Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Architecture/Archive 13

Active discussions
Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13

Architects categorised by the county of their birth

Rathfelder - I'd be interested in others' views on the categorisation of English, and indeed, Welsh, Scottish and Irish, architects by the county of their births. My interest was sparked when the categorisation of this article, Albert Powys, was changed from English Architects to Architects from Dorset. To me, this is a categorisation too far and does nothing to help the reader. Nor do we appear to follow it for other related disciplines. John Constable is not categorised under Painters from Suffolk; Barbara Hepworth is not categorised under Sculptors from Wakefield, although she does have an Artists from Wakefield cat.; and William Shakespeare is not categorised under Dramatists from Warwickshire. To me, this degree of specialism for Categories is symptomatic more of our own mania for categorisation, rather than of a desire to help our readers. I'd be interested on other views. KJP1 (talk) 14:31, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

  • Its about volume. We have a huge number of articles about architects. [[:Category:English architects by county]] is very well populated. I cant see why its unhelpful. And architecture is inherently linked to location in a way which other professions arent. Rathfelder (talk) 14:37, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
I don't understand the volume argument. If it make sense, why is it not adopted for English writers, of whom I will warrant there are more than there are English architects? What reader searches for an architect by county? And the statement that "architecture/architects are inherently linked to (their counties of birth)" is plainly incorrect. Some are, many (the majority?) are not. As some painters/writers/sculptors etc. are, while some are not. KJP1 (talk) 14:42, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
Like Category:Writers from London? NB the counties are not necessarily where the architects were born. They may be where they worked. We also have Category:Architects by city. Do you disapprove of that? Or you think we should discriminate against rural architects? Rathfelder (talk) 15:08, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
I don’t think silly ad hominem arguments will be of much value. KJP1 (talk) 15:30, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
I dont think you have explained your objection. Why is it OK to categorise architects by city but not by county? Rathfelder (talk) 16:29, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
I agree with the objections. Although [[:Category:English architects by county]] has been around for some years, most of the sub-cats were created by Rathfelder two months ago. In general it is a terrible way to divide English people, especially if it means "diffusing" them - removing them from the main category. Very few significant English architects stayed in their own county, or region. I note we don't have Category:English people by county (and please don't set it up). The French and Italian category trees for many things are made completely useless by this manic localizing. Johnbod (talk) 16:42, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
We already have Category:People by county in England. This is a very well established category tree. The whole point of our heirarchical categorisation system is to diffuse entries. If you dont like it this is not the place to raise the issue. Try Wikipedia talk:Categorization. But you still havent explained why it is OK to categorise by city but not by county. Rathfelder (talk) 16:48, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
I never said that it was. I was raising the issue of what I perceived to be over-categorisation because I genuinely wanted to hear other editors' views. And that will be an interesting exercise. So far, we've had one, who dislikes it as much as I, and you, who created most of the Architect by County categories. Let's see what others say. KJP1 (talk) 18:09, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
That is totally different ("People from Yorkshire" etc) - I should perhaps have said Category:English people by occupation by county. There is no "very well established category tree" like that at all. There are some categories that should be diffused, and some that shouldn't - it is important to be aware of the difference, which you don't seem to be. In the vast majority of cases architects by county is just not sufficiently defining in WP:OCAT terms. I'd much rather lose, or at least reduce, the "by city" categories than keep these, especially as diffusing cats. Of the 6 in Category:Architects from Bradford, only 2 articles mention work done there, or indeed in Yorkshire. Category:Architects from London and a few others have justification, because there was so much work there. After about 1820, counties like Dorset had few architects of any significance with local offices - it was something you sent off to London or another city for. Looking at the 8 Category:Architects from Dorset, the Bastard brothers (also Benjamin Bastard) are indeed a relatively rare example of architects who stayed local, but none of the others are even mentioned as working there. Have you included the very firmly London-based Richard Horden just because he went to a boarding school in Dorset? Unless evidence he actually came from there is added to the article, I will remove him. We should do a test case deletion nom at WP:CFD. Johnbod (talk) 18:27, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
People who are interested in the history of Dorset might well think such a category useful. Nobody has explained why such a category is a bad thing. The question of where people are "from" is of course ambiguous. It could mean where they are born, where they grew up, or where they did whatever made them notable. People who know more than I do about architecture are welcome to move them to the most appropriate category. But some of these people are not only notable as architects. This issue is, of course, not confined to England. There are occupational categories divided geographically for most developed countries. In the USA there are both state and city categories. Numbers do matter. We do try not to break down categories that are too small to be useful unless they are part of a well established pattern. The pattern is really part of Category:English people by locality because the changes in local government have made using counties difficult. Rathfelder (talk) 20:31, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
May it soon follow [[Category:Equatoguinean businesspeople]], with its single member, into oblivion! KJP1 (talk) 21:32, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
What is bad is that you are taking architects out of the main national category & hiding them in a forest of local ones, to which in most cases they have only the most tenuous connection. This renders the category structure incapable of fulfilling one of its main functions, namely enabling people to find the article they want when they aren't sure they remember a name properly (or certainly don't do so), unless they happen to know precisely where the person was born. In fact, Category:English architects only has 11 direct members, which is frankly insane. Most articles are in by-century cats, which have their own issues. Johnbod (talk) 03:02, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
  • I'm afraid that is the way the categorisation system is supposed to work. You could try to set up a different system if you like, as has been done by some other projects. But I still dont understand why your arguments dont apply to architects classified by cities. Rathfelder (talk) 19:44, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Just stating “that’s the way the system works”, without any explanation as to how or why the system working in that way benefits the reader, is really no argument at all. And both Johnbod and I have made clear that our objections apply as much to the city categorisations as to the county. It’s the pointless Categorisation to, very localised, place, without any meaning, that makes no sense. KJP1 (talk) 20:25, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
We need a test CFD, probably for Dorset - the regulars there are usually unsympathetic to this sort of over-categorization. Johnbod (talk) 22:14, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Johnbod - Very happy to take this forward but more than happy if you do. You understand the processes better than I. Just let me know. KJP1 (talk) 22:41, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
Ok, Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2020_March_26#Category:Architects_from_Dorset now launched, as a test case. Johnbod (talk) 12:53, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Discord

