Talk:Open-source architecture

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

Architecture Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Open (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Open, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OpenWikipedia:WikiProject OpenTemplate:WikiProject OpenOpen

This entry is speculative and is not based on research. It needs to be rewritten. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.64.209.229 (talk) 13:43, 3 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

David Pescovitz (2011-06-21). "Open Source Architecture". BoingBoing. Archived from the original on 2011-06-21. Retrieved 2011-06-21.

OR

This article is WP:OR per this page.--217.157.165.109 (talk) 20:27, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mirror

This page started out as a mirror of the following:

http://www.domusweb.it/en/op-ed/open-source-architecture-osarc-/

There is no copyright violation, because the original is an an open-source document, but it doesn't come close to being encyclopedic. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what we should do about this? --Guy Macon (talk) 08:55, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also see: http://boingboing.net/2011/06/21/open-source-architec.html --Guy Macon (talk) 09:00, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've attempted to improve some of the original concerns for this page; inline citations, references from primary sources, neutral encyclopedic tone and updated content from recent developments in the field with appropriate citations. I hope this edit leads to a higher rating for the page as well as remove some of the concerns ArchitectPrime (talk) 01:31, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for working on it. Go ahead and remove some of the concern tags if/when you think you've addressed them well enough. Dicklyon (talk) 03:27, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]