Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Skyscrapers: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:59, 18 September 2022

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Skyscrapers Project‑class

	This page 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.SkyscrapersWikipedia:WikiProject SkyscrapersTemplate:WikiProject SkyscrapersSkyscraper articles
Project	This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Shortcut

WT:SKY

Archives

Current discussion

This page has archives. Sections older than 240 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

Secondary sources

Can content from a company's newsletter be used as reference for an article of a skyscraper if the company was involved in the building's construction? Does this make the company a primary source?

I did not get much information about the design and architecture of Antilia (building), but this page from Sterling Engineering (who were the consultants for the building) has the details that can be used. Jay (talk) 07:42, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jay: near as I can tell the answers are yes and yes. The policy at PRIMARY is clear that such sources can be used but only with care. In addition I believe ABOUTSELF also applies due to the close connection. Hence, I wouldn't use it to extoll the virtues of the design, but if you stick to a just the facts ma'am approach I think you'll be fine. Relatedly, this page is little watched at present, and I'm not all that active either so you may have better luck getting prompt feedback at one of the noticeboards or the HELPDESK in the future. (please ping on reply)

𝒬 𝔔 23:18, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

name change

In July 2021, Essex on the Park became known as "Sentral Michigan Avenue". I am unable to document this marketing name change. Help please.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:55, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I.e., I can't find a secondary source although I have included the website in the infobox.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:31, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TonyTheTiger: I don't think there's any issue with using a WP:PRIMARY source to support a mention in the article that the official name has changed. However, since there are secondary sources using the old name but not yet the new one, I would refrain from moving the article until secondary sources pick up on the new name as well. 81.177.27.61 (talk) 20:03, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move at Talk:List of tenants in 1 World Trade Center#Requested move 17 March 2022

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of tenants in 1 World Trade Center#Requested move 17 March 2022 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 22:47, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User script to detect unreliable sources

I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like

John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14. (John Smith "[https://www.deprecated.com/article Article of things]" ''Deprecated.com''. Accessed 2020-02-14.)

and turns it into something like

John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from {{cite web}}, {{cite journal}} and {{doi}}.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Emporis end

Emporis database is dead (officially retired by the new owner). It's a pity, it was one of the few reliable sources and especially covering (unlike CTBUH) also lower buildings (150 m and less) buildings, which may be considered high or even the highest in some countries.

GreenC bot (operated by @GreenC) is rescuing references, but I am not sure, how to handle the situation with Template:Emporis. Jklamo (talk) 22:59, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 57: / Line 57: @@
 <span style="font-size:90%">This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from.</span> Delivered by: [[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
 <!-- Message sent by User:Terasail@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Headbomb/sandbox3&oldid=1085285969 -->
+== Emporis end ==
+[[Emporis]] database is dead (officially retired by the new owner). It's a pity, it was one of the few reliable sources and especially covering (unlike CTBUH) also lower buildings (150 m and less) buildings, which may be considered high or even the highest in some countries.
+GreenC bot (operated by @[[User:GreenC|GreenC]]) is rescuing references, but I am not sure, how to handle the situation with [[Template:Emporis]]. [[User:Jklamo|Jklamo]] ([[User talk:Jklamo|talk]]) 22:59, 18 September 2022 (UTC)