Talk:List of architects of supertall buildings

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AfD[edit]

You say that it serves no purpose, but this is how WIkipedia branches out to include more information for its interested users who want to learn more about subjects. If not this way, then how? It is a relevant area of information. There are architects of supertall buildings that are noteworthy, just as their poets, Fortune 500 CEOS, and other professions that are noteworthy, and they get their due space in Wikipedia. Why should Wikipedia readers be denied getting facts that inform them more clearly in a non-commercial way about useful information? Mykjoseph (talk) 14:34, 21 December 2008 (UTC)mykjoseph, 12-21-08[reply]

One more thing, if you do not allow this to topic to have its own page, then why can't it be a small part of the category page of the List of Supertall Buildings, where it is even more relevant, and where I first attempted to list this but was denied. You do not allow the topic to be mentioned in any way, shape or form. There are thousands of people worldwide who are very fascinated by the topic of tall buildings. Just check out SkyscraperPages and other websites, but they cannot find factual information like what I am providing there or nearly anywhere else. Could the reason you oppose this be that you are in the architectural field but have not achieved this high level of achievement? Mykjoseph (talk) 14:43, 21 December 2008 (UTC)mykjoseph, 12-21-08[reply]

  • Wrong place to put your reasons for keeping the page I am afraid. You need to argue the case at the deletion discussion - but you will need to look at the policy documents such as WP:LISTS and WP:ATA and then make your case. Springnuts (talk) 14:49, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with File:Shanghai Center Dragon.jpg[edit]

The image File:Shanghai Center Dragon.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of architects of supertall buildings[edit]

As one who is very interested and professionally engaged in this subject, I endorse the concept of the list. Unfortunately I find the list to be very incomplete. Simply because of this, it cannot be considered authoritative as presented in the title "List of architects of supertall buildings," which implies some sort of completeness. I think the list should be retained but its name must be modified, e.g. "Partial list of..." or "Selected list of ..." etc. At the very least, the list should be accompanied by statements that (a) define what is meant by a "supertall building" and (b) acknowledge the incompleteness.

Hopefully the list will be expanded, and someday it may merit the present title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.7.190.186 (talk) 17:41, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The original creator of the article never really committed to completing the list. After I originally proposed it for deletion, which was declined, I had no choice but to update it as I felt it couldn't be left with one or two architects. Over the next month I gradually added more architects but I became busy and stopped. I'd like to get started again when I can, but I can't be expected to do it all myself. It would be nice if the original creator who seemed quite set on having his article linked everywhere could contribute a bit. --timsdad (talk) 07:32, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I just happened across this list,too. I think it should be deleted. As it looks like that is unlikely to happen from the above comment, I am going to update the list. I will do it based on today's date. It will be continually out of date in the future as there are hundreds of proposed towers over 300 meters. I suggest that to make this list complete there need to be a few criteria set: 1) only complete, open and in-use towers 2) height must be as certified by the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat or as by the measuring standards of it's height committee 3) towers should be broken down into groups 300M+, 600M+ and this will allow for the continual use of the list as it gets too large in the new future and only the taller category is updated 4) only the concept architecture firm to be listed, no local architect, no architect of record, disputes should refer to whoever the developer chooses or a majority of authorities on the subject, like CTBUH, Emporis, etc 5) as for the listed person, oh boy this is always an argument only sometimes is it clear, any suggestions? - Brad Wilkins (talk) 02:42, 13 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Format[edit]

I've been trialling a different format for this article, with all of the architects and buildings in a table. My work can be found in this sandbox. My main reasons for trying this out are that there are double ups of architectural firms in the current format (e.g. Atkins listed as a firm at the top for The Address Downtown Burj Dubai and then lower down as the firm Tom Wright worked for when desigining the Burj Dubai. I'm hoping the table format will overcome this. --timsdad (talk) 12:12, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of architects of supertall buildings. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:33, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]