Jump to content

Talk:Fazlur Rahman Khan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Fazlur Khan)

Image:Fazlur Khan Stamp Bangladesh.jpg

[edit]

User:Ragib's edit summary argument as to why a fair use stamp image can be used to illustrate the subject depicted on the stamp:

well, a lot of precedent exists from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Fair_use_stamp_images , so unless all of them have been removed, the use of the image should be ok

This is a specious argument. You're basically saying, "Everyone else does it, so it's OK". If every editor made the same argument, then none of the improperly used stamp images would get removed. Even if there are (many) other cases, it still doesn't make it right here. Read {{stamp}} carefully -- it says that stamp images can only be used to discuss the stamp itself. As the saying goes, a journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step. howcheng {chat} 19:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for the explanation. I found that most of the images on Category:Fair_use_stamp_images are used in the articles on the biography-page of the person depicted. These should all be removed. --Ragib 19:57, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An Architect Is Not the Same As An Engineer

[edit]

This article is wildly inaccurate. An architect is not the same as an engineer. He may have designed structural components of the Sears Tower and John Hancock Tower but did not design the buildings themselves. Americasroof (talk) 17:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In response to Americasroof, I think one should have a sound knowledge-base in structural engineering and structural architecture and the relationship between them in the context of modern building science, before judging Fazlur Rahman Khan's architectural contribution to the building of Sear's tower. SOM architect Bruce Graham and SOM engineer Fazlur Khan worked together as a structural design team and without the structural engineering expertise, architectural design remains a dream. This is specially true when we are talking about a relatively new theory being tried out in structural engineering field, as implemented in building of Sear's Tower. The design used in this construction was directly influenced by Fazlur Khan's research and innovation. Beside, who said that a structural engineer can not have any architectural knowledge?! Infact, from the experience of being a civil engineer's son and a civil engineering student myself, I have met enough structural engineers who are actively involved in such design works that would generally be considered an architectural specialty. Fazlur Khan was a strcutural engineer first and foremost, but that must not make us blind in appreciating his excellent grasp in structural architecture. This interview of the main architect of the Sear's tower, Bruce Graham, who worked closely with Faz Khan, may shine some light here: http://www.som.com/content.cfm/bruce_graham_interview
Also, in the introduction section for John Hancock Center, SOM writes: "The world’s first mixed-use high-rise, the John Hancock Center is an architectural icon mirroring the collaboration between architect Bruce Graham and structural partner Fazlur Khan. The multidisciplinary nature of the design remains an archetype for the collaborative ideal that continues to make SOM a leader in the spectrum of design disciplines."John Hancock Center—Preceding unsigned comment added by Gromell (talk • contribs) 10:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is not any way demeaning to the important role he played in John Hancock in designing the steel framework. The source you just cited refers to calls him a partner to the achitect -- not the architect himself. Emporis calls him an engineer. http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=building&lng=3&id=116876 An architect designs the overall look of a building. The engineer makes it happen. Americasroof (talk) 11:10, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Americasroof, you are looking at a complex network of inter-related disciplines as completely separate disciplines. When somebody designs something like a two story house, yes you might be right. However, when we are talking about designing something like Willis(Sears) tower at a time when nothing like this existed, it is nowhere near as simple as you are perceiving it to be. Even a twenty story office building requires architects to work with structural engineers. In some cases structural engineers have little contribution, in some cases they have larger contribution. In the case of Fazlur Rahman Khan, the architect used designs which were pioneered by Fazlur Rahman Khan's research. And in highly specialized level of structural engineering, engineers often posses no less expertise on structural architecture than any good architect. Not all engineers have similar grasp in their field. Remember, we are talking about someone who completed three graduate and post graduate degrees, namely: MSc in Structural engineering, MSc in Mathematical Mechanics and a PhD in Structural Engineering from arguably the best graduate program in Civil Engineering in the USA (UIUC) within the span of 3 years. And if you want me to give any example of his solo architectural contribution, then I can name so many of them. One of the wonder he designed was the revolutionary roof of the Haj terminal in the Jeddah International Airport, Saudi Arabia. Emporis calls him an engineer because he was an engineer, which does not imply he had no contribution to the architectural side of his projects and neither can it prove his architectural inventions were false. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.254.222.234 (talk) 01:07, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Americasroof, watch 4:40 onward http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aswJTvUpGFY

Criticism

[edit]