Hello everyone, I'm Pokemonprime, a member of WikiProject: Architecture. I was curious if there was any interest in starting a a Wikiproject "Infrastructure" channel? There's a few members there already interested in architecture; I think a channel on the Discord could help people collaborate and to recruit more members. The plan is for the channel to be called #wpinfrastructure, as to include some other projects, such as WikiProject Skyscrapers and WikiProject Malls. If you'd like to join the Discord and see what we have to offer, you can join at WP:Discord Pokemonprime (talk) 01:44, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Giovanna Borasi - Added information

Hi there, could an editor add/change some information on Giovanna Borasi page? She is now the new director of Canadian Centre for Architecture. Her page needs as well a little push with added information about her. Please find here some reliable sources to justify this request: [[1]], [[2]], [[3]].

Thanks, let me know if I am asking correctly. First time for me :)--Sadebag (talk) 13:46, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

@Sadebag: Hi, thank you for disclosing (at User:Sadebag) that you work at Canadian Centre for Architecture. There is advice on how to request edits at Wikipedia:Simple conflict of interest edit request. In summary, you should explain what changes you are requesting on the article's talk page and tag with {{request edit}}. You should also read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure as the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that all editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which they receive, or expect to receive, compensation". TSventon (talk) 10:14, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

McMansion

Article is very opinionated essay explaining why mcMansions are bad. It needs to be cleaned up to follow neutrality. 23:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

I'd agree it needs cites, but I doubt such an article will ever be "neutral" in the sense you mean. "McMansion" is by definition a pejorative term and the sources will likely reflect this. KJP1 (talk) 04:54, 6 May 2020 (UTC)
The article uses the Wikipedia voice to say they suck and lists all their flaws rather than citing expert opinion. The whole article is a mess and one of the worst I've ever seen. It's really just an opinion essay that cites tumblr and opinion pieces. And if there's not enough proper sources then the article shouldn't exist. Harizotoh9 (talk) 16:21, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Basilica#RFC

  You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Basilica#RFC. Elizium23 (talk) 08:29, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Hilmi Şenalp

I've never created an article about an architect before, so if someone feels like improving, please do. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

WP:Articles for Creation has a new sort tool, you can see all pending related drafts here: Wikipedia:AfC sorting/Culture/Visual arts/Architecture

