Talk:Milwaukee City Hall
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wisconsin, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Wisconsin. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
If you give this article a rating or change a previous rating, please leave a short summary in the comments to explain the rating and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
|
| Stub | This article has been rated as stub-Class on the quality scale. |
| Mid | This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
 |
This article is within the scope of the National Register of Historic Places WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of listings on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places. |
| Stub | This article has been rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale. |
 |
Please help improve this article or section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. (January 2007) |
This article doesn't make sense. It surpassed the Manhattan Life building as being the tallest in the world, but was only the third tallest when it was completed? How does that make sense? --216.207.86.82 18:30, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
- It has to do with how skyscrapers are measured (topmost accessable floor, spires and flag poles, etc)... if I recall, by one metric, City Hall was the tallest inhabited structure when built, but the Washington Monument was taller. Sulfur 07:16, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
The whole tallest building stuff doesn't make sense at best and is misleading at worst..the metric used seems to be pretty much made up. "Not being habitable" seems not to be a reasonable criterion for excluding things like churches from being called a "building". If it happened to be the building with the highest living quarters of some inhabitants at some time, then this should be be mentioned as some sort of trivia. But it should not be claimed to have been the "tallest building of the world at some time", with the actual and very dubious definition provided merely by an asterisk. There is a conflict by the way, the Ulm Cathedral (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ulm_Cathedral at 167 meters compared to 108 of the MCH) gives the very same definition of the metric used to determine it to having been the tallest building of the world at the same time when the MHC is claimed to be. If the height of the highest habitable floor is used to determine such status, then the actual height of this floor should be listed instead of implying that the overall size of the building was used.80.131.226.253 18:36, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] February 2007 fire
I'm removing the reference, since the cited link has expired and by itself a minor fire in a public building doesn't seem that important (Will anybody remember or care in ten years?). --Chancemichaels 14:41, 27 April 2007 (UTC)Chancemichaels
