Talk:Double-skin facade
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
[Untitled]
editGreetings; my name is Christopher James Botham, and I would like to inquire about posting a link to my website on your 'Double-skin Facade' page; the site is called The World Architecture Map (WAM), and the link follows:
Architecture tagged with ‘Double-skin Façade’ at The World Architecture Map (WAM) database
I am aware that as the site owner, I am unable to add links on Wikipedia myself; the site is free to use and there is no sign-in or membership needed, it's just a great resource for architectural information, so I think it would make a good addition to the page. Christopher Botham (talk) 02:13, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Interwikies
editI suppose all the interwikies are wrong, they should be applied to a some kind of ventilated wall, not sure about the term. AndreyPutilov (talk) 16:45, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Double-skin facade. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20091213045144/http://www.iea-shc.org:80/task34/subtask/index.html to http://www.iea-shc.org/task34/subtask/index.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:32, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Double-skin facade. 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:
- Added
{{dead link}}
tag to http://www.ashrae.org/doclib/20071009_emergingtechnologies.pdf - Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130607042604/http://www.alueurope.eu/publications-building/ to http://www.alueurope.eu/publications-building/
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) 07:01, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
"reviews of the lit" section seems distracting
editit just seems like filler to keep this from being a stub. i am just going to remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.88.55.120 (talk) 02:55, 10 October 2021 (UTC)