![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I know it's always good to have a list of every kind so people can reference it, but is something like this necessary as a stand-alone page and not merged into List of tallest buildings in the world? And whether it is or not, shouldn't we include projects under construction with over 100 floors, like the Burj Dubai, the Chicago Spire, the Freedom Tower, etc? Jimbo 14:01, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Is the bottom of the page supposed to be listing only builings under construction? Many of these skyscrapers are still only proprosed, and the others are approved, but not under construction. Should they therefore be listed under this category? Raime 01:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
What evidence is there that the Noida Tower is under construction? It is still considered to only to a "Vision" on Emporis, and unless a reliable article can be cited, it should certainly not be listed as "under construction", or even be on this page for the time being. Raime 01:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a democracy and changes should be based on general consensus. There seems to be a debate over the placement of unfinished buildings in the first catagory. My intent of the first catagory was to list buildings which have poured or erected 100 floors whether they are done or not. I think the confusion has arised over the title 'completed buildings.' I feel that the title should actually be changed to include the definition of Burj Dubai. The second one exists to show which buildings are imminently (over the next few years) ready to appear in the first catagory. mKleid 20:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Even though the top floor will be numbered 102, the actual floor count is 82 (the numbering's starting at 20). With that said, does that even make it eligible for this list? What parameters are we gonna set for this? I, for one, think the Freedom Tower needs to go; if the BoA Tower started its numbering at 80, it too could have one of the top spots on this list...even at a whopping 386ft! Eagles Fan In Tampa (formerly Jimbo) 20:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
That settles it. I'll remove it. Wikipedia should not propagate this falsehood. 82 it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB90:2E0D:1C25:1745:D970:DD49:704B ( talk) 00:35, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Was I just brain-dead for about 4 days, or was there absolutely no talk or discussion about even suggesting merging this article in with the List of Tallest??? I know it was briefly mentioned (by myself, in fact) about 3 months ago, but this isn't just one of those be bold things that everyone's talking about, you know! Something like this takes planning and cooperation on all accounts; hell, if I just merged every article I saw that could be integrated with another, I'd be banned from ever using this site for all the merges! If no one objects, I'm moving it back to its own article until we can get a concensus of whether to move it or not. You've got 72 hours from this point to make your case. Eagles Fan In Tampa (formerly Jimbo) 12:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I moved the page because I see know reason for it to have its own page when it could be just a subsection of this one. The burden of proof is for you to prove that it deserves its own page. If we waited to build consensus for every action on Wikipedia then nothing would get done.
Note: I even left the article intact so it could be discussed on how to incorporate it.
--
Jorfer 20:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was against merging lists. Eagles Fan In Tampa (formerly Jimbo) 12:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Please vote either Support or Against as to merge this article with List of tallest buildings in the world Support means merge it, Against means leave as-is.
What does C and P mean for floors? JustN5:12 21:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Acording to this source, the Burj Dubai is now at the 124th floor, making it the building with the highest floor count in the world. 218.186.9.1 06:15, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
I just reformated table little bit and made some concept changes. 1) i added Burj to first table, because it actually has 100+ floors and its completed floors are comparable to Ryugyong Hotel status. To reflect better status of first table, i deleted completed building headline (because now that means completed floors). 2) i deleted ranks, because number of building is still low and also we need not discuss about ranks of UC, destroyed or unfinished. If someone oppose first or second change, please write it down. If there will be consensus against them, i will revert these changes. -- Jklamo 02:28, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that is still only proposed, not under construction. Unless someone disagrees, I'll remove it from the list. Raime 06:41, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I am for including Shanghai World Financial Center in a first table. Building is topped out and it is comparable to Ryugyong Hotel status. Share your opinions -- Jklamo 03:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
"Standing" is an odd word to use (highly post 9/11 referential). How about "completed". Therefore assuming if not destroyed/demolition it is indeed standing. Artlondon 18:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
should this not be a list of buildings as stand (ie not destroyed/in construction). Say, a list of wealthiest people/countries would be at a given time not estimated. Or, the number of deaths in an armed conflict. Artlondon ( talk) 15:34, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
The image File:Shanghai Center Dragon.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Does this need to be changed? Sears Tower was known as the Sears Tower until very recently in 2009 (March), the same year as when the Burj Dubai will open (in December). It's been known as the Sears Tower for most of its span as the tallest tower, so does this need to be decided? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tk TommyKim ( talk • contribs) 06:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
How about adding "Formerly Sears Tower" in parentheses?-- 24.244.142.170 ( talk) 01:16, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Can we get a better main photo than what is there now? It's pathetic quality photo (out of focus or blury due to motion, dust on the sensor, noisy sky). I am sure there are better photos of the building than this pathetic quality 98.156.84.149 ( talk) 19:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Alright, people have been editing back and forth on this issue for a bit now, but there's been no discussion about it. What are the pros and cons of including the erection progress as indicated by # of floors completed,of towers under construction in this list? What was the original justification for including it on this list, when as far as I'm aware, no other list of buildings includes that information? Scalzi+ | ( Talk | contribs) 16:46, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Where is Pingan International Finance Centre on the construction list?? -- Extra999 ( Contact me) 17:52, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Canton Tower's article says it is an observation tower but its infobox states it has 108 floors. To list or not? 85.217.36.71 ( talk) 05:25, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
I have spent some time reworking the under construction list using the list creation tool at the CTBUH's database: http://skyscrapercenter.com/ The CTBUH is generally acknowledged to be a reliable source when it comes to skyscrapers. I also created a second list of those buildings which started construction but will now never be completed dues to various factors. I felt this was a useful distinction to make.
