Talk:Nakheel Tower

message: This is to be at least 700m tall and that has been quoted by Nakheel so it's not speculation at all. The source is already there. It's the burj dubai vs al burj article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahmalec (talk • contribs) 18:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Height 

message: A new article from www.meed.com (from 10th August)  says the total height of the tower will be 1050m, and 850m topped by a 200m spire. They also say it'll have 228 floors with 5 more underground, and that the location is still unknown. Unfortunately the article can only be viewed by subscription but it was posted on www.skyscrapercity.com aswell   —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rahmalec (talk • contribs).  
Check the official site...--72.74.112.203 (talk) 07:56, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a hyperlink to the official site? Astronaut (talk) 16:05, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Source 

message: The figures on the right of it's hight to tip massively contradict the rest of the artical that state that it's meant to be one of the tallest (the heights shown would comfortably make it the tallest).
Also, it says at the beggining that it was hyped to be one of the tallest towers - but if it was originally considered to be 1,600m, that would make it the tallest by far.
This artical is seriously messed up, it needs to sort its figures out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.253.205.115 (talk • contribs) 21:35, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The developer has not yet confirmed a location, a final design, a project plan, or got the money together for the project. One can only assume they have said it will be the one of the tallest in case it takes a while to get the project started, at which time there may be other buildings in competition.  Unfortunately, the secrecy around the project details has led to speculation from many sources.  Various heights ranging from 700m to 1600m have been mentioned at various times, leaving everyone confused.  Astronaut 07:58, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, the location has indeed been chosen.  A member at skyscrapercity.com heard rumors of the new location, and he went and found the plot and took pictures of ongoing soil testing.  Also, a reliable insider source there has seen the new design though he can't divulge it since it is confidential.  He says it has been completely redesigned.  Expect to hear official word on this project soon. 71.110.200.88 01:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe they're soil-testing other locations as well?  It's still a rumour from someone on a forum.  Now, if there was a big hole in the ground and a big billboard outside the site saying "Al Burj opening 201?", then we would have a location.  'Til then, its all speculation :-))  Astronaut 03:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  I'm confused 

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 05:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: The latest from the SkyscraperPage.com is Al Burj is definitely going ahead at the 'Dubai Waterfront' reclaimation near Palm Jumeirah. Soil testing started on 2nd Nov 2007. If no problems then construction will start in the first half of 2008. Height is still 1050m total, with 200 floors. That obvuously includes the spire, but roof top would be about 900m.     —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.123.128.114 (talk) 01:53, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you provide a reference?  Astronaut 13:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That was from a fraudulent source.  In fact, this tower has been moved completely from the Waterfront, and will be built near the Dubai Marina.  Also it has been completely redesigned, though the design has not been revealed yet.  Rumors suggest that March could be the final launch and the revealing of the new design.  Also, work has started on this tower in the form of pile testing.  Basically this entire article is out of date and wrong.  I couldn't even start to try to revise it.--71.110.206.11 (talk) 05:27, 16 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latest News 

message: Is the "Pei Partnership Architects" anything to do with I. M. Pei or Pei Cobb Freed & Partners?  Astronaut 15:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Pei Partnership Architects has to do with I. M. Pei and not with [Pei Cobb Freed & Partners]] as I. M. Pei is no longer a partner of the later. Ppapadeas (talk) 07:08, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Architects 

message: http://www.burjdubaiskyscraper.com/Al_Burj/al_burj.html  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.14.240.200 (talk) 18:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  i found a new rendering of the Al Burj 

message: I have been hearing rumors of this so-called building since 2004. It has been over 4 years and I don't see anything.  The Building was supposed to start in 2007, but that was a lie. The Building was also supposed to be the tallest Building in the world at 1600 meters but that was a lie too.  Then they said 1200 meters, but that was a lie too. Then they said 1,050 meters but that was a lie too. Now they say 700 meters. So it's somewhere between 700-1600 meters.  That is a 900 meter range!!!!! The range they give is about the size of the Burj Dubai!!! I mean seriously can't they narrow that a little bit. I heard they started soil testing on November 2, 2008, but I think that is just a bunch of crap because does soil testing take more than 6 months? I mean it is May 2008 and they said they would build the building in 2007 after soil testing. I am starting to think this building is a joke because of inconsistent heights and groundbreaking dates.  Maybe this tower wasn't supposed to start construction in 2007, but in 2207? 2207 is much more likely. What do you think?Maldek (talk) 04:37, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Although Wikipedia is not a forum, I will respond to this message.  There have been no announcements by Nakheel (the developer) since they announced this project for Dubai Waterfront (now simply called Waterfront).  Most renderings of Waterfront do not show this building.  But, there have been unofficial resports that Nakheel will still build this building somewhere else.  You should just be patient and let history take its course.  Now, please only use talk pages to discuss changes on the article.  Thank you.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 00:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  When will the Al Burj Start? 