This article is glowing with praise for Kahn. While I no opinion on him myself either way, I do believe some critique should be present. I may attempt this, though I feel it is necessary to declare my intention. Thanks, TheFireTones 10:28, 19 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism comes when there is criticism. There is something to criticize about everyone. However there might be nothing to criticize someone's particular contribution to a specific field. When someone is writing about Brittney Spears, he might criticize her personal life because she is a celebrity personality and that is something perceived as common in the mainstream media. However Fazlur Khan is not such a personality and his contribution is related to Engineering and Science and to some degree social and cultural contribution. I do not see how one is searching something to criticize here! When somebody says Karl Friedrich Gauss was called "The Prince of Mathematics", it's not an overstatement. Similarly, when someone says Fazlur Khan is considered the "Einstein of structural engineering", that's not an overstatement either. Nobody is trying to glorify him here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.254.222.234 (talk) 00:48, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the "Einstein of structural engineering" violates WP:PEACOCK and should be removed. Why is he like Einstein? Did he also abandon his wife and children? Why not call him the "Bach of structural engineering"? Or the "Shakespeare of structural engineering"? Or the "Babe Ruth of structural engineering"?
I also would not take it for granted that his structural engineering has never been criticized. In engineering, and in the sciences generally, it's a standard and useful practice to subject every new idea to critical examination, even if it's widely accepted at the end. Architecture has tradeoffs, and you can be innovative by choosing one tradeoff over another. So criticism isn't a negative thing, it shows you how ideas develop.
Some people said that the Word Trade Center collapsed is because it had a tubular structure. http://vincentdunn.com/wtc.html I'm not sure that it belongs in this article, but it's an example of design tradoffs.
These are stylistic matters, which don't diminish the man. At some point in a biography, a good editor will say, "Are there any criticisms to include?" --Nbauman (talk)
[edit]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.banglapedia.org/httpdocs/HT/K_0187.HTM. Infringing 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, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that 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. MER-C 04:17, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

how he died not in article

[edit]

how he died?--Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ (talk) 12:30, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Khan's Design Process - Improper Deletion

[edit]

“When thinking design, I put myself in the place of a whole building, feeling every part. In my mind I visualize the stresses and twisting a building undergoes.”

Pleas reinstate.

http://drfazlurrkhan.com/professional-milestones/en-r-constructions-man-of-the-year-issue-february-10-1972/

108.21.13.152 (talk) 04:05, 10 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.21.1.234 (talk) [reply]

I can't see that this was ever in the article, but I've gone ahead and added it. --McGeddon (talk) 16:00, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overciting in lead

[edit]

Nothing should be footnoted in a lead that can be footnoted in the article body, except for contentious/controversial statements. And virtually nothing anywhere should have more than two cites ... there are single things with four or five footnotes here. --Tenebrae (talk) 15:44, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Title

[edit]

This article has been happy on this title for nine years. I see no reason to move it. Google gives 34,700 hits for "Fazlur Khan" and only 20,800 for "Fazlur Rahman Khan". — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 10:24, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The name Fazlur Rahman is Arabic and means bounty of the Merciful One. The name Fazlur on it own would mean bounty of the. Such meaningless name abbreviations and separations do occur in non Arabic-speaking environments, and if they have come to be universally applied in a particular case, wikipedia should follow in accordance with WP:COMMONNAME. In this case, however, looking at the names used in the many reliable sources provided in the article, Fazlur Rahman Khan and Fazlur R. Khan are both used more often than Fazlur Khan, so it beomes preferable to use the correct one. A simple reason for this choice is to stop wikipedia looking ignorant. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 21:13, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed move

[edit]

I propose that the article Fazlur Khan should be renamed Fazlur Rahman Khan, since the latter is correct, allows the name to make sense to those who understand Islamic personal names,, and is at least as well supported by reliable sources. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 00:08, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's been over a week now and nobody has shown any interest. I don't understand why you protected it from move in the first place. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 18:35, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's only protected against moves by non-confirmed editors; this is a direct result of ongoing sockpuppet edit warring. The rename perhaps isn't as controversial as it might appear - RHaworth's disagreement from July was the result of said sockpuppeteer creating a duplicate article at Fazlur Rahman Khan in the mistaken belief that they could write what they liked there and nobody would notice. They didn't give any rationale for the title.
I can't see this article listed at WP:RM. Did you list it per the instructions at Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Requesting_a_single_page_move so that the bot would pick it up? If not, this would explain why it's had no responses. --McGeddon (talk) 19:00, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's protected against my making that move, whatever the reason. I tried and failed to move it as soon as I saw it.
  • "... said sockpuppeteer creating a duplicate article at Fazlur Rahman Khan ..." Thanks for explaining that, which I didn't know, as it doesn't show up anywhere in the history
  • I'll use WP:RM as you suggest. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 21:07, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested Move