In doing this, I came across the JW Marriott International Finance Centre. The building has been revised multiple times, the latest plan seemingly with 102 floors. The CTBUH lists it as on-hold and Emporis (another reliable source) has a lower version of the project on-hold. However, I find some confusing reports that either: a previous 8-storey building was demolished to make way for this project, or that a previous version of this project was demolished to make way for a newer version, or that the current version of this project has been demolished and they have given up completely. Unfortunately, I don't read Chinese, so I have to rely on a Google translation of this news item. For now, I have not listed it, but would like to when I can find out what is going on. Maybe someone who reads Chinese can help me to understand the source better. Astronaut ( talk) 07:18, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Seems very relevant. Anybody can put a student on this or make it an evening project? Thy -- SvenAERTS ( talk) 22:01, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
There are three new American buildings listed in this section which I do not think should be listed: the Old Main Post Office and the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel and Residences in Chicago, and the Peachtree in Atlanta. This section of the article was designed to include only buildings FOR WHICH CONSTRUCTION BEGAN, not buildings that were approved and later abandoned. Will someone remove the three buildings? Amyzex ( talk) 19:32, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
This must be out of date, Sky City One: changsha in China was completed in 2014 and is 838M / 2749FT, taller than anything mentioned in this article, and is not even mentioned according to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGNXcX8MvGA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.151.3 ( talk) 06:50, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Shouldn't Central Park Tower be on this list? Like One World Trade Center its top floor is numbered over 100 despite the fact it will actually have less than 100 floors. Amyzex ( talk) 21:44, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't think One WTC should be included on this page, its top floor may be the "104th floor", but the building doesn't actually have 104 floors. Similarly, 118 is not the actual number of floors for the Hong Kong ICC, only the number assigned to the top floor.
I thought I should probably discuss this here before making a big change like that?