Just in case there are folks here who might be interested in reviewing drafts awaiting article status that are particular to this WikiProject. If you'd like to sign up to review/approve/decline new Drafts, instructions are here. AFC Reviewers get to use really cool automated tools that make reviewing really quick and easy, and I've really enjoyed volunteering there, and I'm really digging the AFC Sorting tool so instead of having to comb through lots of articles, I can zip right to topics I'm interested in. MatthewVanitas (talk) 06:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Merger discussion, Paned window (architecture) and Sash window

There is a discussion of merging the newly created Paned window (architecture) article into the existing Sash window article. Talk:Sash window#Merge discussion --Bejnar (talk) 16:16, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

  • Daft, time wasting suggestion. If you don’t understand a subject Bejnar, then stay away from it. Giano (talk) 16:41, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
@Giano: Should the merge go the other way? There is a great deal about paned windows that I do not know, which is why I noticed this here, before someone explained to me that sash windows were a subset of paned windows. --Bejnar (talk) 17:00, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
No, it shouldn’t. Forget panes completely with sash windows. The sash is a cord within the frame that allows a sash window to slide up and down. A sash window doesn’t have to be pained at all, just two movable framed sections each within a separate frame within a master frame. Giano (talk) 18:04, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Akshardham

Guys and gals, we need some help to settle a dispute between me and Apollo1203(talk).
I am trying to give credit to the architect of the Akshardham Temple in New Delhi, Vikram Lall. The architect has the floor plans in his institutional page[1] and there are multiple news-sources that confirm that he is at least one of the architects behind the temple[2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]. Apollo1203 argues that new-sources are not reliable sources, but I have used them plenty to write other pages and it was never a problem. What is your take? Herrikez (talk) 08:04, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Leeds Town Hall

Hi

It would be appreciated if anyone with spare time could cast their eye over at Wikipedia:Peer review/Leeds Town Hall/archive1, where a PR is underway which will hopefully lead the way towards a successful FAC for Leeds Town Hall (see also this one from earlier in the year). Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (chinwag) 00:56, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Assessments department, updated

Greetings, For Architecture WP, I added progression, pie graph, rainbow; added wikilinks "Quality operations" and "Popular pages". JoeNMLC (talk) 17:53, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Geodesic Domes

All:

Can someone who is knowledgeable on this topic take a look at Geodesic dome. Seems like this article has a request for improvement from 2010. In reading the text, particularly a section 'disadvantages', it does appear that there are significant claims without a citation / reference. Please can someone knowledgeable about this topic, take a look?

Thanks.


Ktin (talk) 02:06, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Adding an article I started

Hello folks! I started a new article on "Green building certification systems" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_building_certification_systems) for one of the Wikipedia summer courses that I took (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/PoliMi/2020-b). I was very surprised to learn that there was not an article covering the different certification systems such as LEED, BREEAM, DGNB etc. I believe that this article would be very useful for students of architecture, sustainable energy and other people in general. Therefore, I was wondering if you could review it and share your thoughts on the article. Perhaps, it could be made good enough to include in the above mentioned "projects"? Thank you very much and hoping to hear from you all soon! Kind regards, User:Glama1 (talk) 11:57, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Upcoming main page link

Superadobe will be linked from the main page in a few weeks for the Pomona College Organic Farm DYK. It's in a pretty sorry state currently, so someone inclined may want to fix it up in anticipation of the upcoming views. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 06:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

We have no article for concert hall (it's a redirect to List of concert halls)

  You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of concert halls § Propose to split the article. {{u|Sdkb}}talk 21:23, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

A discussion which may be of interest to the members of this group can be found here. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:26, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Overlapping Art Deco articles

While working on my own smaller subarticle, I've noticed that Wikipedia's coverage of Art Deco is... really diffuse. Some of these divisions make a certain amount of sense (streamline moderne having an article separate from Art Deco proper) but I've found that there's some really weird divisions being made the further down you go. Specifically, we have Stripped Classicism, PWA Moderne, Greco Deco as separate articles, where especially for the latter two they are basically talking about the same thing and feel like they should be covered in Art Deco in the United States (which currently is basically just a grab-bag of facts and really is threatening to fall afoul of WP:GALLERY.) Before I start getting into specific merge proposals, wanted to float this problem to a wider audience and see if there was any concordant opinions. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 19:25, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Template:Infobox building now has a public transit access parameter

