Talk:Attenborough Building

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skyscrapers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skyscrapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to skyscrapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkyscrapersWikipedia:WikiProject SkyscrapersTemplate:WikiProject SkyscrapersSkyscraper
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion on 12 September 2013. The result of the discussion was keep.

Untitled

It's not anywhere near the tallest: although its top might have the highest altitude, given the hill. It's 50 something metres compared to the 80 something metres of Cardinal Telephone Exchange and St George's Tower. Much of the rest was obviously nonsense and that which wasn't was unreliable considering lack of sourcing and that the same person who added the nonsense added it. So nuked it all. Morwen - Talk 12:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regardless, might as well leave it for others to rip apart and add to. Take out what you want, but leave the bulk of it to be cited by others. Red1 06:55, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paternoster height

Does anyone have a reference for it being the tallest in the UK? What about the one in Sheffield? I've removed it for the moment. JRawle (Talk) 23:17, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Attenborough Building. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://arupassociates.com/Projects/AA_Attenborough.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.archiana.com/le_developmentplan/Chapter03/CentralCampus.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051123213724/http://www.le.ac.uk:80/avs/avsrooms/attenborough.html to http://www.le.ac.uk/avs/avsrooms/attenborough.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 03:03, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]