Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Architecture/Archive 8
This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture. 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 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | → | Archive 15 |
Does anyone want to help me organize Template:Frank Lloyd Wright before I deploy it. Feel free to swap in more representative images or break up sections.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:55, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
- I personally find such massive and overwhelming navbars of limited use, and doubt many readers use them. Similar navbars deployed in the past failed to increase the number of readers of the linked articles. The List of Frank Lloyd Wright works linked in the See also section is more useful and sufficient for me. If is a must, than the more it can be shortened the better IMHO. The structure is also a bit problematic as does not help orientation, some of the most notable buildings being hidden in the "other" category, while the most notable houses are hidden within a seemingly endless list of houses. --ELEKHHT 01:54, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
- How would you measure increased readership. If a template increased readership 10%, it would be virtually imperceptible. The test is whether there are clickthroughs on the template links. The general perception is that lists of works of an artist ARE considered likely to be used by readers who often are intrigued by other works by the artist. I would love a suggestion for a name for the other category. I would also appreciate feedback on whether shorter names are possible in the other category. Maybe if we subdivided the other category, we could make the names shorter. E.g., if there were a category for places of worship, we might be able to use one or two word for each such as Annunciation, Beth Sholom, and Community.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:18, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
- I have just eliminated all redirects which makes the list somewhat shorter.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:57, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
- Increased readership can be measured by comparing monthly views before and after the navbar was implemented. The problem with the structure is that is a mix of criteria including: functional types (houses, home), history (unbuilt, posthumous) and non-criteria ("other", "related"). Since what is notable here is architecture, I would suggest architectural notability would be a better inclusion and structuring criteria: Prairie Houses, Usonian Houses, Mature Organic style etc. As before, I would leave less notable stuff out even if there is an article. It is the role of lists (which we already have) to provide comprehensive overview.--ELEKHHT 01:20, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- One thing that is consistent across biographical navboxes is that they generally attempt to be comprehensive listings of bluelinked articles. I have created hundreds and hundreds of templates (although only a few dozen biographical ones, see User:TonyTheTiger/creations#Templates_Created). I have done authors, composers, artists, and architects. In almost all cases I have included all bluelinked content. It is quite POV for one author to say which things are notable unless you have some rule that you think is reasonable. That being said, I have been involved in editing {{Ray Charles}}, which only includes his "notable" singles. Would people agree only to include Wright work that is on the National Register of Historic Places? I personally prefer the comprehensive style and do not think this current template is too large. I would rather remove all the images so that the links have more room than remove them.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:27, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- Well, I'm interested in the topic, but would never engage in navigating the very extensive list of his works following an alphabetic order (often relating to the name of his clients). Clearly no artist's works are equal, and treating them as that would be the case is POV in itself. Regarding F.L.Wright, hiding his key buildings -which are regularly included in books about world architecture history- such as the Guggenheim within a very long list which could potentially include 1,000 items is not helping navigation IMO. Regarding inclusion criteria, NRHP listing is both very broad and problematic as its scope probably does not include unbuilt and destroyed projects, which nevertheless could be quite notable (Broadacre City). --ELEKHHT 04:21, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- If you don't want to cut down the current list with something that is non-POV like NRHP, then we should just try to arrange all the blue links we have. There are not 1000 bluelinked Frank Lloyd Wright works. In fact, I am guessing that I have 80% or so of them in the template already since I have included everything on the list article page.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:03, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- Well, I'm interested in the topic, but would never engage in navigating the very extensive list of his works following an alphabetic order (often relating to the name of his clients). Clearly no artist's works are equal, and treating them as that would be the case is POV in itself. Regarding F.L.Wright, hiding his key buildings -which are regularly included in books about world architecture history- such as the Guggenheim within a very long list which could potentially include 1,000 items is not helping navigation IMO. Regarding inclusion criteria, NRHP listing is both very broad and problematic as its scope probably does not include unbuilt and destroyed projects, which nevertheless could be quite notable (Broadacre City). --ELEKHHT 04:21, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- One thing that is consistent across biographical navboxes is that they generally attempt to be comprehensive listings of bluelinked articles. I have created hundreds and hundreds of templates (although only a few dozen biographical ones, see User:TonyTheTiger/creations#Templates_Created). I have done authors, composers, artists, and architects. In almost all cases I have included all bluelinked content. It is quite POV for one author to say which things are notable unless you have some rule that you think is reasonable. That being said, I have been involved in editing {{Ray Charles}}, which only includes his "notable" singles. Would people agree only to include Wright work that is on the National Register of Historic Places? I personally prefer the comprehensive style and do not think this current template is too large. I would rather remove all the images so that the links have more room than remove them.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:27, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- Increased readership can be measured by comparing monthly views before and after the navbar was implemented. The problem with the structure is that is a mix of criteria including: functional types (houses, home), history (unbuilt, posthumous) and non-criteria ("other", "related"). Since what is notable here is architecture, I would suggest architectural notability would be a better inclusion and structuring criteria: Prairie Houses, Usonian Houses, Mature Organic style etc. As before, I would leave less notable stuff out even if there is an article. It is the role of lists (which we already have) to provide comprehensive overview.--ELEKHHT 01:20, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- I have just eliminated all redirects which makes the list somewhat shorter.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:57, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
- How would you measure increased readership. If a template increased readership 10%, it would be virtually imperceptible. The test is whether there are clickthroughs on the template links. The general perception is that lists of works of an artist ARE considered likely to be used by readers who often are intrigued by other works by the artist. I would love a suggestion for a name for the other category. I would also appreciate feedback on whether shorter names are possible in the other category. Maybe if we subdivided the other category, we could make the names shorter. E.g., if there were a category for places of worship, we might be able to use one or two word for each such as Annunciation, Beth Sholom, and Community.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:18, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
This looks very useful and personally I don't think the lists are over-long. I see the point about how you would find his most notable works but the article about Wright does that. I went thought the 'other' category and quite a few are private houses, notably Fallingwater. Others are housing in some form and that might be a useful intermediate category, not sure yet. I will try to find time to move the houses at least. ProfDEH (talk) 08:33, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- ProfDEH, I see that you have made some refinements. Thanks. I will deploy this soon.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 20:58, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- I expanded the template. Feel free to revert whatever parts of this you think were erroneous. I am curious about the following terms and whether they should be on the template: Rubble trench foundation, Organic architecture, Usonia, Prairie School.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:23, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
Infobox museum
{{Infobox museum}} has been nominated for merger into {{Infobox building}}. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 02:04, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Guibourd2855.jpg
file:Guibourd2855.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 23:20, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Brunelleschi not in list of renaissance architects
The page purporting to list "Renaissance Architects" seems to have no reference to Filipo Brunelleschi. Is there some obscure scholastic reasoning for this? Because I suspect that it would be a surprise to many visitors to the page.
