Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:44, 31 October 2006

Architecture Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Why isnt the Sears Tower listed? POlsen 17:24, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Trump

The list's name says "2004," yet Trump is scheduled to be complted in 2007. IF we're going to include Trump, then why not in parentheses? Kdammers 07:57, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Proposed

I had to move the proposed structures out of the table (Misplaced Pages is not a crystal ball). Not only does it impede the utility of the table for current rankings, it's potentially wrong. Many things could happen -- construction accidents, financing collapses, terrorism, a steel shortage. That's not even counting new projects that could come to light in the next four years. So proposed/abuilding stuff should be handled separately (I'm not even sure about the table).--Dhartung | Talk 10:42, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Metres

I think that the building's height should be listed in metres as well as feet. It would be easy to convert the heights so no need to look each building up

Done. The data comes from Emporis, so it is more accurate than a simple conversion. Here on Misplaced Pages all heights are rounded to the nearest foot, but if a height is between integers it might round to a different meter than if the rounded number were converted; by recording the data from Emporis (which is more precise than feet or meters) the meter heights will be rounded to the correct integer. Montalto 07:36, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Goal to have a Page & Pic of each building

I know this sounds obvious, but I think it should be our objective to try and have well written (and brief) descriptions of the 50 tallest, and also quality images for each as well. After that we can move to some of the tallest in the suburbs, and hopefully a few people will have pictures of those.

If anyone is willing to help me, that would be great.

After all of that is completed then I'll probably focus my attention on smaller historic/landmark buildings across the city. --spyguy 23:43, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

chronology

After hearing all the fanfare about this weekend's opening of the LaSalle Bank Theatre and being reminded that it was once Chicago's tallest building, we should develop a chronology of the tallest buildings in Chicago.

I like the idea and will try to help. It would be cool to have some pictures of each building too. --spyguy 17:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I think my list is complete with correct info. Does anyone know a specific address for the Masonic Temple? Anyway, I don't think LaSalle Bank Theatre was ever the tallest in Chicago, but I'll check into it. --spyguy 02:55, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Great Job.TonyTheTiger 15:48, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

R. R. Donnelley Building

77 West Wacker Drive is the official name of this building as of May, 2005. R. R. Donnelley moved their corporate headquarters from the building at that time and lost their naming rights. The signs on the front of the building at sidewalk level do NOT read R. R. Donnelley anymore, but simply the street address of 77 West Wacker Drive. I worked for R. R. Donnelley for a number of years and was there when they moved. TheQuandry 20:27, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

• Unassessed Architecture articles
• Unknown-importance Architecture articles