Talk:Franklin Center (Chicago)

Untitled

We really need a photo. I'm not sure when I'll get a chance to get over there. Anyone? Tedernst | Talk 07:35, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Someone needs to correct the height of the roof within the box; I would but I can't for some reason. Maybe only a wikipedia rep can. It's listed as 207 meters but it should really be 270.

GA Passed

Article is well referenced, covers it well, looks all very well, it's, well, a good article.  :) Congratulations. DoomsDay349 00:26, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Corrections needed

This article is good, but here are a few issues: 1. How can this building's design evolve from Jin Mao when the latter was built and designed 10 years later? It has plenty of antecedents in the city. 2. The council on tall buildings did not change to include decorative spires. This issue was settled many decades earlier with the Chrysler Building height issue. What the Council did was add several additional categories, instead of having just the one measuring height. So the building's official height did not change. (If this were the case, so would have the Chrysler's, becoming higher, which it did not.) 3. I would be careful of the information found on Emporis. We all at the office got a good laugh when we found out that the John Hancock Building has no floor beams!Gary Joseph 03:29, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Does anyone know how to contact the corporate office of ATT? Phone #'s, Fax #'s, email, address etc......... Thanks, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.201.210.106 (talk) 13:11, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

Updates needed

• With the construction of the Trump Tower in Chicago, this building is no longer the 4th tallest building in Chicago. (Maybe the fifth?)
• Is it even called the AT&T Corporate Center? The 'USG Building' is no longer called by that name. Rick lightburn (talk) 21:26, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:AT&T Corporate Center/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

I will be doing the GA Reassessment on this article as part of the GA Sweeps project. H1nkles (talk) 15:01, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

The article is good, the writing is tight and the subject is comprehensive. The article is up to date and the references are well-formatted. I'm concerned that the image in the lead has no licensing on it. Being that I am not very versed in image requirements I'm not confident enough to say that's a problem so I will raise the issue in the hopes that if it is an issue that someone will address it. There is one dead link in the references section: [7]. This should be repaired. Otherwise the article is fine. I'll keep it at GA. H1nkles (talk) 15:18, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

GA status questionable

The writing is not "tight" as the previous editor stated. In fact, the introduction, beyond which I have not looked, is a total mess because it puts all the information round the wrong way.

The AT&T Corporate Center is the 5th tallest completed skyscraper in Chicago in Cook County, Illinois, United States and the 9th tallest in the United States at a height of 1,021 ft (307 m) containing 60 floors.[2] Completed in 1989, the 1.7 million square foot (158,000 m²) supertall building stands two blocks east of the Chicago River and northeast of the Willis Tower at 227 West Monroe Street (100 South Franklin alternate address)[3] in the Loop community area of downtown Chicago.[4] Composed of retail and commercial office space, the tower is the tallest building constructed in Chicago in the last quarter of the 20th century.[5][6] The building was built to consolidate American Telephone & Telegraph Company central regional headquarters offices.[7]

What are the problems?

• First sentence: "The AT&T Corporate Center is the 5th tallest completed skyscraper in Chicago in Cook County, Illinois, United States and the 9th tallest in the United States at a height of 1,021 ft (307 m) containing 60 floors.[2]"

Too long

Doesn't say exactly what it is

Begins with a piece of trivia which is a variable factor, not a permanent one.

Separates info about the height and the floors from the other specifications which are given in the second sentence.

• Second sentence:"Completed in 1989, the 1.7 million square foot (158,000 m²) supertall building stands two blocks east of the Chicago River and northeast of the Willis Tower at 227 West Monroe Street (100 South Franklin alternate address)[3] in the Loop community area of downtown Chicago."

Give either its location or its specifications in this sentence, not both.

• Third sentence:"Composed of retail and commercial office space, the tower is the tallest building constructed in Chicago in the last quarter of the 20th century.[5]"

Another sentence of a mixed subject. Put the stuff about the height in the same sentence as the other stuff about the height. None of it goes in the first sentence.

• Fourth sentence:"The building was built to consolidate American Telephone & Telegraph Company central regional headquarters offices."

As an Australian reader, I don't have a clue what AT&T stands for. The information in this sentence needs to be part of the firdt or second sentence.

• Missing information

Who was the architect?

There are two pieces of date related information. They need to be together.

How to write an intro about a building. Put the absolute essentials in the first paragraph, and then link like information, rather than mixing up sentences and paragraphs.

1. First sentence should state simply what type of building it is (house, skyscraper, cathedral), its city and country and its purpose (The purpose, if of great significance, might flow into another sentence.) The first paragraph should include the architectural style, the architect and who the building was built for. (In ancient buildings the architect these two last facts might be uncertain.) The first paragraph can also give an exact location (if it doesn't fit into the first sentence).

1. A subsequent paragraph can contain other facts of significance. The specifications are not necessary in the intro unless they are highly significant. The history, or the style may be more important eg, history at the White House and style at Fallingwater. Keep info of the same type together and in separate sentences for separate topics. Other important facts include heritage status.

Amandajm (talk)

Move

I think most of the above issues have been addressed. As the complex is now known as Franklin Center, I am proposing to retitle the page.Goldnpuppy (talk) 23:28, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Franklin Center (Chicago). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120208094611/http://lightsout.audubon.org/docs/September%2030%20release.doc to http://lightsout.audubon.org/docs/September%2030%20release.doc

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:00, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Franklin Center (Chicago). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130601002754/http://chi-athenaeum.org/land/land4.htm to http://www.chi-athenaeum.org/land/land4.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141006093725/http://www.wightco.com/about/news.aspx?contentid=121 to http://www.wightco.com/about/news.aspx?contentid=121

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:46, 6 October 2017 (UTC)