--216.13.187.110 (talk) 21:43, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
- Could you please link to the page you're referring to? I'm unable to identify what you are talking about. --ELEKHHT 23:29, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Long unsourced lists
Hi all,
What should be done about the various lists of skyscrapers - {{TBSW}} - which tend to be very long and mostly unsourced? I have tried trimming the "bottom" of the lists - for instance, on List of tallest buildings in the European Union I tried removing the ones less than 140m tall, ranked from 96th-highest to 372nd-highest (of which only 4 had sources), but these edits tend to get reverted by the article owner. Even if somebody were to put in the effort of sourcing them, I'm concerned that the very long lists are still likely to be error-prone and have little benefit for readers. bobrayner (talk) 20:12, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- I removed skyscrapers without sources or separate articles. I left skyscrapers that have a sources or separate articles with sources. Subtropical-man (talk) 20:18, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Bobrayner, you must refrain from personal attacks, and read WP:CIVIL. Your reference to Subtropical-man as "the article owner" is evidently sarcastic since you know there is no ownership and he has never behaved in such a way as to give others that impression. All lists are prone to errors but from what I could see, the sources on the individual articles clearly established each construction's place within the 100-139 category. Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 20:38, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- I agree even a list should have sources - as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Stand-alone lists#Citing sources- cant expect our raeders to run all over the place to find source that may or may not be in the parent articles. If there is facts in a list they should be sourced period. That said a conservative effort should be made to retain valid edits that are done in good faith - this would entail searching for sources in parent article or new off site references before deletion.Moxy (talk) 20:50, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- I personally thought they clutter but given that the constructions had wikilinks to articles, couldn't the height source from each page be added to each entry? If this is possible, how is it better blanking the section and producing a vacuum? Evlekis (Евлекис) (argue) 21:00, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- I agree even a list should have sources - as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Stand-alone lists#Citing sources- cant expect our raeders to run all over the place to find source that may or may not be in the parent articles. If there is facts in a list they should be sourced period. That said a conservative effort should be made to retain valid edits that are done in good faith - this would entail searching for sources in parent article or new off site references before deletion.Moxy (talk) 20:50, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Template:Ludwig Mies van der Rohe
Thanks for help organizing the template above. I have also created Template:Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. Feel free to get involved in that one if you like too.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:00, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
- Please, please, please, try to understand what I wrote above. If you really must go on and do such navbars, at least use architectural notability criteria for the categories. If you don't have good books about the subject to understand how best to organise the list of works, or don't have time to read the Wiki article even, maybe don't create a navbar. Categories based on geographic location are most appropriate at Wikivoyage. Here chronologic order would be more appropriate, per MOS. --ELEKHHT 21:07, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
- This is orgnanized per Ludwig_Mies_van_der_Rohe#List_of_works. I am not an architects student or scholar. I may bow out of architect navboxes if I am causing harm to Wikipedia with my work as you seem to suggest.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:50, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
- No harm, just confusion, and is not your fault, so please take no offense. Most architect articles are ridiculous indeed, and not a very good guide. In this case the FLW article is much better than the Mies one. I wish there would be more editors concerned about this topic participating in the discussion, to help establish some key principles for navbars, and have some consensus built around questions such as (a) is a navbar with 100+ items useful, (b) as many architects have a very large body of works covered by wiki articles, besides a List of works by and a Category of buildings by do we need a mega-navbar on each article, (c) when a navbar is considered useful, should it follow a principle consistent with that of architectural critique, or should be based on popular understanding, (d) should trivia be included in navbars. Most importantly the question should be asked what form and content of navbars do best contribute to the educational scope of Wikipedia, and what is more a distraction? --ELEKHHT 00:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
- This is orgnanized per Ludwig_Mies_van_der_Rohe#List_of_works. I am not an architects student or scholar. I may bow out of architect navboxes if I am causing harm to Wikipedia with my work as you seem to suggest.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:50, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