message: :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.
*Oppose; there are no reliable sources for such a name change.  We do not know where this building will be located, or if it will even get built.  No steps should be taken until there is an official announcement about this building's future.  That means an announcement by Nakheel.  --Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 02:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: Yes, I found this article at meed.com, but since you need a paid-for subscription to read the boody of the article, I cannot read it.  So, is it still a good enough source to be used in the article to support the latest height proposal (1400 m)?  For the time being, I have assumed good faith on the part of User:Suz1305, but if the consensus is that we cannot use the source I'll be happy to see it reverted back to before Suz1305's changes.  Astronaut (talk) 00:19, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Well since the article is not accessible to everyone (myself included) and we cannot read exaclty what is written there, I think we should not include it.  If Nakheel has not released any information regarding Al Burj/Tall Tower, then how can we be sure that MEED is able to provide reliable information regarding the structure.  I think we should only use information from Nakheel to back up information about this tower.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 01:01, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: All this comparison with other buildings is becoming a pretty pointless edit war.  For example, the Mile-High Tower, whilst initially proposed to be 1609 m tall, has now been reduced in height and could be "up to 500 meters shorter" and leaving the name confusing to all.  Perhaps Maldek has the right idea in removing the comparison completely.  When comparing Al Burj to Burj Dubai, I don't see how we can provide any sensible comparison - the Burj Dubai completion date has been put back because they are "going higher" but haven't stated how much higher.  Perhaps we should remove that comparison as well? Astronaut (talk) 09:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree that we should remove the comparison.  Since no heights have officially been announced for Al Burj or for the Burj Dubai, it would be best to leave it out until we are certain of a height.  Once heights have been announced, it would be a good idea to include a diagram, similar to :Image:BurjDubaiHeight.png.  --Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 00:22, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

text: This is what I was trying to say when I raised the issue in the first place.  Wikipedia relies on the verifiability of it's sources, and if no one has read it then I really don't think it can be cited as a source.  I was rather hoping that a meed.com subscriber (or meed.com themselves) would take some suitable quotes from the article, or find the original information/sources used by meed.com's reporters, and add them to the article or to a more accessible (and reliable) third-party site.  Astronaut (talk) 10:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latest Height 

message: Maldek2 needs to cite a source to say the roof is at 1050m, but he has brought up a good point.  With the height increased to 1400m, what do we do about the top floor and roof heights which are still from the old design?  Can I suggest they be omitted from the infobox for now?  Astronaut (talk) 13:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Omitting the information is the best idea.  The problem is that 1400 metres is probably incorrect.  I am not sure if you saw my message at the bottom of Talk:Al Burj#Latest Height, but Nakheel has said that MEED's reports about the height are false.  Maybe we should just remove all heights and just say that no official heights have yet been announced.  Leitmanp (talk | contributions) 19:37, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Top floor and roof 

message: http://www.xpress4me.com/news/uae/dubai/20009867.html
The article should be moved/renamed to here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakheel_Tower
As that is the name of the building for now.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by RhoDaZZ (talk • contribs) 20:04, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move/Rename 

message: Could an admin please move this to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakheel_Tower  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danigoni (talk • contribs) 20:34, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Move requested at Nakheel Tower.  Needs to be done this way because the destination article name already exists.  Astronaut (talk) 05:51, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: .  Move completed.  Astronaut (talk) 14:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Please Move or Rename This Article

message: The date for construction for Nakheel tower is a bit ambiguous. In this article it says that construction will restart in January 2010, yet in the other article called list of tallest buildings in dubai, the nakheel tower is still put as a proposed project rather than an approved project. and many articles I am finding from google saying that it is still on hold. can anyone clear this up?--A9l8e7n (talk) 01:52, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Construction schedule 

message: According to Emporis .com the project has been cancelled. 
http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=building&id=226837&lng=3
Daniel Christensen (talk) 07:34, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Project cancelled

message: The edit summary for this edit expresses doubt that this project has been cancelled.  While Nakheel has not made a press announcement, the project has disappeared from Nakheel's list of developments, Emporis updated the project's status to "unbuilt [cancelled]", and the De Tijd article used as a source says "De groep schrapte onder meer al de plannen voor een nieuwe toren van 1 kilometer hoog, en voor een nieuwe stad, Waterfront" = "The group has scrapped plans to include a new 1 kilometer high tower, and a new city, Waterfront" (according to Google Translate).  While the Nakheel Tower is not named in the De Tijd article, I know of no other 1km tower project from Nakheel.  I have reverted the above edit for the time being, but if conflicting evidence was to come to light in reliable sources, it might be sufficient to modify the article wording.  Astronaut (talk) 12:26, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Doubts about cancellation 

message: I have reverted this edit because as far as I can tell this project is still cancelled.  If you wish to change that, please bring your evidence that it has been revived to this talk page first.  In any case, the reference to the story in De Tijd should not be removed, but further evidence of any revival should be incorporated into the article text.  Astronaut (talk) 21:40, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Still cancelled or not? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Nakheel Tower. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090309100648/http://www.themovechannel.com/news/4ab79656-f1b6/ to http://www.themovechannel.com/news/4ab79656-f1b6
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081028044746/http://www.wspgroup.com/en/WSP-Group-engineering-consultants/Press/News-Archive/2008-group/WSP-designs-structure-for-the-worlds-tallest-tower/ to http://www.wspgroup.com/en/WSP-Group-engineering-consultants/Press/News-Archive/2008-group/WSP-designs-structure-for-the-worlds-tallest-tower/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051219162717/http://www.dubaiwaterfront.ae/ to http://www.dubaiwaterfront.ae/
*Added archive https://archive.is/20070626053339/http://www.nakheel.ae/ to http://www.nakheel.ae/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:36, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018)