Template talk:Infobox skyscraper/Archive 1

Boxes
There is a Template:Skyscraper and a Template:Infobox Skyscraper. These should definitely be merged, as they are very similar and redundant.

I think Template:Infobox World's Tallest Building is similar enough that it should just be merged, or at least the redundant parts should be.--Kcumming 15:14, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * the first two are no-brainers. I think the world's talles should be kept seperate, but the parts that are redundant could be removed (so that both infoboxes could be used on world's tallest buildings).  -Quasipalm 16:32, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking that I should be able to remove the redundant parts into 'subroutine'-like templates, so that we can refactor out the common elements. I will do some experimenting and see how it goes...I'm new at this template thing. Kcumming 14:48, 12 July 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, I'm starting to get the template thing. I'm working on a replacement for the skyscraper infoboxes.  You can see this work at User:Kcumming/Template:Infobox_Skyscraper.  Feedback and suggestions are welcome. Kcumming 15:17, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Preliminary work is done. I have made a new Infobox template for all skyscrapers, and you can check it out here: User:Kcumming/Template:Infobox Skyscraper. For the world's tallest building, I figured a succession box at the bottom of the screen is more appropriate. Here's what I developed: User:Kcumming/Template:Succession Box World's Tallest Building.

You can see both of the templates in action at this test page: User:Kcumming/Skyscraper test.

I'll solicit opinions here for a week or so, and then get to work on putting these templates into use.Kcumming 02:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)


 * The prominent placement of the Emporis website, built into the World's Tallest Building template, is quite incorrect for Wikipedia. The link belongs among External links with other external links. Too much like an ad, really, isn't it? --Wetman 05:31, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Units
"Note that the localized unit standard should be given precedence". Why? The world uses metres, the USA is the exception - perhaps it would be more globally acceptable to put the height in metres and provide the feet in parenthesis for the benefit of our cousins over the pond?--Mcginnly | Natter 12:12, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I suppose we could put metric units as the primary unit system, but I noticed that most USAmerican skyscrapers already had feet first. --  tariq abjotu  10:27, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Changes
I don't think I'm able to edit the template without spending a day studying it, so could someone add a field for Construction material and a section for observation decks, with fields for name, height, floor and opening date. This would add functionality currently seen in the hardcoded infobox at Eureka Tower, and it could become viable to replace that with this template. invincible 08:17, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Also a field for address and locality could be useful, since many office towers in Melbourne are referred to by their address instead of their name. invincible 08:25, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Help
Can someone please help me figure out why this template isn't working on the Nakagin Capsule Tower page? Exploding Boy 16:43, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Chronology of World's Tallest Building
There's at least two conflicting sequences (with internal inconsistencies) claiming to be world's tallest building under this template. I know there are different definitions one can use for world's tallest but the definition in the template is quite clear. The chain starting at New York World Building up to Park Row Building claim in this template to be the tallest building, when really I believe they mean to claim tallest skyscraper. There's also some inconsistencies of dates in that sequence. A second, probably more accurate sequence starts at Red Pyramind of Sneferu and involves several cathedrals. The two sequences converge at Singer Building, which links backwards to the latter (buildings) sequence, not the erroneous skyscraper sequence.

I think all of the tallest stuff should be -- as suggested above -- split out into a seperate series of simpler boxes, one for each reasonable definition (e.g., each of skyscraper, building, tower, structure). The benefits of this approach would be --Westacular 20:23, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * sequences won't collapse when one building is tallest in multiple categories
 * it would clearly and unambiguously identify which definitions of tallest applied to the building, and for what duration
 * more appropriate types of infoboxes could be used for buildings of different types: right now the skyscraper infobox is being used by things churches and pyramids, which doesn't make much sense.

Infobox:Building and Infobox:Skyscraper merger?
There are currently two that are suitable for building, Template:Infobox Building and Template:Infobox Skyscraper. I have seen both been used quite randomly, for example Nakagin Capsule Tower, which definitly ain't a skyscraper. So, how about a merger? Or maybe just make the two infoboxes have the same layout? --Jonte-- 10:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)


 * I'd support a merge. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 11:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Demolish and Destroy
I believe that there is no any reason to merge these two words. So I would like to add "Demolished" in status. Any idea? KyleRGiggs 11:23, 23 July 2007 (UTC)


 * It seems that you have already done so. I believe that the second entry is redundant. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 11:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Negative. Can you say that World Trade Center is demolished? No. WTC is clearly not demolished, but destroyed. However, the programming seems strucked. KyleRGiggs 11:51, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * "Can you say that World Trade Center is demolished?". Yes. Andy Mabbett | Talk to Andy Mabbett 12:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Demolished with killing 3000 people? wow! KyleRGiggs 06:41, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Demolished can definitely be a synonym of destroy: "to destroy or ruin (a building or other structure), esp. on purpose;", "to lay waste to; ruin utterly". Circeus 18:02, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for new features
Hi Quasipalm, and thanks for the great template.

I've used the template in few articles, and found out that it might need some fine tuning. I would like the template to produce this kind of result automagically, with a little more automation - if that's not too much trouble for you.


 * First, I would like to have a  field, as in template Template:Infobox_Building.
 * Second, Wikipedians are using the template with various sizes of pictures. It would be nice, if the template would take just the image name as an argument and produce a picture with constant width. I've found 200px to be a good size, but choose for yourself. This again is already implemented in Template:Infobox_Building.
 * Third, it would be nice if the Location would consist of three items: the flagicon, the city and the country. For these, fields named respectively would be needed. That is, the Location field in Central_Plaza%2C_Hong_Kong would be created automatically with following wiki in the template:


 * flagicon = Hong Kong
 * city    = Hong Kong
 * country = China

It could create internal links, if you wish.


 * Fourth, an addition of a  field.
 * Fifth, an update of the template homepage accordingly. What comes to using references, the users could be advised to put "a master reference" just after the buildings name/native name. By master reference here I mean the reference from where all/most of the infobox data was taken.

Br, --Siipikarja 17:34, 13 September 2007 (UTC)


 * A few counter points and comments:
 * " " will do just fine.
 * A base picture size is a very bad thing. There will always be times when an image pops up who is only usable at lower resolutions. It happens all the timewith template that have it and it drives me up the wall
 * Flag are something we should strive to reduce, not spread.
 * Why couldn't " " take a street address?
 * There is no need to request an "update of the template homepage": it's not protection, so anybody can do it.
 * Circeus 00:11, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
 * " " is fine, true.
 * If there is no picture with reasonable quality available, then one should use none. Templates with fixed base picture size are more encyclopedic in my opinion.
 * Why should we reduce the use of Flagimages?
 * " " can take a street address, but street address is not always available. Country and city are most likely well-known, and can thus always be entered in the infobox. However, as the scope of "location" is not defined anywhere, the field is sometimes left blank.
 * Anyone familiar with the more advanced template if-else-then wiki syntax blocks can modify this template. I tried to modify, but got tired of constantly getting it wrong. :(
 * --Siipikarja ♫ 00:08, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Antenna/Spire
Two structurally different things cannot be putted together as a mark point. They should be separated. Elk Salmon 11:42, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It's only used to mention the tallest point, whichever structure it happens to be is pretty irrelevant. Circeus 00:05, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
 * It's highly relevant as antenna is not part of the structure, while spire is. They stands in different titles. Antenna is a part of pinnacle height title, which is used for structures like tv towers and is not being counted for buildings, while spire is a part of structure or architecture concept of the building, so it's being counted. Current infobox compromises only of 3 height marks - antenna/spire, roof and top floor, which makes impossible to people to understand a real height of building with installed antenna on roof without reading entire article. Elk Salmon 14:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree that it is highly relevant. There currently are 4 different categories recognised by the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat for World's Tallest Building: (1) "antenna/flagpole/mast height", (2) "architectural (spire/pinnacle) height", (3) "height of roof", and (4) "height of top floor". Emporis has less categories, but still distinguishes between antenna and spire. See List of tallest buildings in the world. The most famous example, of course, that illustrates why antenna and spire should not be combined is the Sears Tower versus the Petronas Twin Towers, where the latter took over the title of World's Tallest Building, because of its/their spires, despite the fact that the Sears Tower "looked" higher and actually was higher when measured by antenna. This led to the very important distinction between antenna and spire... wjmt 18:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Naming rights
Which section of the template would be best to indicate which company has naming rights over the building (the logo on the building itself). This would be different to the owner in many cases. Muzzamo 04:43, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Request for either map or freeform field
With all the cool locator and pushpin maps now, it would be nice to either have direct locator map support or a freeform field where a locator map could be placed (I've made a request for a base NYC map to get the ball rolling). Thanks. Americasroof (talk) 17:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

I believe this is broken
See Henry M. Jackson Federal Building, which has a caption for the image; the template appends "Henry M. Jackson Federal Building was the world's tallest building from to  .*" to the caption. - Jmabel | Talk 06:04, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Approved skyscrapers
There should be a way to display "Status: Approved" while using this template. Some buildings are not proposed nor are they under construction: they are approved. Simalto (talk) 18:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * If it is approved, just put  into the infobox instead of having   automatically be generated. Cheers,  Rai - me  01:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Image
Is it possible to configure the template to accomodate both a map and an image with captions for both. This would help me to rearrange the top of Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:21, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Is it really necessary to include a map in the infobox? First, a map displaying the location is available through the coordinates link. Second, if a street level map is needed, why not just put a separate map in the article, outside the infobox. --Siipikarja ♫ 21:43, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It is not necessary to do anything. We could leave articles as stubs without infoboxes.  However, yesterday's WP:TFA, Chicago Board of Trade Building, was a skyscraper with a map in the infobox.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)