Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of tallest buildings in San Diego/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 Scorpion0422 22:12, 2 June 2009.

List of tallest buildings in San Diego

 * Nominator(s): Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:31, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

I have worked on this list for the last few weeks after walking around the city and taking pictures of the tallest buildings. Looking to the other similar FLs, I have attempted to format this list accordingly and I believe the article now meets the FL criteria. Let me know if you see any issues and I will get to them as soon as possible. Thank you for taking a look and happy reviewing! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:31, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments


 * For some reason, on my comp the ordered lists display 15=, 15=, 18, 18=, 18=, 21... I'm not entirely sure what these are, but they should be fixed.
 * Shouldn't you include a couple of sentances (I'd go with a para) describing each skyscraper in the last row? Right now it contains only refs or a line, and I find that boring. I'd rather learn a bit about its history then read numbers. Res Mar 00:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for looking the article over, I appreciate it. The equal sign after each rank is to indicate that there is a tie between the two buildings in height. Rather then list buildings of the same height as, say, 1, 2, 3, it would be best to rank them the same since they are of equal height. Because two buildings (or more in certain cases) share a rank in this list, the next successive rank includes the next number. For example, in the case of this list, it goes from 4, 5=, 5=, 7 (which is 4, 5, 6, 7). This helps to maintain the actual number of buildings that are taller than the pre-determined height included in the criteria of the list. Concerning the blank cells, I only tried to include the significant ranks relevant to the topic of the list. Each of the buildings has their own respective articles where readers can pursue further information (as well as look at the given sources). If you take a look at the other buildings FLs, you'll see a similar setup. Obviously some of the other lists may have more information to mention since they likely have some of the tallest buildings in the world (it's hard to have that with a 500-ft limit!). Let me know if you need further clarification or if this didn't make sense. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Nuetral: Seeing that the articles are all stubs, you can't really expand any information... Res Mar 23:31, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Support. I too would like to see a little more information listed for each building in the "notes" section, but this is a fine article regardless. Ahodges7 talk 02:32, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * A 440 feet tall building remained tallest until a 350 feet tall building took its place? Typo?
 * Wow, at first I thought that somebody had vandalized the article. But nope, it's just my mistake. I corrected the height. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Executive Complex is "also known as 101 West Broadway", are you sure?
 * I actually do not know why it was there. It's been removed. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Could you find another reference proving that AT&T building is "also known as 101 West Broadway" because the "alternative name" field in your source is empty. It looks a little WP:OR to me.
 * I removed this as well. Although some of the websites I visited of the offices located in the building list it as 101 West Broadway, I don't think it's necessary to mention each address. Each building might have an alternate title for the road they are near or their actual address. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Since we don't know the exact height of Strata, how do we know that it's at least 300 feet tall? Same thing with First and Island in the proposed section.
 * I would say its based on the number of stories, Strata (23) and First and Island (38). Rather than try to argue the differences in heights (don't want to risk OR) of each story (as it differs by the developer) I moved them to the talk page of the list so that they can be readded later when the height is determined. I'll keep an eye out for any details. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

--Crzycheetah 23:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Support Good looking pictures by the way!--Crzycheetah 04:03, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The general references need to be formatted (publisher, last access date) Dabomb87 (talk) 16:55, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed the formatting with available fields. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Review by 
 * Lead
 * 'In the city there are 29 buildings that stand taller than 300 feet (91 meters).' -- Comma after 'city'
 * Comma added. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 17:38, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 'In 1989, Symphony Towers gained the title, before being passed two years later by One America Plaza.' -- Why not mention their heights?
 * Added height for Symphony Towers, since One America Plaza already listed in first paragraph. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 17:38, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * List
 * Remove the periods from the notes, they are not complete sentences. In addition, for notes that have more than one idea and are split with periods, replace the period with a semicolon.
 * Fixed all occurrences. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 17:38, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Everything else checks out fine.-- T ru  c o   16:16, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the time to review, I appreciate it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 17:38, 30 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Support -- Previous issues resolved to meet WP:WIAFL.-- T ru  c o   18:48, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Support The Rambling Man (talk) 18:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Support An excellent list! Reywas92 Talk  18:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.