It's good to see someone taking an intelligent interest in the subject. Elekhh has a point which I didn't appreciate at first, the FLW navbar does look over-comprehensive in some respects and it might be better to simply provide links to the relevant lists, and transfer the information to those lists if they are incomplete or incorrect. I haven't checked the one yet. ProfDEH (talk) 07:41, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- I have bowed out of architect navboxes. I personally prefer single-glance single-click access afforded by navboxes. Categories and lists do not provide this. Mosts lists require continued scrolling to find what you want (not single-glance) and often there are several categories summarized in a single navbox. The FLW list is particularly unmanageable. It is pages and pages of scrolling to find what you want. I find a template a far superior presentation in this regard. However, if people prefer to scroll forever as is required by that list, who am I to stop them.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 08:00, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- That's too bad, my intention was not to put you off. This project needs all the help it can get.ProfDEH (talk) 07:44, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Angle projection images up for deletion
file:ThirdAngle.png and file:FirstAngle.png have been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 17:15, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, they are meaningless alone and there is a version with the angles shown together. ProfDEH (talk) 07:45, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Name this article: Saarinen tower
I am working on a list article which is intended to list every building that is said to be based on Eliel Saarinen's 1922 Tribune Tower contest entry, which was awarded second place and not built. The name I gave to the article is Saarinen tower but I think it could be more descriptive. What do you think should be the name? Here are some suggestions:
- Eliel Saarinen's Tribune Tower design
- Saarinen's Tribune Tower design
- Saarinen's Tribune Tower
- Tribune Tower competition second-place design
- Saarinen's 1922 skyscraper
- List of buildings influenced by Saarinen's 1922 design
- List of skyscrapers based on Saarinen's 1922 design
- List of buildings influenced by Saarinen 1922 Tribune Tower entry
...Let's see some other suggestions from the Project. Any thoughts? Binksternet (talk) 20:58, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
- Considering WP:CRITERIA, in terms of precision and recognisability the clear winner, and my preferred option, is Eliel Saarinen's Tribune Tower design while in terms of conciseness it is Saarinen tower. The JPMorgan Chase Building (Houston) is also claimed to be influenced by it. --ELEKHHT 22:32, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yup, the old Gulf Building in Houston is on the list, and now it is in the new article. Thanks for your observation! Binksternet (talk) 23:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, the first option is the best name. ProfDEH (talk) 12:34, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- Okay, I'll move the article to that name. Thanks! Binksternet (talk) 13:07, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
The article is ready for others to contribute. Once we settle on a name, it should be inserted into a few articles such as Modern architecture, Architecture of the United States, Architecture of Houston, Early skyscrapers, International Style (architecture), and of course Eliel Saarinen and Tribune Tower. Cheers - Binksternet (talk) 03:30, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- Done The recommended name is now in most of the articles above. I did not take the time to figure out some surrounding prose and context to bring it into the International Style (architecture) article. Binksternet (talk) 15:38, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Could someone assess the importance of this one please - thanks. Acabashi (talk) 09:43, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
- Done. I'd also say it's a reasonable 'C' class, rather than 'start. Sionk (talk) 10:22, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
This reads like an add
for Thompson, Ventulett, Stainback & Associates. All the links appear to be outside wikipedia etc. Please take a look and help me decide if it should be nominated for deletion. Thanks Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 20:14, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
- Oh dear yes, all those links that look like wikilinks but are not, purely promotional. ProfDEH (talk) 20:42, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
J.J. Donnellan
Greetings. Would anyone like to help me create a page for J.J. Donnellan? I am finding it a bit challenging to find sufficient information/sources about him. I know he designed the Church of the Good Shepherd in Beverly Hills, California, and I think he must be the same architect who designed the Albers Brothers Mill in Tacoma, Washington (see this)and many buildings in Vancouver as well (see this at the bottom and this, and also this), but I just can't find one book or article piecing it all together. Anyone else interested? Please leave a message on my talkpage if you reply. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 05:42, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion about alleged feminist theories of the Taj Mahal. Comments would be welcome. Paul B (talk) 14:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
"Grade" or "grade"
Hi. Hope someone can help. When confronting UK listed buildings I come across "Grade" and "grade", as in "Thurlby Hall is a grade II listed small country house", which might also be seen as "Thurlby Hall is a Grade II listed small country house". Is there any WP guideline preference to capitalize or not ? Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 16:34, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- English Heritage and CADW capitalise the 'G', so I'm sure that is the correct way to do it. Sionk (talk) 19:50, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for that - especially as your links to official pages show "Grade" capitalized within a sentence, rather than at its beginning - which is what I wanted to see. Useful. Acabashi (talk) 21:15, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
File:Main01.jpg
File:Main01.jpg has bee nominated for deletion. Can someone identify this? -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 04:41, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
File:Institut auf dem Rosenberg, Historic Main Building (1902).gif
File:Institut auf dem Rosenberg, Historic Main Building (1902).gif has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 01:27, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Is Guerrilla architecture notable?
