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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
After looking at your recent contributions to building lists, I decided it was time to end the unsynchronised nature of our work by collaborating our efforts in improving building lists. But first, I will like to award you a....
The Original Barnstar | ||
I appriciate your great contributions to Wikipedia, especially your additions to building lists! Great work and keep it up! |
That said, I think now would be great time to take a moment to smooth out places where we have different editing/contribution styles. More importantly, I would also like to better organize our contributions (e.g. what lists to improve/expand, what should be included, etc). For now, I just want to get things sorted out before we continue on with the lists. However, please note that I will be taking a short weekend wikibreak after a month heavy editing, but I will get back to editing lists probably by Monday. Happy contributing. =) Hydrogen Iodide 07:01, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
First, I have identified the following cities that need a wiki building list:
In addition, even though it might be redundant, I think there should be a separate list for Dallas and Houston skyscrapers. As for the current lists, the NYC Building list really needs expansion and clean up. For a city that has the most buildings in the Western Hemisphere, the list is weak-start class at best. The intro is very brief, there are no pictures of the skyline/buildings (!) and the second table (Approved/Proposed/Under Construction) is a mess, much like the Miami list before I cleaned it up. I think we should round up and finish "listing" the mid-to-large-skyline cities in USA before we go international (i.e. returning the Paris List back to FL-status). BTW, I finished major initial construction on this new List of tallest buildings in Albuquerque created by another Wikipedian. Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide 03:31, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
I decided to cut short my Wikibreak such that I could develop a list standard with you and smooth out our contributing differences (Nevermind my prior comment). This may save us a lot of work later on.
Alright: I agree that every list look like (using a 400 feet standard example)....
This list of tallest buildings in ABC ranks skyscrapers in the city of ABC, 123 state by height. The tallest building in the city is currently the XYZ Building, which rises 1,000 ft (305 m) in ABC's Financial District (if known). Blah blah ...........
This lists ranks ABC skyscrapers that stand at least 400 feet (122 meters) tall, based on standard height measurement. This includes spires and architectural details but does not include antenna masts. Existing structures are included for ranking purposes based on present height. This list includes under construction buildings that have already been topped out.
Height Rank | Building Name | Height feet ( meters) |
Floors | Year | Notes/References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | XYZ Building | 1,000 ft (305 m) | 80 | 2000 | This is the tallest building in ABC.(reference) |
2 | HSBC Center XYZ | 923 ft (281 m) | 64 | 2007 | (reference) |
2= | Trump International Hotel & Residences | 923 ft (281 m) | 82 | 1994 | ... |
4 | ASDFHJKL | 865 ft (264 m) | 57 | 1936 | ... |
This lists buildings that are under construction in ABC and are planned to rise at least 400 feet (122 meters). Under construction buildings that have already been topped out are also included.
Height Rank | Building Name | Estimated Height feet ( meters) |
Estimated Floors | Estimated year of completion | Notes/References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Armin Center | 20,000 ft (6,096 m) | 1525 | 2010 | This will be the tallest building on Earth.(reference) |
This lists buildings that are approved in ABC and are planned to rise at least 400 feet (122 meters).
Height Rank | Building Name | Estimated Height feet ( meters) |
Estimated Floors | Estimated year of completion | Notes/References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 193 Ellery Lake Tower I | 3,250 ft (991 m) | 245 | 2013 | ... |
This lists buildings that are proposed in ABC and are planned to rise at least 400 feet (122 meters).
Height Rank | Building Name | Estimated Height feet ( meters) |
Estimated Floors | Estimated year of completion | Notes/References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | One500 Westminster | 5,640 ft (1,719 m) | 500 | 2016 | .... |
This lists buildings that have been canceled in ABC and were planned to rise at least 400 feet (122 meters).
Height Rank | Building Name | Estimated Height feet ( meters) |
Estimated Floors | Notes/References |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Cannotbedone tower | ∞ | ∞ | ... |
(Emporis.com, SkyscraperPage.com)
{again, Emporis.com, etc.)
