Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of tallest buildings in San Diego/archive1
- 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 Scorpion0422 22:12, 2 June 2009 [1].
List of tallest buildings in San Diego edit
- Nominator(s): Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:31, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
| Toolbox |
|---|
I have worked on this list for the last few weeks after walking around the city and taking pictures of the tallest buildings. Looking to the other similar FLs, I have attempted to format this list accordingly and I believe the article now meets the FL criteria. Let me know if you see any issues and I will get to them as soon as possible. Thank you for taking a look and happy reviewing! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:31, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comments
- For some reason, on my comp the ordered lists display 15=, 15=, 18, 18=, 18=, 21... I'm not entirely sure what these are, but they should be fixed.
- Shouldn't you include a couple of sentances (I'd go with a para) describing each skyscraper in the last row? Right now it contains only refs or a line, and I find that boring. I'd rather learn a bit about its history then read numbers. ResMar 00:01, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for looking the article over, I appreciate it. The equal sign after each rank is to indicate that there is a tie between the two buildings in height. Rather then list buildings of the same height as, say, 1, 2, 3, it would be best to rank them the same since they are of equal height. Because two buildings (or more in certain cases) share a rank in this list, the next successive rank includes the next number. For example, in the case of this list, it goes from 4, 5=, 5=, 7 (which is 4, 5, 6, 7). This helps to maintain the actual number of buildings that are taller than the pre-determined height included in the criteria of the list. Concerning the blank cells, I only tried to include the significant ranks relevant to the topic of the list. Each of the buildings has their own respective articles where readers can pursue further information (as well as look at the given sources). If you take a look at the other buildings FLs, you'll see a similar setup. Obviously some of the other lists may have more information to mention since they likely have some of the tallest buildings in the world (it's hard to have that with a 500-ft limit!). Let me know if you need further clarification or if this didn't make sense. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:20, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I too would like to see a little more information listed for each building in the "notes" section, but this is a fine article regardless. Ahodges7 talk 02:32, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
Support, all issues resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
| Resolved issues, Dabomb87 (talk) |
|---|
Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
|
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:21, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The general references need to be formatted (publisher, last access date)Dabomb87 (talk) 16:55, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed the formatting with available fields. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:32, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Truco
|
|---|
|
Review by Truco (talk · contribs)
|
| Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 18:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply] |
|---|
*Oppose but comments which will hopefully help.
|
- Support The Rambling Man (talk) 18:58, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.