Unreferenced, stub, orphan.. I know zip about architecture so don't know what to do with it. Thought someone here would know. The Potato Hose ↘ 00:56, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
- The term has been in use [1] but the stub is poorly written, so deletion would do no harm. --ELEKHHT 01:13, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, the term is not uncommon, but often means a variety of different things. I don't think there's a dominant definition. It's basically an adjective added to a noun... or, erm, a noun added to a noun? Sionk (talk) 01:25, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
- I would certainly not agree to the article's deletion. The term has been used and described quite widely in the literature. See for example here. Maybe the article can be improved on the basis of these sources?--Ipigott (talk) 05:27, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, the term is not uncommon, but often means a variety of different things. I don't think there's a dominant definition. It's basically an adjective added to a noun... or, erm, a noun added to a noun? Sionk (talk) 01:25, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
New articles
The New Architecture Articles tool on AlexNewArtBot ceased functioning some time ago. As far as I can see, no one has the time or inclination to get it working again. Maybe it would be useful to see if other tools are available to identify articles of interest to the architecture community.--Ipigott (talk) 15:07, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
- AlexBot is operated by TedderBot, and the issue has been reported at User talk:Tedder#Odd behavior of TedderBot and hopefully will be taken care of soon. --ELEKHHT 20:47, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, let's hope so. Tedder himself seems to be too busy to take care of it on a regular basis. It's really a pity we cannot see new articles of architectural interest more easily. Over the past year or so, I have tried to copy-edit the more interesting ones and add them to WP Architecture in the hope that others will assist too. As a result, many have made DYK. Unfortunately, we seem to be losing out here too.--Ipigott (talk) 08:28, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
- Bot is back on, although still has some glitches. --ELEKHHT 21:41, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, let's hope so. Tedder himself seems to be too busy to take care of it on a regular basis. It's really a pity we cannot see new articles of architectural interest more easily. Over the past year or so, I have tried to copy-edit the more interesting ones and add them to WP Architecture in the hope that others will assist too. As a result, many have made DYK. Unfortunately, we seem to be losing out here too.--Ipigott (talk) 08:28, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
File:TUStephConstr.jpg
File:TUStephConstr.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 06:20, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
File:Mural LA Central Library.jpg
File:Mural LA Central Library.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 04:35, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Mortar
The usage of mortar is under discussion, see talk:Mortar -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 03:07, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Merger proposal for Jewry Wall Museum
The article for the Jewry Wall Museum has been proposed to be merged with the article for Jewry Wall, which is covered by your wikiproject.
The discussion can be found at Talk:Jewry_Wall_Museum#Merger_proposal if you would like to contribute.
Many Thanks
Rushton2010 (talk) 15:20, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
Category:LGBT architects
I started a discussion about this newly created category at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2013 May 17#Category:LGBT architects. Any feedback welcome. --ELEKHHT 02:45, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
- I replied. I think we should keep it...Zigzig20s (talk) 03:18, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sheely Drive
Dear architecture enthusiasts:
There's an article in the Afc Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Sheely Drive that could use your attention. Knowing nothing about architecture, I am unable to determine what may make the homes being discussed more notable than millions of other homes. —Anne Delong (talk) 11:50, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
- Historic districts are typically older but in this case the character thought worth preserving is the 1950s suburban lifestyle. Many of the houses and presumably the overall character of the area remains in fairly original condition. The article does of course need more material and especially images to show what is interesting about it. ProfDEH (talk) 07:53, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
I'm having a problem with
Second Empire architecture. I have come to believe (but could be convinced otherwise) that this is a term only used in the Americas - particularly the US and Canada. The few book I have on French & British architecture do not use that term (Second Empire). So I am wondering how this epiphany (albeit a minor one) should be reflected in the article. Should I continue calling the Paris Opera - for example - "Second Empire" when the French call it something else? What are these buildings called in Australia? Because the British do not seem to be inclined to call these buildings by a French name. Etc. Your thoughts please. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 02:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
File:Balbardie House1910.gif
File:Balbardie House1910.gif has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 07:25, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Is this a meaningful category of architecture, or just a misinterpretation based on a few press releases? Rant just added at the talk page. ProfDEH (talk) 17:42, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
- I agree with your rant: the article is nonsense as it stands and the only inline reference provided doesn't even mention the word "architecture". Looks to me like a personal essay more likely to confuse than enlighten. A good candidate for deletion. --ELEKHHT 23:08, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
- I have similar concerns. I tried to remove a couple of links to pages that don't even mention architecture, but they got reinserted. Now the article looks more like an advert for one particular business... bobrayner (talk) 22:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
- An anonymous editor has added more stuff which makes a particular business startup in Cambridge, Massachusetts seem quite prominent. By extraordinary coincidence, their IPv4 address geolocates to Cambridge, Massachusetts. What are the chances of that? bobrayner (talk) 20:26, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
- I have similar concerns. I tried to remove a couple of links to pages that don't even mention architecture, but they got reinserted. Now the article looks more like an advert for one particular business... bobrayner (talk) 22:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
File:Haydarpasha train station istanbul - Recoloured.jpg
File:Haydarpasha train station istanbul - Recoloured.jpg has been nominated for deletion (here and on commons) -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 08:09, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Latte stones 2.jpg
image:Latte stones 2.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 07:14, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
File:Kirkstall Power Station.jpg
File:Kirkstall Power Station.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 05:42, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Kgvlagilama.jpg