Kestreltail ( talk) 15:58, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
I agree, it's a bit silly to list buildings not under their actual number of floors but under the number of the top floor. 77.56.210.240 ( talk) 23:04, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
Why do we have a list of buildings with 100 Floors or more? 156.34.79.134 ( talk) 11:47, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
Building in the future 1st is nothing I'm tired by 86.3.255.238 ( talk) 17:49, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Only the world's List of tallest buildings article is respectably accurate when it comes to floor counts. Buildings like the Wanda Vista Tower ( St. Regis Chicago) have about 90 floors, not 100 or 101. Also the Ryugyong Hotel clearly has less than 100/105 floors. Construction shell photos, as it stood uncompleted for many years, show that it might not even have 90 floors. The glazing has more than one expansion joint, where the windows split, per floor, as do some other buildings giving an illusion of more floors as well. This is the same but opposite trick Las Vegas did to make one of their buildings look smaller, with two storey windows. There's a few dozen buildings at least with highly inflated floor counts, skipping over 10 floors in some cases, mostly supertalls. B137 ( talk) 01:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
What about Rise Tower with its 678 floors? - Shiftchange ( talk) 05:52, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
![]() | This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I know it's always good to have a list of every kind so people can reference it, but is something like this necessary as a stand-alone page and not merged into List of tallest buildings in the world? And whether it is or not, shouldn't we include projects under construction with over 100 floors, like the Burj Dubai, the Chicago Spire, the Freedom Tower, etc? Jimbo 14:01, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
Is the bottom of the page supposed to be listing only builings under construction? Many of these skyscrapers are still only proprosed, and the others are approved, but not under construction. Should they therefore be listed under this category? Raime 01:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
What evidence is there that the Noida Tower is under construction? It is still considered to only to a "Vision" on Emporis, and unless a reliable article can be cited, it should certainly not be listed as "under construction", or even be on this page for the time being. Raime 01:19, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is a democracy and changes should be based on general consensus. There seems to be a debate over the placement of unfinished buildings in the first catagory. My intent of the first catagory was to list buildings which have poured or erected 100 floors whether they are done or not. I think the confusion has arised over the title 'completed buildings.' I feel that the title should actually be changed to include the definition of Burj Dubai. The second one exists to show which buildings are imminently (over the next few years) ready to appear in the first catagory. mKleid 20:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Even though the top floor will be numbered 102, the actual floor count is 82 (the numbering's starting at 20). With that said, does that even make it eligible for this list? What parameters are we gonna set for this? I, for one, think the Freedom Tower needs to go; if the BoA Tower started its numbering at 80, it too could have one of the top spots on this list...even at a whopping 386ft! Eagles Fan In Tampa (formerly Jimbo) 20:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
That settles it. I'll remove it. Wikipedia should not propagate this falsehood. 82 it is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:FB90:2E0D:1C25:1745:D970:DD49:704B ( talk) 00:35, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Was I just brain-dead for about 4 days, or was there absolutely no talk or discussion about even suggesting merging this article in with the List of Tallest??? I know it was briefly mentioned (by myself, in fact) about 3 months ago, but this isn't just one of those be bold things that everyone's talking about, you know! Something like this takes planning and cooperation on all accounts; hell, if I just merged every article I saw that could be integrated with another, I'd be banned from ever using this site for all the merges! If no one objects, I'm moving it back to its own article until we can get a concensus of whether to move it or not. You've got 72 hours from this point to make your case. Eagles Fan In Tampa (formerly Jimbo) 12:25, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I moved the page because I see know reason for it to have its own page when it could be just a subsection of this one. The burden of proof is for you to prove that it deserves its own page. If we waited to build consensus for every action on Wikipedia then nothing would get done.
Note: I even left the article intact so it could be discussed on how to incorporate it.
--
Jorfer 20:59, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
The result of the debate was against merging lists. Eagles Fan In Tampa (formerly Jimbo) 12:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Please vote either Support or Against as to merge this article with List of tallest buildings in the world Support means merge it, Against means leave as-is.
What does C and P mean for floors? JustN5:12 21:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
Acording to this source, the Burj Dubai is now at the 124th floor, making it the building with the highest floor count in the world. 218.186.9.1 06:15, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
I just reformated table little bit and made some concept changes. 1) i added Burj to first table, because it actually has 100+ floors and its completed floors are comparable to Ryugyong Hotel status. To reflect better status of first table, i deleted completed building headline (because now that means completed floors). 2) i deleted ranks, because number of building is still low and also we need not discuss about ranks of UC, destroyed or unfinished. If someone oppose first or second change, please write it down. If there will be consensus against them, i will revert these changes. -- Jklamo 02:28, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that is still only proposed, not under construction. Unless someone disagrees, I'll remove it from the list. Raime 06:41, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
I am for including Shanghai World Financial Center in a first table. Building is topped out and it is comparable to Ryugyong Hotel status. Share your opinions -- Jklamo 03:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
"Standing" is an odd word to use (highly post 9/11 referential). How about "completed". Therefore assuming if not destroyed/demolition it is indeed standing. Artlondon 18:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
should this not be a list of buildings as stand (ie not destroyed/in construction). Say, a list of wealthiest people/countries would be at a given time not estimated. Or, the number of deaths in an armed conflict. Artlondon ( talk) 15:34, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
The image File:Shanghai Center Dragon.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:18, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
Does this need to be changed? Sears Tower was known as the Sears Tower until very recently in 2009 (March), the same year as when the Burj Dubai will open (in December). It's been known as the Sears Tower for most of its span as the tallest tower, so does this need to be decided? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tk TommyKim ( talk • contribs) 06:42, 27 August 2009 (UTC)
How about adding "Formerly Sears Tower" in parentheses?-- 24.244.142.170 ( talk) 01:16, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Can we get a better main photo than what is there now? It's pathetic quality photo (out of focus or blury due to motion, dust on the sensor, noisy sky). I am sure there are better photos of the building than this pathetic quality 98.156.84.149 ( talk) 19:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Alright, people have been editing back and forth on this issue for a bit now, but there's been no discussion about it. What are the pros and cons of including the erection progress as indicated by # of floors completed,of towers under construction in this list? What was the original justification for including it on this list, when as far as I'm aware, no other list of buildings includes that information? Scalzi+ | ( Talk | contribs) 16:46, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Where is Pingan International Finance Centre on the construction list?? -- Extra999 ( Contact me) 17:52, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
Canton Tower's article says it is an observation tower but its infobox states it has 108 floors. To list or not? 85.217.36.71 ( talk) 05:25, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
I have spent some time reworking the under construction list using the list creation tool at the CTBUH's database: http://skyscrapercenter.com/ The CTBUH is generally acknowledged to be a reliable source when it comes to skyscrapers. I also created a second list of those buildings which started construction but will now never be completed dues to various factors. I felt this was a useful distinction to make.
