Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Skyscrapers/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Skyscrapers
 This project page is within the scope of WikiProject Skyscrapers, which aims to create, expand, and maintain pages that relate to skyscrapers, high-rises and towers. To participate, visit the WikiProject Skyscrapers project page for more information.
Archive 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
Archives
  1. 2007
  2. 2008

Contents

New Image?

I think we should pick a new, central image to use for this project, for use on the main project page, the project banner, and a userbox. Of course, we could also use separate images for each. We should probably use an image of a famous skyscraper, at least IMO. Simply add new images to the gallery below if you think they should be considered.

Some ideas:

1 - 30 St Mary Axe

2 - Burj Dubai

3 - Bank of China Tower / Cheung Kong Center

4 - Commerzbank Tower / Maintower

5a - Empire State Building / Chrysler Building (current)

5b - Empire State Building (current)

6 - Four Seasons Miami - Withdrawn due to Copyright Violation

7 - Jin Mao Building

8 - John Hancock Center

9 - One Wall Centre (current)

10 - Petronas Towers (current)

11 - Sears Tower

12 - Taipei 101

13 - Tour Montparnasse

14 - Transamerica Pyramid

15 - Turning Torso

Vote

  • Comment I'd say we go with the Taipei 101 picture until the Burj Dubai is complete for the central image. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 16:49, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
    • I am not sure if we should use an image of a building simply because that building is the official tallest. Yes, Taipei 101 is tallest, but the image is not great. For best images, I would say that honor goes to either the Petronas Towers, the Sears Tower, or the Four Seasons Miami. Perhaps we should use criteria besides height to determine which buildings to include? But that is just my opinion. If we were to go with the most famous building, I would probably say the Empire State Building. Rai-me 22:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: Image 6, Four Seasons Miami, has been removed from the list, as it is apparently a copyrighted image being claimed under free use, and will likely be deleted. Rai-me 19:24, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd like Image:Empire State Building3 Dec.2005.jpg, but cropped, so the image focuses in on the ESB. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 02:49, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

How is this? I would be happy to make any adjustments to the image, but I am still not convinced that it is better to use than the current ESB/Chrysler image. Rai-me 03:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
I like the cropped image. But, I think we should go with a picture of teh CN Tower unless that's not in our scope. Æetlr Creejl 02:01, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
It is in our scope, but I don't think it is the image most closely associated with "skyscrapers", which more or less implies buildings. Perhaps we could use both on the main page? I have used the Petronas Towers image on the project banner, as the cropped ESB one was too narrow and the Petronas are already used on the userbox. Anyone disagree? Cheers, Rai-me 12:20, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Greetings!

I decided I would join your project after seeing it posted on the proposals list. I look the liberty of creating a userbox, if you don't like the image I chose it is very easy to change it to a preferred one. All members can now use {{User WP Skyscrapers}} to generate the userbox and hopefully this project can really get going as it has a huge yet very central scope.

This user is a member of
WikiProject Skyscrapers


└and-rew┘┌talk┐ 06:29, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that is a great userbox. I will create a project banner soon, I just don't have enough time at the moment. Does anyone think this project is almost ready/already to move to the Wikipedia space? Rai-me 02:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Let's go, although I am bogged down with 'midterm madness'. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 05:26, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
As my first contribution to the project, I have updated the link on the userbox to point to the project page in the main Wikipedia space. Astronaut 13:41, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Featured topic drive

For any interested users, Hydrogen Iodide and I have organized a Featured topic drive related to United States tallest building lists. All information can be found here, in my sandbox. When this project moves to the Wikipedia space, then we can create a separate page. Any more participation would be greatly appreciated, and hopefully we can organize more FTDs (i.e. with Canadian, European, Chinese building lists) in the future. Thanks! Rai-me 02:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Template time

Since this project has been moved to the wiki space, I think it's about time to create all of the necessary template. I think there needs to be an invitation template, a project banner (for lists, images, categories, project pages, and templates, in addition to the article template). Any comments? Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 06:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree with everything except the creation of a list template. It is very common for lists to be assessed as "list-class" articles, and for FLs to be assessed as FAs. I see no reason why we need a separate list tempate. But I agree on all other accounts. We also could use a welcome banner and stub templates. I will get working on them soon. Cheers, Rai-me 12:17, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Comment, the project banner, for articles and list, could use unref=yes to mark articles that lack references. I think that is better than {{unreferenced}} tag on the main article page. Comments? Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 05:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Y Done, added the code for unref=yes. Hydrogen Iodide (HI!) 06:56, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Ratings and importance

There is presently no ratings scale or importance scale for these articles. I assume we'll be using the same quality scheme:

Article progress grading scheme [  v • d • e  ]
Label Criteria Reader's experience Editor's experience Example
Featured article FA
{{FA-Class}}		 Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured article" status, and meet the current criteria for featured articles. Definitive. Outstanding, thorough article; a great source for encyclopedic information. No further additions are necessary unless new published information has come to light, but further improvements to the text are often possible. Tourette Syndrome (as of July 2007)
Featured list FL
{{FL-Class}}		 Reserved exclusively for articles that have received "Featured lists" status, and meet the current criteria for featured lists. Definitive. Outstanding, thorough list; a great source for encyclopedic information. No further additions are necessary unless new published information has come to light, but further improvements to the text are often possible. FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives (as of January 2008)
A
{{A-Class}}		 Provides a well-written, reasonably clear and complete description of the topic, as described in How to write a great article. It should be of a length suitable for the subject, with a well-written introduction and an appropriate series of headings to break up the content. It should have sufficient external literature references, preferably from reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy (peer-reviewed where appropriate). Should be well illustrated, with no copyright problems. At the stage where it could at least be considered for featured article status, corresponds to the "Wikipedia 1.0" standard. Very useful to readers. A fairly complete treatment of the subject. A non-expert in the subject matter would typically find nothing wanting. May miss a few relevant points. Minor edits and adjustments would improve the article, particularly if brought to bear by a subject-matter expert. In particular, issues of breadth, completeness, and balance may need work. Peer-review would be helpful at this stage. Durian (as of March 2007)
Good article GA
{{GA-Class}}		 The article has passed through the Good article nomination process and been granted GA status, meeting the good article standards. This should be used for articles that still need some work to reach featured article standards, but that are otherwise acceptable. Good articles that may succeed in FAC should be considered A-Class articles, but having completed the Good article designation process is not a requirement for A-Class. Useful to nearly all readers. A good treatment of the subject. No obvious problems, gaps, or excessive information. Adequate for most purposes, but other encyclopedias could do a better job. Some editing will clearly be helpful, but not necessary for a good reader experience. If the article is not already fully wikified, now is the time. International Space Station (as of February 2007)
B
{{B-Class}}		 Commonly the highest article grade that is assigned outside a more formal review process. Has several of the elements described in "start", usually a majority of the material needed for a comprehensive article. Nonetheless, it has some gaps or missing elements or references, needs editing for language usage or clarity, balance of content, or contains other policy problems such as copyright, Neutral Point Of View (NPOV) or No Original Research (NOR). With NPOV a well written B-class may correspond to the "Wikipedia 0.5" or "usable" standard. Articles that are close to GA status but don't meet the Good article criteria should be B- or Start-class articles. Useful to many, but not all, readers. A casual reader flipping through articles would feel that they generally understood the topic, but a serious student or researcher trying to use the material would have trouble doing so, or would risk error in derivative work. Considerable editing is still needed, including filling in some important gaps or correcting significant policy errors. Articles for which cleanup is needed will typically have this designation to start with. Jammu and Kashmir (as of October 2007) has a lot of helpful material but needs more prose content and references.
Start
{{Start-Class}}		 The article has a meaningful amount of good content, but it is still weak in many areas, and may lack a key element. For example an article on Africa might cover the geography well, but be weak on history and culture. Has at least one serious element of gathered materials, including any one of the following:
  • a particularly useful picture or graphic
  • multiple links that help explain or illustrate the topic
  • a subheading that fully treats an element of the topic
  • multiple subheadings that indicate material that could be added to complete the article
 Useful to some, provides a moderate amount of information, but many readers will need to find additional sources of information. The article clearly needs to be expanded. Substantial/major editing is needed, most material for a complete article needs to be added. This article still needs to be completed, so an article cleanup tag is inappropriate at this stage. Real analysis (as of November 2006)
Stub
{{Stub-Class}}		 The article is either a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to bring it to A-Class level. It is usually very short, but can be of any length if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible. Possibly useful to someone who has no idea what the term meant. May be useless to a reader only passingly familiar with the term. At best a brief, informed dictionary definition. Any editing or additional material can be helpful. Coffee table book (as of July 2005)


but we need a way to prioritize the Burj Dubai over the Wells Fargo Center.--Loodog 14:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I've been trying to keep Burj Dubai up to date and free of vandalism. I would like to see it achieve Featured Article status soon after the buiding's completion and/or opening, but I'm unsure how to improve it whilst the building is still under construction. Astronaut 15:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I also agree that cetrain articles such as Burj Dubai, Taipei 101, and the CN Tower need to be prioritized over other, much less notable buildings. There will soon be an assessment page (the project banner already has redlinks to the pages), but no one has had the time to create it yet. But until then, we can still assess the Burj Dubai as "Top" and the Wells Fargo Center as "Low" for importance. Cheers, Rai-me 22:35, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

CBD/Downtown

Are central business districts/downtown areas part of the scope of this project? Æetlr Creejl 07:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I would say so, as most CDBs have plenty of skyscrapers and high-rises. Rai-me 14:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Anyone in?

Hello! I'm Simalto, Sim B on the French wikipedia. I'm mainly a French contributor, still in the skyscrapers category, but as I'm hanging around on this wikipedia too I wondered if I could join the project. I've already created a couple articles on the subject, and I can translate skyscrapers articles from French to English (yes, there are articles that exist on the FR wikipedia that don't here! The ones I created some days ago did.) I will spot those articles in need of a tag, and help contribute!

So, I wondered if I could just enter my name and start participating. Yours, Simalto (talk) 03:25, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Anyone can join; it is not required to request membership. Also, you can contribute while not having your name listed under participants. Third, I am sure all WikiProject Skyscraper members welcome editors that can translate articles. --Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 07:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Archive 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.