image:Kgvlagilama.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 05:13, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
FfD notices
I think is sufficient if files nominated for deletion are included at Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture/Article alerts, no need really to post each of them individually on this talk page. --ELEKHHT 07:49, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
I am raising article issues here. If no further improvement is needed, perhaps re-assessment is needed. --George Ho (talk) 20:21, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
- I see no issues with this page at all and have commented here: Talk:Destruction of country houses in 20th-century Britain#Article issues?. Giano 20:48, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Definition of a skyscraper
Dear building experts:
An editor has removed the "Skyscraper" category from the Babillon Tower article. It is 44 stories tall. Is this a skyscraper? I guess it wouldn't be in New York, but what about in Batumi? The definition on the Skyscraper page isn't clear for buildings of this size. —Anne Delong (talk) 02:26, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
- It is most definitely s a skyscraper. There is no firm definition for the term, but generally, in my view, any building which towers over an area and which the human eye has a problem counting its floors, while the neck is tilted backwards, is a sky scraper. I can also find scholarly and published references to the Monadnock Building being referred to as a skyscraper, and that is considerably less than 44 floors. Giano 12:00, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
Notability of three environment buildings in Réunion
Someone might want to have a look at INNOVAL, Retrofitting Building M: University of Reunion Island, France and The Groupe Omicrone, bioclimatic building In ictu oculi (talk) 02:28, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Hemolch-2.jpg
image:Hemolch-2.jpg has been nominated for deletion (this is not an FFD) -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 05:45, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
St-john-church-dublin-1884.jpg
image:St-john-church-dublin-1884.jpg has been nominated for deletion (this is not an FFD) -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 06:16, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Unforgetting Women Architects
I thought these recent articles (which discuss List of female architects) might be of interest to this project's editors:
http://www.architectmagazine.com/architects/unforgetting-women-architects.aspx
W0551sf (talk) 21:52, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
- Good to know our hard work has attracted some interest! Sionk (talk) 18:45, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Reed-College-Eliot-Hall-fall-lrg.jpg
image:Reed-College-Eliot-Hall-fall-lrg.jpg has been nominated for deletion; as this concerns Emailed permissions, you may wish to check other images of buildings and repair their permissions, as standards for emailed permissions have changed. (ie. files are deleted if the email is not in OTRS, files are deleted as not meeting current standards of clarity) this is done without asking for new reauthorizations (ie. no one will contact the email address left from when the permission was originally filed) -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 05:04, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
File:Drawingroom-ardress.jpg
File:Drawingroom-ardress.jpg has been nominated for deletion (this is not an FFD) -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 02:05, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Could someone Talk Page assess the importance of these ones please ? Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 19:33, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Manor-courthouse-dublin-1890.jpg
image:Manor-courthouse-dublin-1890.jpg has been nominated for deletion (this is not an FFD) -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 11:03, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
TrinityShoal.jpg
image:TrinityShoal.jpg has been nominated for deletion (this is not an FFD) -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 01:55, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
One of your project's articles has been featured
Hello, |
Advice please
I have been creating and editing articles on UK listed churches and note that, apart from infoboxes, there are inconsistencies in layout and content. Are there specific WP guidelines to be found for church articles ? Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 11:20, 5 July 2013 (UTC)
- I don't know of any specific guidelines, but in terms of consistency, I can see multiple criteria at play (historic period, geographic region, notability as architecture vs religious practise, etc.), hence diversity of format/content is not surprising. Do you have any specific problem or proposal in mind? --ELEKHHT 00:17, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Mucem-Villa-de-la-Mediterannee-Marseille.jpg
image:Mucem-Villa-de-la-Mediterannee-Marseille.jpg has been nominated for deletion (this is not an FFD) -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:10, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
Please assess this new one for the Architecture Project. Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 00:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
Oldcap.JPG
File:Oldcap.JPG (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) has been nominated for deletion. (this is not an FfD) -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:52, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
The Temple of Madam Xian.jpg
image:The Temple of Madam Xian.jpg has been nominated for deletion (this is not an FfD) -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:48, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Pomeranian Architecture (US)
Can anybody help with this question over at the Humanities Ref Desk please? Alansplodge (talk) 19:50, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Could someone assess this one for the project please ? Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 22:19, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Timeball station.jpg
image:Timeball station.jpg has been nominated for deletion again (for the same reason it was nominated last time) -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:43, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Earliest Photograph of the 270 Sherman building c. 1900.jpg
image:Earliest Photograph of the 270 Sherman building c. 1900.jpg has been nominated for deletion (this is not an FFD) -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:44, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Could someone assess this new one please. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 19:20, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
Vega casino images
- File:Paris las vegas boulevard interior.JPG (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- File:BellagioChineseNewYearDragon.JPG (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
- File:Caeserstrevi.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
have been nominated for deletion (these are not FFDs) -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:53, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
Requested Articles
Hi, I am trying to re-work Requested Articles. It was suggested that I get individual WikiProjects involved with their section, which, in the case here, is here All I am asking you to do is to go through the requested articles here, and see if they are worth an article or not. If they are, please feel free to create them and remove them from the list. If they are not, please just remove them from the list with an appropriate comment.
