Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates/Ratner Athletic Center

Counterweight
Unless and until there is a specific article for counterweights in architecture one or both of the following would be instructive and encyclopedic in the counterweight article, IMO. I think the problem may be with the current caption in the article. Advice on the proposed caption would be well-received.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Following a link here from my talkpage. Checked the usage in counterweight. Come off it Tony, that is total BS. Please remove it from that article. Not only is the picture basically irrelevant, the placement is just awful. I'll remove it tomorrow if you don't. This is really starting to waste everyone's time. --jjron (talk) 14:28, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I am not asking for comment on its current usage in counterweight. I do understand it seems shoehorned in its current use.  My request of you was to comment on the proposed usage to the right for counterweight.  What I am proposing is removing its current usage and replacing it with the usage to the right.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 17:47, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The first question is where in that short article do you propose to jam this - is this 'double image' going to replace the current badly placed single image and make the article even more unwieldy? The second question is what's with your latest fad for creating these 'double images', in particular using images that don't have any real natural association? Again is it just for the purpose of shoving them in more articles? The Tower of Pisa one may have some place in there as a classic building and overt use of counterweights, but I don't know what the obsession is with this Ratner image. --jjron (talk) 15:01, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * For the record, I was the user who requested the creation of Template:Multiple image a long time ago and if you look at the majority of my better articles at User:TonyTheTiger/Header template, you will see use it. Three of my five 2010 WP:FAs (Harris Theater (Chicago, Illinois), Inauguration of Barack Obama, Jay Pritzker Pavilion) use it and the other two (McCormick Tribune Plaza &  Ice Rink and Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)) both use image stacking in the infobox where I believe the template would be a problem.  I believe I was also the person who requested triple image and requested MI when I needed more than a triple stack.  I am a big fan of stacking.  This particular template helps avoid edit button bunching.  I have used it to eliminate the gallery at Signalling control and in numerous pages related to past and current FPC noms to fix edit button bunching.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:52, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * In terms placement in the counterweight article, I would propose moving upright File:Space elevator structural diagram.svg, which seems to be some sort of fantasy design, to the left top of the Counterweights in action section (actually just moved it). Then, to incorporate this double along the right I would convert it to a vertical stack and move File:Crane Weights.jpg to the left.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:52, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The topic at issue is the propriety of the architectural counterweight uses in the article. This is not an obsession. The Ratner building is a creation of one of the most innovative architects of our generation and underground counterweights are something that should be introduced to the reader.  Everyone reading the article with the caption presented to the right would understand that the counterweights are underground but essential to the design. The Ratner building is not the classic that the tower is, but its architect is at the forefront of the field and his most innovative designs are instructive to our readers.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:52, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Other articles

 * Contemporary architecture - It would seem that an award winning first of its kind architectural design by César Pelli would count as a primary example of contemporary architecture. I fail to see why it is less relevant to this than Auditorio de Tenerife.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * High-tech architecture - Ratner seems to be a more overt example than the majority of images in the article.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Second Chicago School of Architecture - Also seems to be a more overt example than what is there.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)