Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Twenty-five Year Award/archive2

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 Dabomb87 20:12, 19 December 2011 [1].

Twenty-five Year Award edit

Twenty-five Year Award (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Found5dollar (talk) 01:56, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because it failed it's last nomination in July not because of any objections whatsoever, but because there were not enough reviews. Now that the summer is over, I can again devote time to wikipedia and advancing this list through the nomination process again. --Found5dollar (talk) 01:56, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Quick comment – One new issue I noticed that wasn't there last time: a typo in the second paragraph of the Eligibility section ("canidate"). Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:22, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • One more I found while doing spot-checks: the "25 to 35 years" quote is in reference 3, not ref 1; that source just gives the 25 year figure. Giants2008 (Talk) 22:48, 30 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I may have asked this before but have we guaranteed that images are all okay under the freedom of panorama laws? Other than that, I have no other issues with the list since it's gone through significant review thus far. A quick comment about the former and if happy, I'll support. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:31, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • From my understanding of the law, photographs of buildings are permissible as long as they are taken from public areas (including lobbies, auditoriums, etc.). The only caveat is that sculpture does not have freedom of panorama. From what I can tell there are no sculptures, besides the rogue company sign which I believe would be considered part of the architecture of the building, in any of the pictures, and they all appear to have either been taken from a public street or a lobby of the structure.--Found5dollar (talk) 23:27, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Jafeluv (talk) 21:29, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A few comments:
  • The capitalization of the title looks odd to my eye (I expected "five" to be capitalized), but AFAIK there's no mention of that in WP:CAPS so either version is probably acceptable. The references used in the article seem to use either "Twenty Five", "Twenty-Five" or "Twenty-five".
  • Noted. I believe that i had the title capitalized differently before, but then someone suggested this way. I could be wrong though.--Found5dollar (talk) 17:42, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reference 3 (American Institute of Architects) is a dead link.
  • "25 to 35 years" is written in numbers in the lead, but later "between twenty-five and thirty-five" are spelled out. Since the first one is a quote, maybe it would be better to use numbers in the latter instance as well.
  • Is there a reason why some cities include the state and some not? Surely if Barcelona is "Barcelona, Spain", Boston should at least be "Boston, Massachusetts" (if not "Boston, Massachusetts, United States").
  • The concept behind this is that places such as "New York City," "Los Angeles," "Boston," etc are known well enough that the subsequent state and country would be redundant. Much like how the titles of those cities articles are named. Any city outsideof the United States, where the award is handed out, I placed the name of the country as well.--Found5dollar (talk) 17:42, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess that makes sense, since the article is clearly in a US context. Thanks for clarifying. Jafeluv (talk) 21:28, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Titles with the definite article should be sorted without it. Eg. "The Atheneum" should be sorted at A, not at T. Similarly, people's names are usually sorted by last name, not first name. Might want to consider using {{sort}} here.

Jafeluv (talk) 00:18, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from NapHit (talk) 19:05, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
  • The table currently does not meet WP:ACCESS standards see MOS:DTT for more details. Basically you need row and col scopes for the table.
  • I am not familiar with those parameters but i added "scope=col" to the column headers. As the rows don't really have a header (A.K.A. one of the columns darker and what the entire row is about), I didn't add scopes there. If I should please let me know.--Found5dollar (talk) 01:06, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You could argue that the building is the header, but if you're not happy with having one column darker I would add scope=row without using the exclamation mark, because you do need the scope=row. NapHit (talk) 11:03, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Instead of having the dagger and then a note at the bottom which is quite hard to read why not put it before the table in a key?
  • I originally didn't have that note at all, but during the last review i was told to add it in that style.--Found5dollar (talk) 01:06, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just think it makes more sense for it to be before the table so the reader can identify what it means, especially as its right at the top of the table saves them scrolling all the way down.

Other than those two comments I can't see any other problems. NapHit (talk) 10:58, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Great list, well done. NapHit (talk) 19:05, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]


  • Weak oppose I feel there needs to be a World map with the location of the buildings. Nergaal (talk) 20:03, 4 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I thought about adding a map like that at one time, but decided against it for two reasons. First the map would be very messy as many of the buildings are in the same cities. This combined with the size the map would have to be (it would have to cover basically the whole world), it would be virtually unreadable. There would be too many building names and not enough space on the map to get them all on it.Secondly, after looking at other featured lists, specifically the featured "tallest building," and other featured architecture award lists, i noticed that no other featured articles in the same category as this one have maps associated with them. I am open to adding one, I just don't think it will add anything to the article as the location of each building is stated clearly in the table, and having a map that is unreadable do to the proximity of many of the buildings and the distance of a few others may take away fromt he visual impact of the article.--Found5dollar (talk) 03:02, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have also just added a small paragraph to the openign to explain where the most awarded cites are.--Found5dollar (talk) 03:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 20:56, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Perhaps introduce "Eero Saarinen" as "Finnish architect" or similar because I'm pretty sure most will not have heard of him, certainly not compared with the likes of Skidemore et al and Lloyd Wright.
  • May also be worth stating in the lead where the majority/minority of these buildings are seeing as only two are outside the US despite it being a world award.
  • "Nominees are judged by today's architectural standards in their function, execution, and creativity" is that a quote? It reads like one. If so it should be in quotes, if not, we need to define what we mean by "today's architectural standards in their function, execution, and creativity".
  • The quote the information in this sentence comes from is in Ref2 and reads "The project must have excellence in function—in the distinguished execution of its original program and in the creative aspects of its statement by today's standards." I believe they leave what "today's standards" is purposefully vague so that as standards in aesthetics and functionality change they do not have to rewrite the rules.--Found5dollar (talk) 03:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do we really need post-nomials like FAIA here?
  • That is how they are listed on the official list of winners on the AIA website [2]. --Found5dollar (talk) 03:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, but do we need them here? Do we normally list things like OBEs etc after someone's name or not? I think not. The Rambling Man (talk) 11:29, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are the two See also's of particular relevance here or are they "just another two" architecture prizes? E.g. what specifically links that Skyscraper prize to this "longevity-based" prize? More of a query than an accusation by the way...!
  • They are both other prizes that are given to a building (or architect of a specific building) like this one is, instead of an architect in general like most architectural awards.--Found5dollar (talk) 03:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refs 2 & 5 could use a page number.
  • Just a general question, the AIA themselves (on the general reference you provide) don't hyphenate the Twenty-five as you do here. Which is correct?
  • there has been tons of questions regardign the hyphanation and capitalization of the title in this and the last FLC. Basically for the hyphenation I was going off what the MOS says at WP:ORDINAL and figured that that overruled how the AIA spells it.--Found5dollar (talk) 03:32, 8 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Twenty-five_Year_Award/archive2&oldid=1089075859"