In doing this, I came across the JW Marriott International Finance Centre. The building has been revised multiple times, the latest plan seemingly with 102 floors. The CTBUH lists it as on-hold and Emporis (another reliable source) has a lower version of the project on-hold. However, I find some confusing reports that either: a previous 8-storey building was demolished to make way for this project, or that a previous version of this project was demolished to make way for a newer version, or that the current version of this project has been demolished and they have given up completely. Unfortunately, I don't read Chinese, so I have to rely on a Google translation of this news item. For now, I have not listed it, but would like to when I can find out what is going on. Maybe someone who reads Chinese can help me to understand the source better. Astronaut ( talk) 07:18, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
Seems very relevant. Anybody can put a student on this or make it an evening project? Thy -- SvenAERTS ( talk) 22:01, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
There are three new American buildings listed in this section which I do not think should be listed: the Old Main Post Office and the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel and Residences in Chicago, and the Peachtree in Atlanta. This section of the article was designed to include only buildings FOR WHICH CONSTRUCTION BEGAN, not buildings that were approved and later abandoned. Will someone remove the three buildings? Amyzex ( talk) 19:32, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
This must be out of date, Sky City One: changsha in China was completed in 2014 and is 838M / 2749FT, taller than anything mentioned in this article, and is not even mentioned according to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGNXcX8MvGA — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.151.3 ( talk) 06:50, 20 November 2015 (UTC)
Shouldn't Central Park Tower be on this list? Like One World Trade Center its top floor is numbered over 100 despite the fact it will actually have less than 100 floors. Amyzex ( talk) 21:44, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't think One WTC should be included on this page, its top floor may be the "104th floor", but the building doesn't actually have 104 floors. Similarly, 118 is not the actual number of floors for the Hong Kong ICC, only the number assigned to the top floor.
I thought I should probably discuss this here before making a big change like that?
Kestreltail ( talk) 15:58, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
I agree, it's a bit silly to list buildings not under their actual number of floors but under the number of the top floor. 77.56.210.240 ( talk) 23:04, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
Why do we have a list of buildings with 100 Floors or more? 156.34.79.134 ( talk) 11:47, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
Building in the future 1st is nothing I'm tired by 86.3.255.238 ( talk) 17:49, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Only the world's List of tallest buildings article is respectably accurate when it comes to floor counts. Buildings like the Wanda Vista Tower ( St. Regis Chicago) have about 90 floors, not 100 or 101. Also the Ryugyong Hotel clearly has less than 100/105 floors. Construction shell photos, as it stood uncompleted for many years, show that it might not even have 90 floors. The glazing has more than one expansion joint, where the windows split, per floor, as do some other buildings giving an illusion of more floors as well. This is the same but opposite trick Las Vegas did to make one of their buildings look smaller, with two storey windows. There's a few dozen buildings at least with highly inflated floor counts, skipping over 10 floors in some cases, mostly supertalls. B137 ( talk) 01:45, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
What about Rise Tower with its 678 floors? - Shiftchange ( talk) 05:52, 25 January 2024 (UTC)