Talk:Murjan Tower

Article reconstruction

I have omitted many of the things from this article, as there were no other sources I could find, apart from the Emporis page. As much as I dislike deleting useful information, I had to remove the quotes "the most luxurious ever built" and "world's largest shopping mall". Seeing as the building is only proposed, and could well be built a lot shorter or never actually approved, I have also removed all of the pretentious info about its competition with other supertall buildings, and its comparison with other structures. However, I have rewritten the now single paragraph and changed the infobox. If anyone disagrees with anything I have done, or finds any other sources, speak up on this talk page! timsdad 08:03, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Comparison with proposed buildings

Ceres987 and I have recently been at a disagreement. The user has added a paragraph to the article comparing the Murjan Tower to other proposed tower. I don't think we're in much of a position to be speculating "if the tower is built". Yes, it is obvious, if it is built it would surpass all of those buildings. However, the building is only proposed and is more likely never to be built than to reach that height. I don't think it's very wise to say "The Murjan Tower will even surpass the Burj Dubai in height by 204 meters" as, being only proposed, that height might not even by the official height once approved, and 204 metres is very unlikely to be the height difference. When re-adding his/her paragraph, Ceres987 stated in the edit summary "Nakheel Tower, and Mubarak Tower, and Mile High Tower are proposed buildings, and their height is compared with other buildings. What's the difference?" Those buildings mentioned are not compared to other buildings in their articles, so I don't know where that came from. --timsdad ^(talk) 06:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

A very similar case can be see in Dubai City Tower, which includes a statement: "The Dubai City Tower will be 2.4 times taller than the Burj Mubarak Tower, 2.35 times taller than the Murjan Tower, 1.71 times taller than Nakheel Tower, and 1.5 times taller than the Mile High Tower" (which was added by this particular user). It is just plain nonsense. --timsdad ^(talk) 06:37, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah.. falling back on the "other crap exists" argument. Just because it states this speculative crap on other pages, is not an excuse to have it here. I've got it in my head now to visit those other articles mentioned and remove the speculative nonsense from there too.

One thing I have learnt about skyscraper projects is that many proposals never get built, and of those that do get built all kinds of design changes happen. For example, the Nakheel Tower has been through three different names, at least three locations, several redesigns, and heights ranging from 700 m to 1600 m - and there's still no more than an empty patch of desert to show for it. Astronaut (talk) 09:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. Unless the building is under construction, I can see no reason to speculate. --timsdad ^(talk) 09:27, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Agree with Timsdad. Comparison should not be included unless or otherwise the tower is actually being built. For proposals which have been permanantly cancelled, it is best to delete the article, rather than making the site like a large archive of everything that happened in the universe. :) Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 10:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Edit 272052279

Dear Astronaut, Please note that i have reverted your edits purely due to the fact that it is contradicting with the Manual of Style. As you can see for yourself;

• The paragraph breaks are important for editors to identify between different types of content (which have no visual difference)
• The image-placeholder is used for users who do not know how to add new images (which intrests them to add, that is the reason why the image was created).
• The conversion from sqft to ft2 is to comply with the new standard of adding "2" for all squared elements, (rather than "sq").

Thanks again for your help in making Wikipedia a great place! Have a nice day. Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 03:44, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

The image placeholder itself doesn't help people upload images (perhaps it should), but I see your point about it encouraging someone to look for an image. I did feel it was too big though, so I've made it smaller. If you check the difference carefully, you will see the change to the conversion was simply to keep the number of significant figures nearly the same - the floor area of 9.3 million m² is an approximation at this very early stage, and therefore it is just silly to convert that into ft² accurate to the last digit. Astronaut (talk) 05:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I understand. Anyway, the current version seems to be alright. Thanks for your edits. Have a nice day :). Rehman⁽⁺⁾ 06:44, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Not proposed

Dear Rehman, this building isn't proposed, there are no news since 9 years ago. According to CTBUH a proposal must fulfill all the following criteria: 1) Have a specific site with ownership interests within the building development team 2) Have a full professional design team progressing the design beyond the conceptual stage 3) Have obtained, or is in the process of obtaining, formal planning consent/legal permission for construction 4) Have a full intention to progress to construction and completion

Murjan Tower doesn't fulfill any of those requeriments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CMP4000 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi CMP4000. Noted, and thanks for your message. Kind regards, Rehman 02:45, 8 March 2018 (UTC)