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 01:40, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fazlur Khan → Fazlur Rahman Khan – The name Fazlur Rahman is Arabic and means bounty of the Merciful One. The name Fazlur on its own would mean bounty of the. Such meaningless name abbreviations and separations do occur in non Arabic-speaking environments, and if they have come to be universally applied in a particular case, Wikipedia should follow in accordance with WP:COMMONNAME. In this case, however, looking at the names used in the many reliable sources provided in the article, Fazlur Rahman Khan and Fazlur R. Khan are both used more often than Fazlur Khan. The full name would be correct and woould certainly be preferred by those famliar with the form of Arabic names. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 21:29, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Birthplace

[edit]

The article says Kahn was born in Dhaka, Bangladesh in 1929. As Bangladesh did not exist in 1929, would be more accurate to say something like Dhaka, British India (now Bangladesh)? The reference cited does not mention Bangladesh but labels it "then British India". Goldnpuppy (talk) 21:59, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Related; why is his nationality set as Bangladeshi? He left before it gained independence 2601:87:104:6970:6D49:D572:999F:9B03 (talk) 04:32, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 25 February 2016

[edit]

Edit inaccurate information such as references to Bangladesh. Please note the Bangladesh was not formed until 50 years after this person was born.

The correct birthplace is Dhaka, British India The correct ethnicity is Indian

Grubbiz (talk) 14:07, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Most instances refer to it correctly. As for Bangladeshi-American in the lead, that is properly sourced. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:23, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Done
Fazlur Rahman Khan was born 3 April 1929 in Dhaka, East Bengal (now Bangladesh).
@Grubbiz: Thank you for suggesting the change. It's both useful to the reader to know where Dhaka currently is; however, since we're talking about a historic event when we talk about his birth, we need to know where Dhaka (Dacca) was at the time of the event. Note thus that I've linked East Bengal to Bangladesh#British Eastern Bengal. For events after a change of name, the appropriate name (Pakistan, Bangladesh) is then used for events during the times of those names.
@EvergreenFir: Please note that the source currently cited for his place of birth in the article refers to it as Dhaka, Bengal. —C.Fred (talk) 20:27, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@C.Fred: Thanks. I did miss that instance. Saw the one in the infobox was correct and didn't check the biography section. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 20:30, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Fazlur Rahman Khan. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 03:57, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Fazlur Rahman Khan. 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) 08:27, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Standards

[edit]

If "SOM" is shorthand for "Skidmore, Owings & Merrill", so define it at first mention of "Skidmore, Owings & Merrill". It takes too much effort to figure it out as the article is written now. You have to read the entire article, you can't just search for "SOM" and find that the first time it occurs it is preceded by "Skidmore, Owings & Merrill".2604:2000:C682:2D00:ADF5:6982:FA5A:E273 (talk) 05:18, 3 April 2017 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson[reply]

Google Doodle 3 Apr 2017

[edit]

Note that this article may be getting extra attention today because Khan is the subject of the day's Google Doodle. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 08:29, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Constant vandalism --202.134.13.140 (talk) 11:39, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It may need 30/500 protection for the day and next year. 86.22.8.235 (talk) 17:00, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2017

[edit]

Hello,

There is a typo in the caption for this image in the article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fazlur_Rahman_Khan#/media/File:Hancock_tower_2006.jpg


" ... efficient and feasible building very tall skyscrappers could be, ... "

(skyscrappers should be skyscrapers with one p.)

Thank you.

2601:4B:300:7819:61DA:29E7:89CE:6733 (talk) 17:42, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 3 April 2017

[edit]

In the section:

Done EvergreenFir (talk) 19:28, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Outrigger and belt truss

[edit]

Change the word "ude" in the last sentence:

"Later buildings to ude this include Shanghai World Financial Center"

to use:

"Later buildings to use this include Shanghai World Financial Center"

which corrects a misspelling. Rokob (talk) 19:00, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Linking with IIEST Shibpur page

[edit]

Fazlur Rahman Khan attended IIEST Shibpur, which previously known as Bengal Engineering College, Shibpur. But in the education section, on clicking Bengal Engineering College, it redirects to a blank page, not currently existing page of Indian Institute of Engineering Science and Technology, Shibpur. Please correct the hyperlinks ans the name. __Abhipso (talk) 19:12, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Fazlur Rahman Khan. 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) 00:51, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fazlur Rahman Khan. 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) 20:18, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Fazlur_Rahman_Khan&oldid=1194901906"