Talk:Mechanical floor

Mechanical floor was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
May 13, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed

Well written and comprehensive article, so I nominated it as a good article Rpvdk 19:28, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am very new here, so please let me know if I need to be doing anything differently/better.

I would like to suggest, or possibly edit myself, this article to include some mention of the term interstitial. The article reads in the very first paragraph ""Mechanical" is the most commonly-used term, but words such as utility, technical, service, and plant are also used." This is where I think there could be some mention of the term interstitial as being used too. I am familiar with this as I work at a consulting engineering firm and have taken part in designing mechanical HVAC systems for various types of buildings. One building in particular had an interstitial space that was dedicated to mechanical equipment.

Thank you, --Eric Jack Nash 02:00, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eric! Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm replying late so this may be old news to you, anyway, we encourage you to make changes like the one you mentionned. Unless the change is major or controversial, it's perfectly fine to put it in the article directly; others will then improve on it if need be. If you want to explain a change, you can put a summary in the Edit summary field, or a longer explantion in the talk page like you did. Lawrence Lavigne 22:37, August 29, 2005 (UTC)

GA Failed

This article failed due to lack of references. Tarret 13:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Increases in building sizes

I am curious: it says in the article, quoting: "In some legislations they have been excluded from maximum floor area calculations, leading to significant increases in building sizes...", but shouldn't it be the opposite, i.e. if the floors have been excluded wouldn't this leade to decreases in building sizes, and reversed, if the floors have been included wouldn't this leade to increases in building sizes??

regards Wayfarer-Talk | on December 12, 2006

Removed self-referential sentence

I removed the following from the article:

...however this article focuses on the cases of the best-known, tallest skyscrapers with significant structural, mechanical and aesthetics concerns.

The manual of style suggests that we not refer to "this article" in any section. I'll try to reword it without making the self-referential comment. --Rkitko 08:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rating for WP:Architecture

I just rated the article as start class for the project. In order to be elevated to B class and above, it should have references, preferably inline citations. Altairisfar _talk 23:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mechanical floor. 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:

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) 23:16, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]