Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of tallest buildings in Austin/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by Giants2008 18:06, 23 June 2011.

List of tallest buildings in Austin

 * Nominator(s): TheAustinMan (talk) 01:22, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured list because it has been worked on for a while and it appears to meet all of the requirements of an FL article. I have checked the article multiple times, and it has been checked with the criteria as well. The list is modeled after the already FL status List of tallest buildings in Albuquerque, which in turn is modeled after a number of other featured lists. When you state any concerns/suggestions, please do so in an understanding fashion, which would be simple, yet understanding and comprehensive. As always, your comments will help this article, and I will do my best to fix your concerns if any. Remember to respond positively and with constructive criticism. Also remember that the use of graphics is discouraged. Again, thank you for your comments. TheAustinMan (talk) 01:22, 19 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Did the first image map, was pretty easy, but check that I did it all correctly, especially 100 Congress which I'm not sure I identified correctly. I'll let you identify each building in the caption (I'm pretty sure screenreaders don't work on image maps but you'd have to check with WT:ACCESS for confirmation). The caption shouldn't be too hard to find; it's in the Image: line just like a normal image caption would be. Just don't wrap it in square brackets or you'll break the template. Also suggest identifying the buildings on the file description page at Commons as most people will want to click the image to get a larger view. It's past midnight now so I'll do the nighttime one tomorrow. Matthewedwards : Chat  07:20, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, and I forced the thumbs to 400px. I'm sure there's a style guideline orimage use policy somewhere that says don't force image sizes, but oh well.. there's no point mapping it if it's too small to be seen. Matthewedwards : Chat  07:21, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I checked with WT:ACCESS, so an answer will probably come in. I'll put it on here if the question has been answered. :) TheAustinMan (talk) 15:19, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * OK. Meanwhile I've mapped the second photo. Matthewedwards : Chat  17:03, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment At the risk of giving contrary advice, I don't think "56 floors" or "21 skyscrapers" need non-breaking spaces (&amp;nbsp;). Nor do I think there is any policy or guideline that suggests that non-breaking spaces should be used in such cases. I would also expect per WP:ORDINAL that "more than 30" would be preferred (although I don't find "more than thirty" to be poor style, it does contradict our guidelines). --RexxS (talk) 16:16, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Isn't it that words above ten that can be spelled out as one or two words should be? Like thirty and thirty-one are ok but three-hundred-and-sixty two aren't? Figures in prose just looks jarring to me, but it's not a huge deal either way. Matthewedwards : Chat  16:30, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * From WP:ORDINAL: As a general rule, in the body of an article, single-digit whole numbers from zero to nine are spelled out in words; numbers greater than nine are commonly rendered in numerals, or in words if they are expressed in one or two words. But it's not a big deal for me either. --RexxS (talk) 21:43, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


 * All the images except the first have alt text, and the alt text given is reasonable (remember that screen readers will hear the alt text and then the caption, so we don't them to be too duplicative). --RexxS (talk) 16:16, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I mapped the image last night and may have removed the alt text. I'm not sure if it works with mapping, though. The guys at WT:ACCESS will let us know. Matthewedwards : Chat  16:30, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, I added the alt text. Seems like it works. I just need some old computer with dial-up to see if the alt text shows up :D TheAustinMan (talk) 17:30, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The alt text does show up, thank you. The image maps convey information not accessible via the keyboard, so fail WCAG 2.0 but MOS:ACCESS offers no guidance on the issue. --RexxS (talk) 21:43, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * But you said at WT:ACCESS that the image map links do work with a keyboard, by using tab, enter and backspace. Matthewedwards : Chat  05:07, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry to be blunt, but please try it for yourself, so that you can actually see what happens before making any more guesses. Yes, the LINKS work, although they take the viewer to a non-existent article half of the time. No, the TOOLTIP doesn't work if you use the keyboard, and as far as I can see the image map was implemented principally to display those tooltips, which fails accessibility standard WCAG H24: Providing text alternatives for the area elements of image maps. --RexxS (talk) 12:31, 25 April 2011 (UTC)


 * The table needs scope="col" for the column headers, and would benefit from having suitable row headers marked up with '!' and scope="row". There's a description at MOS:ACCESS and a tutorial linked from there. However, if you want assistance with the markup, either I or one of the regulars here would be happy to help. --RexxS (talk) 16:16, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but I don't really know how to do that. And no, the tutorial doesn't really help me either sadly. TheAustinMan (talk) 17:51, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh. Thanks for doing the scope="col" charts and all that. You've earned my gratitude. TheAustinMan (talk) 22:17, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I've marked up the table in three stages. It may be worth examining the diffs to see what each step does for future reference. --RexxS (talk) 22:24, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