If you have any questions, please just ask on m talk page. Thanks for your help, Matty.007 07:30, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- I've had a quick look and removed a couple of individuals from the list. The list isn't excessive, in the grand scheme of things! Sionk (talk) 12:40, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
- Sionk: thanks for your participation, I am trying to get the various WikiProjects to help clear out the relevant areas, and possibly take responsibility for the areas. Thanks for the help, and other help is welcomed. Matty.007 18:38, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Requested move
There is a requested move at Estate houses in Scotland. Please comment there. RGloucester — 📬 17:27, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
Gambrel roof
Is the diagram in the gambrel roof article actually a diagram of a mansard roof? 98.184.128.13 (talk) 16:13, 4 August 2013 (UTC) Norman Bryant Nkbryant@cox.net 4Aug2013
One of your project's articles has been featured
Hello, |
Discussion of notability standards for large construction projects at WT:N
I am attempting to start a conversation (perhaps this is a de facto RfC) about notability and sourcing standards for large construction projects over at the talk page for the notability policy. I would appreciate additional input over there. -- [ UseTheCommandLine ~/talk ]# ▄ 22:27, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
Updated Edna S. Purcell House Article
Hello, everyone -- I've expanded the Edna S. Purcell (Purcell-Cutts) House article, which was a stub just prior, and I would appreciate any input or edits. Please feel free to leave suggestions for my handling of the situation on my Talk page, as I am brand new to editing on Wikipedia! Many thanks. MJBredeson (talk) 19:55, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
- Looks extremely impressive. Well done! Sionk (talk) 01:53, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
WikiProject Bernini
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Stone house of Maibang, Dima Hasao, Assam.jpeg
image:Stone house of Maibang, Dima Hasao, Assam.jpeg has been nominated for deletion (this is not an FfD) -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 13:23, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Grande Arche de La Défense et fontaine.jpg
image:Grande Arche de La Défense et fontaine.jpg has been nominated for deletion (this is not an FFD) -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:04, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Fort Qu'Appelle public building.jpg
image:Fort Qu'Appelle public building.jpg has been nominated for deletion (this is not an FFD) -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:16, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Please help get Wikipedia's UK listed building data ready for the start of the Wiki Loves Monuments competition on 1st September
In September the UK is taking part for the first time in the international photography competition Wiki Loves Monuments. Participants will be invited to submit pictures of listed structures of significant importance (eg grades I or grade II* or equivalent), as recorded by English Heritage, Historic Scotland, Cadw and the Northern Ireland Environment Agency. The main external website for competitors can be found here, and you can leave a message there if you have queries about competing. Do please join in, and let people in your local area know of this excellent way in which both existing and new Wiki users can help improve the encyclopaedia by contributing photographs of local listed structures. What about organizing a local Wikimeet to attract new people?
In preparation for the start of the competition on 1st September there is still quite a lot of work to do, and we would like to ask for the help of members of the architecture project. Your local and expert knowledge will be invaluable in ensuring that the lists of eligible structures are up to date and correctly formatted. If you look at Listed buildings in the United Kingdom you will see how many structures are included. If you then follow the links, you can get to the detailed lists for your area. Alternatively have a look at the WLM planning table. Can you help to ensure that the lists for your area are up to date and well presented?
Some of the lists have been semi-automatically generated from data provided by the official listing organizations. These use pre formatted templates (eg EH header) which will make it much easier for competition participants to upload their photographs to Commons as an automated process. Please don't change the template structure, as we need to ensure that the templates are properly compatible with the WLM standards that are in use worldwide. The format will allow a bot automatically to collect the information and to put it into the international Monuments Database.
The data still needs the attention of local editors:
- The "title" may need wikilinking to a suitable article name (whether we currently have that article or not). If there are several buildings in one street all of the wikilinks point at an article about the street; however each entry has a separate line in the list.
- The "location" column looks and sorts better if just the parish or town is included (& wikilinked).
- The "date completed" column sometimes has eg "C19" for 19th century, and "C1850" for c. 1850 when the date is uncertain - these need to be corrected manually.
- The "grid ref & lat & long" (which is occasionally missing) may be given to 8 characters — only 6 (grid ref) or 5 (lat & long) are really needed.
- Clicking on the "list entry number" should take you to the data sheet for that entry on the official database which can be checked if needed for details.
- The image column should have a picture added if we already have a suitable image on Commons. (N.B. if you are going to be taking photos yourself for inclusion in the competition don't upload them until September)
- References may be added according to normal WP practice.
For further information, please see Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in the United Kingdom.
If you have any queries, please post them not below but on the Organizers' help page on Commons.
Anything you can do to help improve these lists will be much appreciated. The final deadline for cleaning up is 31st August.
Missing topics page
I have updated Missing topics for Architecture and Engineering. - Skysmith (talk) 08:30, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! There are some uncommon and unlikely misspellings:
- Leon Kner = Leon Krier
- Vincenzo Scammozzi = Vincenzo Scamozzi
- Filippo Brunalleschi = Filippo Brunelleschi
- Do we need redirects, or can just be removed from the list? --ELEKHHT 14:32, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
- Fixing typos is fine. I will remove them later. To keep up with the progress - Skysmith (talk) 19:35, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Naming the Harvey House in Barstow, and possibly other Harvey Houses
There is a move discussion underway at Talk:Harvey_House_Railroad_Depot#Requested_move. The discussion is specifically about what should be the name of the article about Casa del Desierto, the train station in Barstow, California, which was built by the Fred Harvey Company. The result of the discussion may set a direction for the creation of additional Harvey House articles, and redirects. If you are interested, please feel free to offer your thoughts. Binksternet (talk) 15:43, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Austrian Architect Heinz?