After years and years of people proposing it basically uncontested on the talk page but it never getting actioned, we've finally added |public_transit= to {{Infobox building}}. There are 22,000 transclusions, so there's plenty of work for any of you who want to start using it; feel free to pick your favorite buildings and add the information for them. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk 06:07, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Error on the Lighthouses page

Hello! I noticed what I'm sure is an error here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lighthouse in the Famous lighthouse builders section. However, I'm not 100% sure of what the text ought to say and I don't feel remotely qualified to make any edits myself. Is mentioning it here sufficient, or is there somewhere else I should go to report it? I'mAWriterOkay (talk) 14:39, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Assuming it was the bit of gibberish after James Douglass, I’ve corrected it. I would have pinged you but your name is so complicated. KJP1 (talk) 15:35, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

Rova of Antananarivo featured article review

I have nominated Rova of Antananarivo for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. (t · c) buidhe 02:38, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Update to peer review page

Hi all, I've boldly updated your project's peer review page (Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture/Peer review) by updating the instructions and archiving old reviews.

The new instructions use Wikipedia's general peer review process (WP:PR) to list peer reviews. Your project's reviews are still able to be listed on your local page too.

The benefits of this change is that review requests will get seen by a wider audience and are likely to be attended to in a more timely way (many WikiProject peer reviews remain unanswered after years). The Wikipedia peer review process is also more maintained than most WikiProjects, and this may help save time for your active members.

I've done this boldly as it seems your peer review page is pretty inactive and I am working through around 90 such similar peer review pages. Please feel free to discuss below - please ping me ({{u|Tom (LT)}}) in your response.

Cheers and hope you are well, Tom (LT) (talk) 23:40, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Donald Schmitt

Notable, or not? Please fix it, or risk deletion. Bearian (talk) 16:22, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

Repurposed churches, etc

Category:Repurposing contains Category:Adaptive reuse of industrial structures, but no "Adaptive reuse of [anything else] structures": Ecclesiastical, military, monarchical, etc. Am I failing to notice some set of categories with similar purposes but very different names? -- Hoary (talk) 06:18, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

@Hoary Category:Buildings and structures by former use exists, but also includes demolished structures (and oddly doesn't include Category:Former Barracks in Australia). TSventon (talk) 19:50, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, TSventon. I wonder how I missed that. (And now I wonder about the distinction, if any, between demolition and destruction, and whether Hornbach Abbey should belong to Category:Demolished Christian monasteries or Category:Destroyed Christian monasteries.) Suddenly I notice surprising absences from Wikipedia: though the "St. Pancras Renaissance London Hotel" recycles railway company offices, its article doesn't have any category suggesting this; the article on Tokyo station doesn't even mention either the hotel or the gallery created within its building. -- Hoary (talk) 22:29, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Hoary, some thoughts: I started by finding a former church and working up to Category:Former churches, which oddly doesn't include Panthéon. Demolished and destroyed are not used consistently, e.g. Category:Destroyed churches by country includes "demolished" churches in the Soviet Union, Ukraine and the US. Destroyed buildings include ruins, e.g. Category:Ruins of churches destroyed during World War II was discussed at WP:CfD earlier this year. The St. Pancras Hotel is perhaps not classified as former offices as it was built as a hotel (then converted to offices and back to a hotel). TSventon (talk) 10:15, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
This may be going off on a tangent, but... any distinction between destroyed and demolished should be articulated in the categories. I think there is a legitimate split – for example a natural disaster such as an earthquake might destroy or damage a building but not demolish it – but is that the kind of thing that would be lost on the readers? Richard Nevell (talk) 15:40, 27 November 2020 (UTC)
It's a tangent worth going off at, Richard Nevell. I don't see any urgency to a discussion, but such discussions are better earlier than later, when subcategories might well have proliferated. And therefore see the thread below. -- Hoary (talk) 23:32, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Eve of Demolition?