 * I would suggest removing  ft / m  from the Height header, as it is doubly redundant. The units are given explicitly in each data cell in that column and WP:OVERLINK has this guidance: Avoid linking common units of measurement. --RexxS (talk) 22:24, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Done The measurement "legend" has been removed. TheAustinMan (talk) 22:27, 24 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Support All my issues have been resolved. Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:15, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I only increased it to 400 for, like you said, to see the buildings better when moving the mouse over, but if the images being at 400px causing the problems The Rambling Man has with horizontal constraint, then it might be best to reduce size to 350 or 300px. Or use clear  Matthewedwards :  Chat  21:56, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Done The concerns listed by The Rambling Man and Adabow have been generally resolved. Answering the question from the Rambling Man, Scarbrough Building is not wikilinked because it does not have a page. However, even though I have generally resolved your concerns, I don't know how to operate the sort template. If anyone could help me, that would be great. TheAustinMan (talk) 03:29, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * But... should One American Center, One Congress Plaza and One Texas Center be sorted under the letter O or the number 1? I've left them as O for now, but what do people think/what's usually done in this case? Matthewedwards : Chat  05:40, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I took a look at List of tallest buildings in New York City, which is a pretty big featured skyscraper list. They have a lot a buildings that are known as "One..." instead of "1..." When sorted, they file alphabetically, in that the go between N and P, rather than sorting at the top of the list. Using that, I would suspect that the buildings in this list sort under "O", as usual. TheAustinMan (talk) 16:19, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

The Rambling Man (talk) 19:22, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Ref 8 needs an accessdate.
 * What makes "Wikimapia" (ref 43) a reliable source?
 * You mean reference 28 right? Fixed. Wikimapia is not a reliable source because it is a open to edit thing. However, it is the only source of information regarding the completion of the William B. Travis Building. Should I remove the reference, along with the information though? TheAustinMan (talk) 02:55, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I did, thanks. Unfortunately, with respect to wikimapia, unless you can source the information more reliably in keeping with WP:RS, I don't think it's wise to keep the information in the article. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Did you see if the building has a plaque on it or anything? That could be used as a Primary source? Maybe something at Austin Library has something in a book you could use. Matthewedwards : Chat  08:10, 2 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Conditional Support - Just a few more comments before I can support. Is there a reason why 501 Congress is not listed in the Tallest approved and proposed section? It looks like it would be one of the tallest buildings in the city if constructed, and should probably be listed in both the table and the introduction. Also, is there really only one building approved out of all of those proposals? That seems unlikely to me - have you checked all of the building's entries on Emporis? Finally, the alt text really should be more descriptive than just the name of the building. A better example would be something like "Slightly elevated view of a 60-story skyscraper with a glass facade set atop a rectangular pedestal; the building has balconies on every floor and has two small setbacks near the roofline." for the Austonian. See List of tallest buildings in Mobile for more examples. I will support once these three concerns are addressed. Cheers, Rai • me  03:06, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Your concerns have been noted, but I am busy now, so they might not be resolved quickly. 501 Congress is not listed because it is the same as the T. Stacy & Associates Building, you can look it up. Even though they are the same, Emporis lists 501 Congress as 'visionary' while it lists the T. Stacy Building as proposed. You can also confirm they are the same building by comparing the pictures of 501 Congress with those of the T. Stacy and Associates Complex. Is 1 building approved out of all the rest? Yes. I have checked on Emporis. Like I said, I am busy right now, but I have started on some of the more comprehensive alt text. They will be finished within a week from when this comment is signed. TheAustinMan (talk) 23:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Would you consider adding GeoGroupTemplate? For that to work as intended, name parameter would need to be added to all coords. GregorB (talk) 19:03, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. "56–story" should be "56-story", i.e. a regular hyphen instead of a ndash. Ditto "second–tallest", etc., if I understand WP:DASH correctly. GregorB (talk) 15:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I think they're all regular dashes already. I didn't see any ndash html coding. TheAustinMan (talk) 20:42, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * While they are not coded as &amp;ndash;, they actually are ndashes, which is apparent from their size (see the "56-story" example above). GregorB (talk) 20:58, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * All improperly used en dashes have been converted to hyphens. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:12, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Support All my issues were resolved, seems everyone else's have been, too. Article looks good. Matthewedwards : Chat  06:46, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.