Wikipedia:Peer review/Elevator/archive1

Elevator[edit]

A long article which is quite impressive in its coverage. Some referencing and tightening could put it on the fast track to FA status. - Roy Boy ⁸⁰⁰ 16:07, 24 July 2006 (UTC)\[reply]

You can start by turing the list in the "Types of elevator hoist mechanisms" (more specifically the "Hydraulic type") section into a prosaic paragraph. Other sections such as the "Controls in early elevators" and "The elevator algorithm" can also be improved in the same way. The lists at the end of the article sould be moved to their own article along with most of the larger sections to comply with WP:SUMMARY. The lead needs to be expanded to comply with WP:LEAD. Tarret 12:59, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, AZ _t 01:47, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A few things I notice, that in my view can be improved as it heads towards FA candidacy:

Lead is too short, as Tarret mentioned.
Needs footnotes, at approximately 1 per paragraph.
Some 55 items are on the table of contents, this could be reduced to a fraction of this. I suggest merging many sections, or using ;heading for many of the sub headings.
Paragraphs are often short and choppy, often they are one sentance long or bulleted items. These can be merged and expanded into full paragraphs.

Apart from these concerns, it is a very informative article with good use of illustrations. Best of luck. DVD+ R/W 05:26, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good article - A few points though.

Support all of the above comments, particularly regarding lead length and TOC length.
"A special type of elevator is the paternoster, a constantly moving chain of boxes. A similar concept moves only a small platform, which the rider mounts while using a handhold and was once seen in multi-story industrial plants." If you read the article on Paternosters instances are given (particularly in Europe) of their use in many public buildings, universities and office buildings (See IG Farben Building).
I remember watching a documentary some years back about Norman Foster's Tokyo Millenium Tower proposals[1]. Central to his concept was the proposed use of "maglev" elevators (I think) to overcome the height 'limit' and speed restrictions of cable supported elevators (presumably due to cable flex and speed)[2]. No mention is given that I can see, of the design limits of Traction elevators or the "maglev" elevators (unless they come under the "climbing electric elevator" section). One approach is to provide 'transit floors' where people get out of one elevator and into another serving higher floors[3]. This needs more research and a discussion about how elevator design limits the height and economic viability of skyscrapers. --Mcginnly | Natter 12:25, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What about a mention of the Space elevator? [4] --Mcginnly | Natter 13:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]