(City buildings template)
(US building lists)
So, what do you think? And also, I did some prep work on the Las Vegas list to make up for my abscence later today and tomorrow. Please reply here for these comments. Cheers! Hydrogen Iodide 17:22, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for not getting back to you sooner - The answer is of course, please just add them to Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture/FAC. regards -- Mcginnly | Natter 15:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey Raime, I was wondering if you would be interested in starting (co-founding) a new WikiProject focusing on improving and creating building lists. Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide 18:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for adding your concerns to the Jack Adams FLC. I've been on a WikiBreak, and I'll try to fix everything within the next few days. Sorry for the delay. Maxim (talk) 23:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I have noticed several stub-articles like The Orion (which is a NYC residential skyscraper), have been PRODDED and deleted by admins because of notability reasons. I think we may run into this problem when we create a lot of stub articles about future and current skyscrapers. I've had a speedy-delete tag placed on a stub-building article before for notability reasons (later overturned and kept). I believe a way to address this issue is to post a message on Wikipedia talk:Notability and have other editors/admins share their thoughts on this matter. If a consensus is reached, I guess it would be advisable to start a guideline page titled: Wikipedia:Notability (Buildings and structures). Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 18:24, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
One note, I don't think notability will be a problem for short buildings (which were San Francisco's tallest buildings a 100 years ago) listed under the Timeline of tallest buildings section of the SF list. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 23:22, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Brickell Station.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:04, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:WTC 5.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Since your initial GA/R of Bringin' on the Heartbreak, significant strides have been made in the article, and as the original nominator, I believe the article is now up to GA standards. So, I'd appreciate it if you could re-review the article real quick and change your vote if you feel it's up to par. Thanks! Drewcifer 04:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey there, it would be appropriate to split apart the tallest U/C, approved and proposed buildings in Bellevue since the city does have 15 U/C buildings, 9 proposed, and 5 approved even though the city is not too big ( evidence). Combining the three subsections will result in a mess, I think. Anyway, great job on the FL-status of the Miami List! Although I cleaned up the Miami list a while ago, I think you deserve most of the credit for bringing the list to FL-status. BTW, I think it would be reasonable to put the SF list to FL-review by next week. Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 22:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I have a question for you. Do you think this section is a bit unencyclopedic? Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 19:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
After doing some research on Emporis, it appears both the Fort Collins, CO and Laredo, TX lists should not be included in the template. Both cities have only a minuscule number of highrises over 12 stories, which translates into a very short (and maybe pointless) building list. In addition, the Hartford list was KO'ed recently because it was a copyright of Emporis and so I removed it from the template. Besides that, it seems like you can ask User:Loodog to help support the Skyscraper WikiProject, since he seems to be a major contributor to skyscraper-related content, such as the FL-Providence buildings list.
Anyway, as you noticed, I have been too busy with college (crazy stuff such as ʃʃʃρ²sin(Φ)dρdΦdθ, wave equation, matrices, coordination numbers and (ugh)) to really contribute much. Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 05:54, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Should we include completed buildings with floor counts, but no heights under the tallest buildings section? Or should we omit them altogether. I am undecided on this matter. Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 07:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Looking over the Center of India Tower edit history, it was you who edited the article in saying it was simply a vision, based on "new information." This "information" was not properly added and cited as per Verifiability standards. Given your experience, I'm guessing this was just a slip-up. If you still have this information (I know it's about a year since, but still), please add and cite it into the article. Otherwise, I will revert the edits to "proposed," since I haven't been able to find other information to suggest otherwise. Brokenwit 06:31, 25 September 2007 (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. |
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. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
After looking at your recent contributions to building lists, I decided it was time to end the unsynchronised nature of our work by collaborating our efforts in improving building lists. But first, I will like to award you a....
The Original Barnstar | ||
I appriciate your great contributions to Wikipedia, especially your additions to building lists! Great work and keep it up! |
That said, I think now would be great time to take a moment to smooth out places where we have different editing/contribution styles. More importantly, I would also like to better organize our contributions (e.g. what lists to improve/expand, what should be included, etc). For now, I just want to get things sorted out before we continue on with the lists. However, please note that I will be taking a short weekend wikibreak after a month heavy editing, but I will get back to editing lists probably by Monday. Happy contributing. =) Hydrogen Iodide 07:01, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
First, I have identified the following cities that need a wiki building list:
In addition, even though it might be redundant, I think there should be a separate list for Dallas and Houston skyscrapers. As for the current lists, the NYC Building list really needs expansion and clean up. For a city that has the most buildings in the Western Hemisphere, the list is weak-start class at best. The intro is very brief, there are no pictures of the skyline/buildings (!) and the second table (Approved/Proposed/Under Construction) is a mess, much like the Miami list before I cleaned it up. I think we should round up and finish "listing" the mid-to-large-skyline cities in USA before we go international (i.e. returning the Paris List back to FL-status). BTW, I finished major initial construction on this new List of tallest buildings in Albuquerque created by another Wikipedian. Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide 03:31, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
I decided to cut short my Wikibreak such that I could develop a list standard with you and smooth out our contributing differences (Nevermind my prior comment). This may save us a lot of work later on.
Alright: I agree that every list look like (using a 400 feet standard example)....
This list of tallest buildings in ABC ranks skyscrapers in the city of ABC, 123 state by height. The tallest building in the city is currently the XYZ Building, which rises 1,000 ft (305 m) in ABC's Financial District (if known). Blah blah ...........
This lists ranks ABC skyscrapers that stand at least 400 feet (122 meters) tall, based on standard height measurement. This includes spires and architectural details but does not include antenna masts. Existing structures are included for ranking purposes based on present height. This list includes under construction buildings that have already been topped out.
Height Rank | Building Name | Height feet ( meters) |
Floors | Year | Notes/References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | XYZ Building | 1,000 ft (305 m) | 80 | 2000 | This is the tallest building in ABC.(reference) |
2 | HSBC Center XYZ | 923 ft (281 m) | 64 | 2007 | (reference) |
2= | Trump International Hotel & Residences | 923 ft (281 m) | 82 | 1994 | ... |
4 | ASDFHJKL | 865 ft (264 m) | 57 | 1936 | ... |
This lists buildings that are under construction in ABC and are planned to rise at least 400 feet (122 meters). Under construction buildings that have already been topped out are also included.
