Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Skyscrapers/Archive 6
 | 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 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 |
Watch for this user I got banned adding sneaky misinformation
Also I've only checked the first 5 and last 2 and the BLP, anyone want to check the other non-reverted edits or know any tools to make it quicker as many are too old to be undone? I'm not knowledgeable about Wikitools. Also he occasionally corrects, would have to check with CTBUH or something instead of reverting without checking. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 15:34, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Some new information was reported recently on the latest plans for development, may benefit from some restructuring by an experienced writer. 119.59.121.170 (talk) 20:29, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Tour Prisma
Hello guys. Vandalism on Tour Prisma. Please if you can help. Thanks a lot. 92.184.107.141 (talk) 20:12, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
- Looks to me like you were trying to turn the redirect into an article and others disagreed, maybe talk it over next time instead of edit warring to get your way. 119.59.121.170 (talk) 20:32, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
I found more skyscraper article vandalism at Grand Hyatt New York
If everyone added some skyscraper articles (not just extant or famous ones, proposed, under construction, ones only well-known to local skyscraper fans, lists etc are being vandalized too) to their watchlist that would help. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 18:37, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Sagittarian Milky Way: Looks like there's been nothing but vandalism from the entire Special:Contributions/2603:8001:5F00:8E53:6595:6301:9397:C510/64 range. You probably need to catch them in the act and warn a few times before reporting to WP:AIV though. 119.59.121.175 (talk) 02:13, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of tallest buildings in New York City § RfC about list inclusion criteria. 119.59.121.172 (talk) 03:01, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
More tall building vandalism recently
30+ in 4 days. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:54, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
One Dalton Street, Boston
- cross-post with modification Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Boston#One Dalton Street
Skyscraper specialists probably know better than Boston ones, what to do with meagre content of this 2014 stub Christian Science Center- Belvidere/ Dalton --if I judge correctly that it concerns early, if not first, public announcement of the Boston high-rise One Dalton Street, aka the New Four Seasons. --P64 (talk) 17:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
This RfC may be of interest to the members of this project. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:40, 18 June 2021 (UTC)
This discussion may be of interest to the members of this WikiProject. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:12, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:Mirax-Plaza Ukraine#Requested move 12 July 2021
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Mirax-Plaza Ukraine#Requested move 12 July 2021 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 01:49, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
AFD discussion ongoing, about List of future tallest buildings
Please consider participating at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of future tallest buildings. --Doncram (talk) 04:46, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
basic concept of list-articles not understood, see AFD on Pedimental sculptures in Canada
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pedimental sculptures in Canada. IMO, the basic concept of list-articles in Wikipedia is not understood by some participants in this AFD. Please consider contributing. --Doncram (talk) 05:03, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
name change
In July 2021, Essex on the Park became known as "Sentral Michigan Avenue". I am unable to document this marketing name change. Help please.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:55, 25 July 2021 (UTC)
- I.e., I can't find a secondary source although I have included the website in the infobox.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:31, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
- @TonyTheTiger: I don't think there's any issue with using a WP:PRIMARY source to support a mention in the article that the official name has changed. However, since there are secondary sources using the old name but not yet the new one, I would refrain from moving the article until secondary sources pick up on the new name as well. 81.177.27.61 (talk) 20:03, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Secondary sources
Can content from a company's newsletter be used as reference for an article of a skyscraper if the company was involved in the building's construction? Does this make the company a primary source?
I did not get much information about the design and architecture of Antilia (building), but this page from Sterling Engineering (who were the consultants for the building) has the details that can be used. Jay (talk) 07:42, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
- @Jay: near as I can tell the answers are yes and yes. The policy at PRIMARY is clear that such sources can be used but only with care. In addition I believe ABOUTSELF also applies due to the close connection. Hence, I wouldn't use it to extoll the virtues of the design, but if you stick to a
just the facts ma'am
approach I think you'll be fine. Relatedly, this page is little watched at present, and I'm not all that active either so you may have better luck getting prompt feedback at one of the noticeboards or the HELPDESK in the future. (please ping on reply)𝒬𝔔 23:18, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of tenants in 1 World Trade Center#Requested move 17 March 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 22:47, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (
John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)
and turns it into something like
- John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.
The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.
Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.
This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Emporis end
Emporis database is dead (officially retired by the new owner). It's a pity, it was one of the few reliable sources and especially covering (unlike CTBUH) also lower buildings (150 m and less) buildings, which may be considered high or even the highest in some countries.
GreenC bot (operated by @GreenC) is rescuing references, but I am not sure, how to handle the situation with Template:Emporis. Jklamo (talk) 22:59, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
- User:Jklamo thanks for bringing this up. Recommend we convert the templates (each instance) to
{{cite web}}then deprecate the template. There are a couple reasons but mainly custom templates are not supported by tools such as citation bot, internetarchivebot, reFill, etc.. conversion to a standard template will make them more reliable over time. My bot is setup for conversions, just recently did one, I can work on this after the bot is done rescuing the non-template cites, it will require some custom programming. -- GreenC 00:01, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Project-independent quality assessments
Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.