We have Category:Demolished Christian monasteries and Category:Destroyed Christian monasteries. The distinction between the two doesn't seem to be explained anywhere; and it's not obvious (to me, anyway). I'd say that categories of the "destroyed" versus categories of the "demolished" is a category matter for discussion. However, Wikipedia:Categories for discussion seems to require actionable proposals, and at this point I'm neutral. If demolition implies destruction but destruction doesn't imply demolition, then destruction is the broader term, and I'd propose standardization on "destroyed". Opinions? -- Hoary (talk) 23:32, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Agreed, "destroyed" seems to be the standard term for subcategories of Category:Demolished religious buildings and structures. You could ask a regular from CfD for feedback before submitting a proposal if that would help. Explanations from other categories:
You say (disabling the links):
Now I'm totally confused! I would take "demolished" to mean knocked down in an organized way as redundant or for redevelopment, and "destroyed" as this, plus, fire, war, iconoclasm/change of religion, earthquakes etc. So yes, standardization on "destroyed". Johnbod (talk) 04:38, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
TSventon, Johnbod, thank you both for your comments. I'm now exploring the category trees, getting a better idea of what's what, and, I hope, starting to move towards a proposal that would be easy to understand and easy to implement. -- Hoary (talk) 09:01, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikiproject Conway Library

Hello! I thought I should write and say 'hello' as I have been tagging several drafts and new article talk pages with the WP Architecture, and I wanted to check if I was using the category correctly! I'm helping a group of volunteers to create articles about architectural photographs and academics, who contributed photographs of architecture to the Conway Library of art and architecture. We have quite the backlog of articles for creation that are pending review, as in the group there are lots of brand new wikipedia editors who need to go through the AfC route. You can find the project page here Wikipedia:WikiProject ConwayLibrary I wondered, firstly, whether WP Architecture are interested in such biographical pages? Secondly, I thought I would drop here some articles that are waiting for review - - and give many thanks in advance if any experienced eyes might give them a look over! I understand not all of them will be wiki-worthy, but many of the creators are feeling de-motivated that the review process can take so long. So even a rejection will be super helpful, as it will help people to 'move on' to tackle another possible new page, or make edits to existing ones! Here are the drafts: Draft:Millard Fillmore Hearn Jr., Draft:Stephen Murray (historian); Draft:John Higgitt; Draft:Frederick Reginald Pinfold Sumner; Draft:Jeffrey K. West; Draft:Peter Anthony Newton; Draft:David Hemsoll. Many thanks indeed, and happy to share more about the project, too! - KerstingFan (talk) 18:21, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

KerstingFan Millard Fillmore Hearn Jr. (i.e. Fil Hearn) now done, but NB no real article yet links to it. (List items do, but they're insignificant.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:25, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks very much for taking a look, Hoary! I'll ask the creator to see if they can't fix the orphan status this week/ weekend! - KerstingFan (talk) 10:18, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
KerstingFan, Stephen Murray (historian) now done too; but again, it's effectively an orphan. -- Hoary (talk) 11:36, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Just wanted to say I think this is a great project, and a wonderful library. I shall certainly take a look at a few but RL is taxing just now. All the very best with it. KJP1 (talk) 18:37, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback and luck, KJP1, and for the additional feedback Hoary! - KerstingFan (talk) 12:12, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
KerstingFan, Draft:Peter Anthony Newton was declined on 9 September (two months before you mentioned it above), and not touched since. -- Hoary (talk) 12:08, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Hoary yes indeed, and I did wonder about it, as, reading it, I can't see where the problems are with peacock words or npov. To me, it reads similarly to many other pages, and all claims are cited. The user who drafted the page just isn't sure what to change, and neither am I. Guidance here would be appreciated if anyone has the time! - KerstingFan (talk) 12:12, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
I'll look at it soon, KerstingFan, but not today. (Meanwhile, you might take another look at Draft:David Hemsoll.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:24, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Hoary Amazing, and no rush of course - I didn't mean to say it had to be you :D and thanks for the nudge, will do! KerstingFan (talk) 12:28, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Done, KerstingFan. I started out in a good mood -- I have a high regard for this Conway Library project, and like to read about this kind of thing -- and I too wondered about Utopes's comments. I think and hope that I improved the draft somewhat. However, I'm not convinced of the biographee's [Wikipedia-defined] notability, and am disappointed by other aspects of the draft. Please look at the rant I posted to Draft talk:Peter Anthony Newton, and if you agree with some of it then consider passing this on to your participants. -- Hoary (talk) 01:18, 5 December 2020 (UTC)