This reference to the Pataudi Palace says that it was designed by the "famous architect Heinz" and the original unsourced content in the article refers to him asKarl Molt Von Heinz. However, I have been unable to track down who exactly this "famous Heinz" is - he doesnt appear to be listed in our list of architects and google books gave me a lot of Karl-Heinz hits that I dont think are the right target. Can anyone help? Thanks! -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:01, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Holkham Hall - possible reassessment
I'm concerned about the state of this article and think it might have to go to a Featured Article Reassessment. See Talk:Holkham Hall#Reassessment? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:36, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
FA review of Mosque
I have nominated Mosque for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. --Loomspicker (talk) 23:52, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Chand Baori - add to project
The featured photograph today on the Bing search engine is a Indian stepwell called Chand Baori. I came to the linked Wikipedia article to find out more. Other than seeing a breath-taking design, the article is quite stubby with a majority of poor citations. One citation is to the caption of a photo uploaded to Flickr. The article clearly needs help. I am also posting this message to Wikipedia:WikiProject Archeology. Could someone who knows how to format citations please correct the one for the book Steps to Water: The Ancient Stepwells of India? I capitalized the title of the existing citation, added the co-author and publisher, but am stuck from there. The original author has GoogleBooks as the publisher and not justa a link, but I don't know how to fix it. Thank you for your time, Wordreader (talk) 16:42, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Churches in Norway - new
I have just started a new article on churches in Norway. The ambition is to give an overview of churches built in Norway (existing and perished) with regard to periods, materials, style, design and location. I like to treat this as single topic because of the institutional and historical context particular to Norway. Please take a look at the article so far and say what you think, and help out where possible. Regards --Erik den yngre (talk) 15:39, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Stedelijk Museum, Amsterdam Project - please help!
Hi Wikipedians,
I'm a member of a Cornell University student project aimed at improving the quality of the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam page, currently classified as a C-Class Article. Over the next week or so, myself and two others (Wdevriescornell and eas295) will be researching and updating the page, and we'd like your help. We would love it if you guys critiqued our edits and discuss them with us on this talk page if you disagree or think we can improve somehow. Because we're still learning and we will be graded on our work, please don't just delete or redact our changes without giving us an explanation why you did on the museum's talk page. If you're interested in helping us out, please add the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam page to your Watchlist and feel free to post there or in my own personal talk page. We would really appreciate any help you can give!
Infobox church - appropriate specifications?
I have been trying to add information to "infobox church" for Norwegian church buildings, but it appears that this template does not fully match the classification criteria most relevant to churches in Norway. For "architectural type" the template description mentions the original function of the building like "Basilica", "Cathedral", "Chapel". Molde Cathedral for instance was built as a parish church, then upgraded to cathedral when a new dicoese was created, in this case the concept of "cathedral" says little about the architecture. Further the notion of "basilica" is in Norway used to describe a certain design or shape, not a function or status. Key classifications for churches in Norway include type of material (wood, stone, concrete), technique (notably stave church vs log) and perhaps most importantly overall design (cruciform, octagonal, basilica, "long church", other shapes). Regards --Erik den yngre (talk) 15:54, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- You don't need to use an infobox for these articles. That is the Gordian knot solution for the problems inherent in infoboxing. Besides things that just don't apply, there are all the subtly misleading or dubiously relevant things, such as giving denomination as "Lutheran" (or something similar) for mediaeval churches where everything that is important and interesting about them originates in the period when they were Catholic. --Hegvald (talk) 20:17, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
- True. Some of the more interesting old churches also exist primarily or exclusively as museums (and not as parish churches), stating denomination will then be misleading. In addition to denomination many old stone churches has a complex history such that for instance there are both gothic and romanesque elements. The most important and interesting buildings often have the most complex history, for instance Nidaros Cathedral. Infoboxes are still an elegant way of presenting and organizing information, and I would be happy if these infoboxes can be slightly expanded or improved. Thanks --Erik den yngre (talk) 12:59, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- If it is the architecture that is more notable, the alternative is to use Infobox building instead. --ELEKHHT 23:57, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- Very few articles are improved with infoboxes. Put the relevant material right in the article. See WP:Disinfobox. GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:49, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- If it is the architecture that is more notable, the alternative is to use Infobox building instead. --ELEKHHT 23:57, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
- True. Some of the more interesting old churches also exist primarily or exclusively as museums (and not as parish churches), stating denomination will then be misleading. In addition to denomination many old stone churches has a complex history such that for instance there are both gothic and romanesque elements. The most important and interesting buildings often have the most complex history, for instance Nidaros Cathedral. Infoboxes are still an elegant way of presenting and organizing information, and I would be happy if these infoboxes can be slightly expanded or improved. Thanks --Erik den yngre (talk) 12:59, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
Who wants to use this photo?
Can anybody use this picture as an example of some kind of building or building material? I am not sure what those blocks are made of. Anyway, the photo is there for your use. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:45, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- Hi GeorgeLouis and thanks for uploading this interesting image! As I can see it is already used in two articles, but you can increase its encyclopaedic value by providing a more detailed description, for instance by specifying where exactly in China is this facility located (province?, urban/rural?, etc.). Also note that if you upload your images to Commons that will make them available to all Wikimedia projects, including the 286 Wikipedias in other languages. --ELEKHHT 10:07, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- I am not quite sure what would happen if you added it to the Asia galley at Vernacular architecture, but it might start some interesting discussions. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 16:22, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Volute
the article regarding Volutes accessed from Alberti's Church of Santa Maria Novella lists only rams hotns and clover as the origin of the scroll typically found at the head of Ionic columns. In fact, equally possibly, is the idea that learning supports the building as much as bricks and mortar, the word scroll also refering to the way ancient writing was conveyed; eg the Dead Sea Scrolls. It may even indicate a knowledge of mathematics, through which it may be drawn.