No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.
However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:14, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
Requested move at Talk:PNC Plaza#undefined
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:PNC Plaza#undefined that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. SkyWarrior 22:07, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
RfC on List of tallest buildings in the United Kingdom
Hi, I've requested comment on List of tallest buildings in the United Kingdom regarding a dispute about different definitions being used determine which city a tall building is located.
See RfC about the use of different definitions of a city
ChiZeroOne (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Standardizing the definition of skyscraper
Hi. I recently went to answer this edit request at List of cities with the most skyscrapers, and found that there is some disagreement over what constitutes a skyscraper for purposes of being counted on that list.
TL;DR: I propose the following "official" definition of skyscraper to be used across all Wikipedia articles unless there is some compelling reason otherwise: A skyscraper is defined as a continuously habitable high-rise building that has at least 40 floors and is at least 150 m (492 ft) in height, including spires and other architectural details, but not including antenna masts.
The 40/150 criteria are found in multiple RS, but there's no clear consensus as to whether it's 40 or more and 150 or more vs. at least 40 and at least 150, etc. However, in the List of tallest buildings in Mumbai article, there are 38 out of 234 buildings that are exactly 150 meters tall and have at least 40 floors--making it almost seem like architects are designing buildings to meet the minimum definition of a skyscraper. I would rather include than exclude them.
I did review the talk archives before posting this and found no such prior proposal, but I do apologize if this is considered a perennial question.
The list of cities article gives the definition, A skyscraper is defined as a continuously habitable high-rise building that has over 40 floors[1] and is taller than approximately 150 m (492 ft).[2]
Ref 1 is Britannica, which says The term skyscraper originally applied to buildings of 10 to 20 stories, but by the late 20th century the term was used to describe high-rise buildings of unusual height, generally greater than 40 or 50 stories.
Nothing about 150 m. Cite [2] is a book The Visual Dictionary of Architecture p. 233, but wouldn't you know, p. 232 and 234 are in the preview but not 233. I suspect it only gives a 150 m criterion, in which case we have a synth problem.
The Wikipedia article Skyscraper says in the lede, A skyscraper is a tall, continuously habitable building having multiple floors. Modern sources currently define skyscrapers as being at least 100 meters (330 ft)1 or 150 meters (490 ft)2 in height, though there is no universally accepted definition, other than being very tall high-rise buildings.
Article text is true to both cites, and neither of them contain a minimum floors criterion.
Under the Definitions section of the same article we find, Different organizations from the United States and Europe define skyscrapers as buildings at least 150 meters in height or taller
11612
- Ref 11 says,
Once built it will be the seventh tallest building on the estate and their eleventh proper skyscraper, that is by definition buildings above 150 metres.
- Ref 6 says,
As a general rule, a building must be at least 150 metres high to qualify as a skyscraper.
- Ref 12 (also used in the lede) says,
A skyscraper is defined on Emporis as a multi-story building whose architectural height is at least 100 meters. This definition falls midway between many common definitions worldwide, and is intended as a metric compromise which can be applied across the board worldwide.
In sum, none of the citations I've found on Wikipedia support a 40 floor criterion, so I specifically searched for "skyscraper 150 meters 40 floors" and here's what I got:
- Top 12 Tallest Buildings in India Sep 14, 2022
A skyscraper is a building of a greater height of 150 meters (492 feet) plus, and has at least 40 floors. Can you guess which Indian city has the maximum number of skyscrapers? If you thought Mumbai, then you are bang on! Mumbai has about 74 skyscrapers, and these include some of the tallest buildings in India.
- 10 Tallest Skyscrapers In The United States You Definitely Must See (undated, blog)
Today, a skyscraper generally describes a building that is 40 stories tall or more and/or measures 150 meters, or 492 feet in height.
- 20 Cities with the Most Skyscrapers in the World September 24, 2020
According to its modern definition, a skyscraper should be at least 150 meters (492 ft) tall, and constantly habitable with a minimum of 40 floors.
- Get ready for more and taller skyscrapers August 20, 2018
For this research, Auerbach and Wan consider buildings more than 150 meters “tall.” There are 3,251 such skyscrapers in 258 cities around the world. The researchers first characterize historical patterns the height of skyscrapers and the numbers built. It turns out the number of skyscrapers built each year has followed a remarkably stable pattern. “The number of skyscrapers exceeding 150 meters and 40 floors has risen eight percent each year since 1950,” say Auerbach and Wan.
- Height of the world's tallest skyscrapers as of 2023 (Statista) Mar 27, 2023
The requirements that a building needs to meet in order to be considered a skyscraper have changed across time, and they might also slightly differ from place to place. However, a skyscraper is generally defined as a building that is comprised of over 40 floors and is over 150 meters taller.