Talk:22 Bishopsgate

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.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skyscrapers Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skyscrapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to skyscrapers 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.SkyscrapersWikipedia:WikiProject SkyscrapersTemplate:WikiProject SkyscrapersSkyscraper
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Height

Recently it's proposed height was scaled down, meaning that it will be shorter than the Shard London Bridge, the article needs to be changed to reflect this, but I'm afraid I don't know the exact figures. Jamandell (d69) 11:59, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have permission from Union Investments to use an official rendering, but I don't know what image tags/information to use for uploading. Wikipedia seems to delete anything I attempt to upload... Wjfox2005 16:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Will - someone may be deleting your images in preference of his "own" renderings. Chap in question is a known nuisance around here and we're working on a way to deal with him.

I work for the company that rendered this image, www.cityscape3d.com there are copyright issues with this image that i'm persuing within the company, however we should at least be referenced directly on the file attributes, not just through skyscrapernews.com Alastair 10:14, 25th July 2007

Better renders

http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee370/ajaaronjoe/pinnacle3.jpg 86.164.103.135 (talk) 17:47, 11 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was move back to Bishopsgate Tower. Rai-me 18:26, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

22-24 Bishopsgate → Bishopsgate Tower — Move was made without any discussion. Similar moves are also being discussed here, here, and here. —StuffOfInterest (talk) 14:50, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Support - as per nomination. --StuffOfInterest (talk) 14:54, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the name is likely to change and names need standardising accross all building articles relating to skyscrapers in the uk. The postal address seems the most logical way of standardising names as it is not going to change over time.--Lucy-marie (talk) 20:11, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Common name should be used unless a case for using systematic names over common names for buildings of this type is made and agreed. Andrewa (talk) 00:46, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. As per nom. --203.220.171.83 (talk) 11:37, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. See my comments on the Tower 42 and Shard London Bridge talk pages. Wjfox2005 (talk) 21:59, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Rai-me 16:58, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 17:28, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

See User talk:Andrewa/systematic names for some discussion on when and whether systematic names should take precedence over common names. This is another case in point. Andrewa (talk) 21:18, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

On Hold

I know "indefinitely on hold" is usually a stealth cancellation, but if the reason that the building's on hold is to make more space for offices in a redesign, then doesn't that mean its probably getting bigger rather than smaller? Also, Arab development firms aren't known for their restraint, the Burj Khalifa went bankrupt twice, got put on hold three times, and was eventually paid off by the sheikh himself with a loan from Saudi Arabia! I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing happens to this building, and it not only gets done anyway but gets done even bigger, maybe even higher than the shard. --70.106.148.11 (talk) 04:55, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 22 Bishopsgate. 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) 09:29, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Banana bread

I added a citation needed tag.

It says: "Whilst there have been token efforts made to improve sustainability, such as baking banana bread[...]".

Absent any citation or context, this looks like vandalism; the building is not a bakery, and it seems unlikely that baking banana bread is a solution to ESG problems. Accordingly, if a citation or other improvement to this section hasn't appeared within a few days, I'm going to delete it. MrDemeanour (talk) 13:13, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not vandalism, I think, but probably undue. The building's LinkedIn feed has

Indulge yourself or delight someone special with a scrumptious loaf of #bananabread available at The Market.
In an effort to minimise waste, The Market team offers to transform your four overripe bananas into a delectable bread loaf for just £3, as we strongly believe 'Waste is Bananas'. The freshly baked loaf will be ready for pick up the next day.
Occupiers can also participate in The Market's Banana Bread Classes for just £5 when you bring your own bananas. Next one is on April 24th so make sure to sign up.

--Cavrdg (talk) 16:06, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I took it out. MrDemeanour (talk) 18:25, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]