Height Rank | Building Name | Estimated Height feet ( meters) |
Estimated Floors | Estimated year of completion | Notes/References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Armin Center | 20,000 ft (6,096 m) | 1525 | 2010 | This will be the tallest building on Earth.(reference) |
This lists buildings that are approved in ABC and are planned to rise at least 400 feet (122 meters).
Height Rank | Building Name | Estimated Height feet ( meters) |
Estimated Floors | Estimated year of completion | Notes/References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 193 Ellery Lake Tower I | 3,250 ft (991 m) | 245 | 2013 | ... |
This lists buildings that are proposed in ABC and are planned to rise at least 400 feet (122 meters).
Height Rank | Building Name | Estimated Height feet ( meters) |
Estimated Floors | Estimated year of completion | Notes/References |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | One500 Westminster | 5,640 ft (1,719 m) | 500 | 2016 | .... |
This lists buildings that have been canceled in ABC and were planned to rise at least 400 feet (122 meters).
Height Rank | Building Name | Estimated Height feet ( meters) |
Estimated Floors | Notes/References |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Cannotbedone tower | ∞ | ∞ | ... |
(Emporis.com, SkyscraperPage.com)
{again, Emporis.com, etc.)
(City buildings template)
(US building lists)
So, what do you think? And also, I did some prep work on the Las Vegas list to make up for my abscence later today and tomorrow. Please reply here for these comments. Cheers! Hydrogen Iodide 17:22, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for not getting back to you sooner - The answer is of course, please just add them to Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture/FAC. regards -- Mcginnly | Natter 15:10, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey Raime, I was wondering if you would be interested in starting (co-founding) a new WikiProject focusing on improving and creating building lists. Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide 18:05, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for adding your concerns to the Jack Adams FLC. I've been on a WikiBreak, and I'll try to fix everything within the next few days. Sorry for the delay. Maxim (talk) 23:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I have noticed several stub-articles like The Orion (which is a NYC residential skyscraper), have been PRODDED and deleted by admins because of notability reasons. I think we may run into this problem when we create a lot of stub articles about future and current skyscrapers. I've had a speedy-delete tag placed on a stub-building article before for notability reasons (later overturned and kept). I believe a way to address this issue is to post a message on Wikipedia talk:Notability and have other editors/admins share their thoughts on this matter. If a consensus is reached, I guess it would be advisable to start a guideline page titled: Wikipedia:Notability (Buildings and structures). Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 18:24, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
One note, I don't think notability will be a problem for short buildings (which were San Francisco's tallest buildings a 100 years ago) listed under the Timeline of tallest buildings section of the SF list. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 23:22, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Brickell Station.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:04, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:WTC 5.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
Since your initial GA/R of Bringin' on the Heartbreak, significant strides have been made in the article, and as the original nominator, I believe the article is now up to GA standards. So, I'd appreciate it if you could re-review the article real quick and change your vote if you feel it's up to par. Thanks! Drewcifer 04:30, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey there, it would be appropriate to split apart the tallest U/C, approved and proposed buildings in Bellevue since the city does have 15 U/C buildings, 9 proposed, and 5 approved even though the city is not too big ( evidence). Combining the three subsections will result in a mess, I think. Anyway, great job on the FL-status of the Miami List! Although I cleaned up the Miami list a while ago, I think you deserve most of the credit for bringing the list to FL-status. BTW, I think it would be reasonable to put the SF list to FL-review by next week. Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 22:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I have a question for you. Do you think this section is a bit unencyclopedic? Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 19:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
After doing some research on Emporis, it appears both the Fort Collins, CO and Laredo, TX lists should not be included in the template. Both cities have only a minuscule number of highrises over 12 stories, which translates into a very short (and maybe pointless) building list. In addition, the Hartford list was KO'ed recently because it was a copyright of Emporis and so I removed it from the template. Besides that, it seems like you can ask User:Loodog to help support the Skyscraper WikiProject, since he seems to be a major contributor to skyscraper-related content, such as the FL-Providence buildings list.
Anyway, as you noticed, I have been too busy with college (crazy stuff such as ʃʃʃρ²sin(Φ)dρdΦdθ, wave equation, matrices, coordination numbers and (ugh)) to really contribute much. Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 05:54, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Should we include completed buildings with floor counts, but no heights under the tallest buildings section? Or should we omit them altogether. I am undecided on this matter. Cheers. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 07:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Looking over the Center of India Tower edit history, it was you who edited the article in saying it was simply a vision, based on "new information." This "information" was not properly added and cited as per Verifiability standards. Given your experience, I'm guessing this was just a slip-up. If you still have this information (I know it's about a year since, but still), please add and cite it into the article. Otherwise, I will revert the edits to "proposed," since I haven't been able to find other information to suggest otherwise. Brokenwit 06:31, 25 September 2007 (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. |