Feedback your views
We'd love to hear what you think about Designing Buildings Wiki so we can make it better.
Do you like the design? Do you like the way it works? Do you find it helpful? Is there anything missing? Is there anything else you wish it could do? We really do want to know.
To tell us your views, you can either:
- Click 'Discussion' above and then and add your thoughts to the Discussion page.
- Click 'Submit Comment' below and send us your ideas.
- Email info@designingbuildings.co.uk.
To report abuse, click 'Report abuse' in Site info / tools.
Featured articles and news
Not buildings. Happy holiday from DB.
Future Homes Standard: Industry calls for more ambition
As the Government FHS consultation finally closes.
Improving government projects with data and AI
Enabling better outcomes, efficient modern delivery and influential leadership on government projects.
BSRIA Living Laboratory Innovation Challenge
Final days for submission, closing March 29.
Windows, their frames, forms, factors and functions.
The hidden subtleties of U-Value calculations
Different contexts and what to include as variables.
A brief run down with related articles.
Electrical sector calls for safer public EV charge points
Serious concerns about electrical safety in the public domain.
Building Blocks manifesto presented to parliament
Architects Declare call in for support of five critical policies.
The four elements of project management with APM
Analysis, expectations, collaborative communication and partnerships.
City of London launches Heritage Building Retrofit Toolkit
Empowering owners to initiate necessary adaptations.
Guidance on RAAC in listed buildings
Published by Purcell, endorsed by IHBC, SPAB and C20.
Learning from the past.
Reluctance to hire people with criminal convictions revealed
Employing People with Criminal Convictions Report.
Tackling unconscious bias; Women's History Month
Personal reflections, as the last week of March approaches.
Comments
[edit] Just click on 'Add a comment' and type your thoughts below
Your website looks good, but I think a spell checker may be useful. (There is a spell checker in the text editor - incorrect spellings are underlined in red - DBW)
Not clear whether I can be self promotional in my 'page about me'. (Yes you can - just not in your articles - DBW)
The orange hyperlinks make the text difficult to read. (This has been changed - DBW)
I like the way that you keep articles factual but allow them to have author's names in and link to a promotional page, it seems a very clever way of allowing ownership of ideas within a professional forum.
Hats off to you - this is just the kind of initiative the industry needs. So many professionals I work with (I include myself in this) find they need specialist information which impacts on their work but is outside their specific area - and until now there's been nowhere to find it. I expect your site will become the secret reference for every professional before long!