92.99.113.95 (talk) 05:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC) Peter Dew
Reliability of Emporis
Is Emporis.com a reliable source to cite heights of buildings? — Bill william comptonTalk 18:21, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Could someone project assess this one please ? Many thanks. Acabashi (talk) 00:19, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Featured Article Review for Sanssouci
I have nominated Sanssouci for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:15, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
House-building
If anyone fancies a challenge the House-building article needs serious development. I've just noticed it is almost entirely cited to an American childrens book! Sionk (talk) 12:45, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
- Agree. Perhaps that stub article should be included in the main article on construction. The house-building article deals with the process of building (construction). Regards --Erik den yngre (talk) 13:19, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Portal:Technology for featured candidacy
I've nominated Portal:Technology for featured candidacy. Comments would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:Technology. — Cirt (talk) 01:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for notifying. The only high-rated article I can find tagged as in the scope of both WikiProjects is Fabyan Windmill, but perhaps Early skyscrapers might be also of interest. --ELEKHHT 10:17, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Dear architects: The above old declined submission at Afc seems professionally written, and the sources are not on line. It will shortly be deleted as a stale draft. Is this a notable architect, and should its deletion be postponed? —Anne Delong (talk) 17:48, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
- (Okay, I guess not... it's gone! —Anne Delong (talk) 17:29, 5 December 2013 (UTC))
Hello architects. This abandoned Afc draft was declined, in part, because it lacked sources. However, hidden in bad formatting are many references to http://skyscraperpage.com. Is this a reliable source, and is this a suitable topic for an article? —Anne Delong (talk) 18:34, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- There is a discussion about the reliability of skyscraperpage.com at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Skyscrapers#Reliable resources?. Since none of the buildings on the list has demonstrated notability I'm not sure of the use of the list, but others might have different opinion. --ELEKHHT 22:28, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link to the above discussion. About the buildings: It's not a list of notable buildings, just tall ones. IMO skyscraper heights are information that people find interesting, provided that the facts are backed up by a reliable source so that the heights are correct. —Anne Delong (talk) 04:47, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
See WT:WikiProject Archaeology, where I've started a discussion on this. -- 70.50.148.122 (talk) 05:39, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Dear architecture experts: Here's an old Afc submission that is about to be deleted as a stale draft. Can someone take a look at it and see if it should be kept? —Anne Delong (talk) 17:57, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
- Done! If anyone has access to the New York Times (my 10 article free monthly limit has been reached) then there may be useful information in the news articles listed, particularly the 2010 article which should confirm when the building was completed. Sionk (talk) 21:38, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Requested Articles
Hi, Requested Articles is encouraging WikiProjects to have a look at their relevant section at RA. For this WikiProject, that is here. Thanks, Matty.007 18:57, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- I had a look at them in early August and removed quite a few. Nice to see the page is being dealth with, many of the requests there are unsourced, unexplained and very old! Sionk (talk) 20:12, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, I was aware, but I was just trying to let other people know. Thanks, Matty.007 20:16, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Stub contest
For anyone interested in improving stubs, the Stub Contest running 1-31 December might be of interest. There are about 8,000 stubs in the scope of WikiProject Architecture. The stubs with the highest scores (based on page views, interwikilinks, rating) are here. --ELEKHHT 21:02, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Request for upgrade of Talwin Morris from Stub status
I've just undertaken a major rewrite and expansion of the page on Art Nouveau designer Talwin Morris. I think it should now no longer be Stub status Duncanchappell (talk) 16:36, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Request for upgrade of Talwin Morris from Stub status
I've just undertaken a major rewrite and expansion of the page on Art Nouveau designer Talwin Morris. I think it should now no longer be Stub status Duncanchappell (talk) 16:36, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Translation from german
In Bremen starts a project in which selected information boards of listed buildings with QRpedia-codes are provided. If you interested to translate article look here. Thanks --Godewind (talk) 14:18, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
- Excellent initiative! --ELEKHHT 22:30, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
- I should have seen this earlier. Have just started looking at the initiative today. I'll bring it to the attention of other projects and contributors.--Ipigott (talk) 13:44, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Baker/Palmer Mansion
This building is owned by the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia, and has been since 1958. Richard Jenrette purchased the neighboring wing at 69 East 93rd Street. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.167.230.243 (talk) 16:52, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Is period needed after "B.Arch" and "M.Arch"?
The articles Bachelor of Architecture and Master of Architecture flip-flop between "B.Arch." and "B.Arch", and between "M.Arch." and "M.Arch". Are they equally proper? At least there should be consistency within the articles. Comparing to PhD, "PhD" is preferred in Wikipedia, but "Ph.D." is acceptable, whereas "Ph.D" is not. Chris the speller yack 14:58, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Can I get help with my entry on architect Hugh M. Kaptur
I wrote this entry which has been rejected several times - the last one on a technicality. I believe at this point it has the references it needs to be credible and I would like to see it get approved before Mr. Kaptur's Hall of Fame Star ceremony on 2/14/14.
Any assistance would be greatly appreciated in making sure the article can pass a review.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Hugh_M._Kaptur
Bsimonis (talk) 23:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC)Bert Simonis