Invitation to US Housing Edit-a-thon

Please join us on 13 December 2020, 12:00-14:00 EST, as we update and improve articles in Wikipedia related to housing in the United States of America. Sign up here. -- M2545 (talk) 11:03, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated New Orleans Mint for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm Bacon 05:06, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Antae temple

Hi. I recently proposed a merger of Antae temple and Temple in antis, since they seem to concern the same topic. I haven't had any response to that so far. Since then, I've found that there is also Distyle in antis, whose subject seems to be only marginally, if at all, different. I don't know enough about this topic to see if, how, and what should be merged, but it seems clear that there is at least some duplicity here. Additionally, it appears to me that Temple in antis contains a fair amount of original research, which I've also brought up at Talk:Antae temple#Merge proposal. I'm hoping that someone with the right expertise is willing to take a look at these articles and see what should be done. Thanks in advance! Lennart97 (talk) 19:08, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Carbon12 in Portland, Oregon

Carbon12 has been expanded recently. I'm not 100% sure all of the sourcing is Wikipedia-compliant. I'd invite project members familiar with architecture articles to take a look and make improvements, or leave feedback on the article's talk page. Thanks! ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:11, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Tsunami-proof building

Could we work to fix this article? Bearian (talk) 21:06, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Frederick Mathesius

 

The article Frederick Mathesius has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

NN architect, tagged for almost nine years

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bearian (talk) 16:10, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Frederick Mathesius for deletion

 
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Frederick Mathesius is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frederick Mathesius until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Bearian (talk) 21:57, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Mausoleums for heads of state

Crossposting this to WikiProject Death as well, but I feel like there could be a better way to categorize the mausoleums for heads of states. Looking at the See also sections for Washington's Tomb (United States Capitol) and Lenin's Mausoleum, both contain fairly long lists of other, similar tombs or mausoleums, and I feel like creating a dedicated category and list article for this topic could be a better way to organize these related topics. Thanks, --JJonahJackalope (talk) 17:46, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Or you could just trim the SA sections, which are gross breaches of WP:SEEALSO. The idea seems to be to collect "Father of the Nation" tombs, but this is a subjective group (not all heads of state - eg Che Guevara) & I think a category would run into trouble. Perhaps a list too. Most head of state tombs are for royalty, often going back a long way. Johnbod (talk) 17:54, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard § RFC: sortkeys for church articles

  You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Christianity/Noticeboard § RFC: sortkeys for church articles. Elizium23 (talk) 05:10, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Moorish Castle

Please join discussion at Talk:Moorish_Castle#Requested_move_23_January_2021. Vpab15 (talk) 17:05, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Office for Visual Interaction (OVI): Article Review

Hello, architecture community. I'm kindly asking for helping in getting an article approved. I'm fairly new to the contributions process and I would so appreciate if a qualified editor/approver is willing to assist in moving my draft through the process. Would love to get this published. Please see Draft: Office for Visual Interaction (OVI). Thank you for your help and consideration! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedMars GreenMars (talkcontribs) 19:56, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

RedMars GreenMars - I'm afraid I don't work at Articles for Creation anymore, but I've left a few suggestions/comments on the draft's Talkpage. KJP1 (talk) 10:14, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Tour Prisma

Hello guys. Vandalism on Tour Prisma. Please if you can help. Thanks a lot. 92.184.107.141 (talk) 20:12, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sandbox organiser

 

Sandbox Organiser

A place to help you organise your work

Hi all

I've been working on a tool for the past few months that you may find useful. Wikipedia:Sandbox organiser is a set of tools to help you better organise your draft articles and other pages in your userspace. It also includes areas to keep your to do lists, bookmarks, list of tools. You can customise your sandbox organiser to add new features and sections. Once created you can access it simply by clicking the sandbox link at the top of the page. You can create and then customise your own sandbox organiser just by clicking the button on the page. All ideas for improvements and other versions would be really appreciated.

Huge thanks to PrimeHunter and NavinoEvans for their work on the technical parts, without them it wouldn't have happened.

John Cummings (talk) 10:54, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

FAR of St. Michael's Golden-Domed Monastery

I have nominated St. Michael's Golden-Domed Monastery for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Z1720 (talk) 02:59, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Return to the project page "WikiProject Architecture/Archive 13".