This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skyscrapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to skyscrapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Well, try this on for size. I added some clr templates to stop clashes between sections, and avoid text squishing. While this introduces some more white space, this seems to be the lesser of two evils. The Infobox forces a picture size of 300px. I also tried other infoboxes, such as the "building" infobox and the "Historic building" infobox, but they use a 260px and a 250 px picture; neither of which was small enough to make a difference. Also, the MOS recommends against left-aligning pictures IF such alignments clash with section headings (i.e. right under the section heading line), so I right-aligned the pictures. Having ALL right aligned picturs IS one of the reccomended MOS methods of distrubuting pics (the other is a right-left-right alternation. This article is so short that that method doesn't work as well.) I also copyedited the lead, and added an awards and honors section (since these were ONLY mentioned in the lead, and a lead should not be the ONLY place a fact is mentions) and did some other minor copyedits. What do you think of these fixes?--Jayron32|talk|contribs 01:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Look, maybe move the architecture section under the history section? See how that looks. I will try that. The infobox template "hardcodes" the picture size. There is a way of rewriting the template code to allow someone to change the size in some articles as needed, but defaults to the current picture size. I am no good at coding templates, but this needs to be fixed somewhere besides this article. I will try moving the sections around to solve the squished text problem. Also, the TOC and the Infobox are squishing text as well. That needs fixing. I will work on that. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 16:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria. I went through the article and made various changes, please look them over. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. Altogether the article is well-written and is still in great shape after its passing in 2007. Continue to improve the article making sure all new information is properly sourced and neutral. I would recommend updating the access dates of the sources. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 20:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)