Talk:Park Row Building

message: User:Emerson7 is undoing some layout choices I made without discussing them here, despite my request that he do so.  He was Bold, I Reverted, now it's time to Discuss, not for him to continue to reinsert his changes.
*Emerson7 added an image of the church the bulding was based on, which is a good addition to the article, but he put it on the right side of the article, which means that it gets pushed down by the infobox to a place which bears no relationship to the part of the article where the church is discussed.  I put it on the left, so it will be near that place.
*I also swapped the image to a slightly cropped version, which I lightened so that it was better visible in the article. Emerson7's reverts keep removing the easier-to-see adjusted image for the harder-to-see adjusted image.
File:VicenteFora-IPPAR.jpeg|Emerson7's original image
File:VicenteFora-IPPAR crop.jpeg|My adjusted image
*Finally, there's a gallery of four images in the article.  Unformatted, the images are too small to have any real impact (especially #2 and #4), and anyone who wants to actually see what the images show needs to click through the images. We should never force our readers to click through to get the value of an image, we should always have images at the size that best best presents them to the reader.  For this reason, I formatted the sizes of the images.  Rather than discuss the specific of the formatting – which I am more than happy to do – Emerson7 is just removing the formatting, which does not improve the article.
 
File:15ParkRowTower.jpg|Park Row Building - Tower
File:Park_Row_Building_1912_New_York_City crop.jpg|Early image of Park Row Building
File:15_Park_Row_3.JPG|Front of building
File:15_Park_Row_2.JPG|Building as seen from City Hall Park
 
File:15ParkRowTower.jpg|Park Row Building - Tower
File:Park_Row_Building_1912_New_York_City crop.jpg|Early image of Park Row Building
File:15_Park_Row_3.JPG|Front of building
File:15_Park_Row_2.JPG|Building as seen from City Hall Park
We should always strive to make our articles are good as they can be, and deleting stuff that improves an article, simply because "the MoS says so..." is not a helpful choice -- doing so without discussion is not the way things are done here.  Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:56, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Emerson7 has not edited since the conflict over the article layout ended temporarily, so he has not commented here as of yet.  Even if he had, though, the consensus here, with the input so far plus his (presumed) objections, would be that the adjusted image & formatted gallery are better choices.  Given this is the case, I've restored that layout until such time as more input changes the consensus. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:02, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.--Epeefleche (talk) 02:34, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Undiscussed deletions by editor 

message: In the yellow template it reads that the Park Row building was the tallest building of the world until 1901 - that is not correct. The article History of the tallest buildings in the world clearly states that "From 1300 until 1901, the world's tallest building was always a church or cathedral" so actually the tallest building preceding Philadelphia City Hall is the Ulm Minster in Germany. The whole series of preceding "Tallest Buildings of the world" seems to ignore churches and such as buildings??? --Estormiz (talk) 17:29, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see a problem. This article says the Park Row building was the "tallest office building in the world," not the tallest building overall. --Orlady (talk) 18:19, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I mean the yellow infobox in the end of the article --Estormiz (talk) 05:16, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah... As a temporary measure, I added "habitable" to the heading, since that's the theme of the buildings before and after, then I hid the box, since the whole matter is uncertain. More research is needed -- I have a hunch that it all boils down to how one defines terms like "habitable" and "building." --Orlady (talk) 14:41, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I deleted the infoboxes in articles of preceding "tallest buildings". The last one was Equitable Life Building (New York City) with 7 floors only so I think its reputation as even tallest habitable building is more than uncertain. --Estormiz (talk) 16:16, 2 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tallest building in the world?? 

message: The symmetrical front facade is layered as it rises. The two 3-story towers are capped with copper-clad domes. There are four caryatids and 16 figures.  Really? So where are they? And the flagpoles?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.175.191.46 (talk) 14:41, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Look at this image under full resolution.  You'll see the caryatids between the 3rd and 4th floors, while the towers, domes and figures are at the top. Beyond My Ken (talk) 20:37, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

text: What makes you think they are "long gone"? I pointed you to an older photo because it had the best resolution to show the features you asked about, but that doesn't mean they are not there.  Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:36, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

text: The caryatids are there, the figures are there, the domes are there, the only thing not there are the flagpoles, which are not even mentioned in the article.  Please watch your tone, this is a cooperative collegial project where we assume good faith of other editors and practice civility. Beyond My Ken (talk) 18:25, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://s-media.nyc.gov/agencies/lpc/lp/2024.pdf. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  epicgenius (talk) 14:10, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed