you are a very good editor that knows how to handle different situations well. If you have no clue about what to do, I appreciate your time anyway.

Now, since I want to bring the Phoenix list to featured status, I knew it would be good to have a panoramic image of the Phoenix skyline. Since Phoenix does not have a very impressive skyline, there are not that many skyline images. So, I decided to look on Flickr for a good image of Downtown Phoenix which both shows all (or at least most) the buildings and can be used commercially (I should admit that I only looked for images which I though portrayed Phoenix as a nice place). While I was there, I also searched for a new lead image in the hope that the current lead image would be deleted. I was wondering if you could look at them to make sure they can be used on Wikipedia and that they are images which would be good for the list. I have two panoramic alternatives and two lead alternatives. The first panoramic image ( http://www.flickr.com/photos/mixstar/2345337861/sizes/l/) is a few years old and was poorly stitched. The next one ( http://www.flickr.com/photos/mixstar/2346170286/sizes/l/) is nicer and more up-to-date (2007, I think), but has a border around it. The first possible lead image ( http://www.flickr.com/photos/mixstar/2346166610/sizes/o/) shows most of the downtown area but looks like it was taken around 1989 or 1990. The second image ( http://www.flickr.com/photos/mixstar/2346168458/sizes/o/) is much nicer. It was taken after 2000, but the skyline might be too small. If you would like to find others that could be used, be my guest. It is probably best if you do it since I will only pick the ones which make Phoenix look nice, which is not the purpose for having the images in the list. And maybe the images currently at Commons:Category:Phoenix, Arizona and/or Commons:Category:Buildings in Phoenix, Arizona are worthwhile, but I just do not find them appealing.

I appreciate you taking the time to look into these issues for me. If you would feel more comfortable and less pressed, feel free to look into these issues one by one, and over a few days if you want. I am sorry if I seem forceful or rude, but I know that you are much more skilled than I. Thank you so much. Leitmanp ( talk | contributions) 21:48, 22 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping. The reason the cutoff was at 245 feet is because that was the height of the last building in the list; I did not even think about changing it. And thanks for your help with the copyrighted image, is has already been deleted.

Now, about the images you uploaded. I believe you uploaded an image which is already on Commons. You uploaded commons:Image:Phoenix skyline.jpg, while commons:Image:Phoenix skyline Arizona USA.jpg already existed. The interesting thing is that both images have different licensing terms and the latter image has a higher resolution. Also, when I went to look for another website as proof for the copyright violation of Image:Sparkling Downtown Phoenix, I found two websites ( http://www.city-data.com/picfilesc/picc30188.php and http://www.aroundphoenix.com/index.html) that have the same image as commons:Image:Phoenix skyline sunset.jpg. Both websites state that the images are by Donald M. Burns and the second website states that "all images are copyrighted." This is different from what is stated on Flickr.

I saw the dates you wrote in each image's description box. There appear to be some errors. Although Flickr states otherwise (March 2005), I believe commons:Image:Skyline of Phoenix.jpg was taken in 1989 or 1990. One of the two buildings in the Arizona Center complex (one was completed in 1989 and the other in 1990) can be seen under construction to the upper right of downtown. I cannot see the Viad Tower which was completed in 1991. But I do see both buildings in Renaissance Square (the tallest was completed in 1990). I think we should use the most up-to-date image for the lead, if possible. If you do keep commons:Image:Phoenix skyline.jpg, you should also change the date as it was taken in 2004 (according to its sister image). To replace the current lead image, I assume the sister image will be okay. The only problem with this image is that multiple buildings are not visible due to the location from which we are viewing the skyline. Although some of the buildings are still obscured, commons:Image:Phoenix.skyline.750pix.jpg (from 2001) will work since more buildings are visible (but is might be too small). Do you have any opinions on this?

Now back to the list itself. If sources state that a building is expected to be completed in 2007, should we change it to 2008? Thanks again. Leitmanp ( talk | contributions) 19:02, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

I also believe that MS' images are copyright violations. Do you have to provide a website to prove this, or can you (as the uploader) delete it yourself? I did a quick look using a search engine to find more Phoenix skyline images. I could not find any of the ones that were uploaded from Flickr. But, I did see commons:Image:Phoenix skyline Arizona USA.jpg multiple times. It could also be a copyright violation, but it is just a guess. It is very difficult to search for an image, and we may never be able to find them. And I am not sure from where we may be able to get other images that can be used on Wikipedia. I looked at the source of the side images in the Phoenix list. Most of the images are the works of User:Jimmybeverage. If we cannot find any good, free images, Jimmybeverage would be a great source. And what did you mean when you said "I will add your estimated dates of completion to the 'Description' part [of] the summary"? Did you mean the possible year the image was taken? But do not waste your time if the image will be deleted for possible copyright violation. Leitmanp ( talk | contributions) 01:26, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

On 23 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with facts from the articles 100 North Tampa, and List of tallest buildings in Tampa, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Vishnava _talk 02:21, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

On 25 June, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of tallest buildings in Baltimore, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- BorgQueen ( talk) 04:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Shouldn't One Museum Park be listed at List of tallest buildings in the United States now?-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 20:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.