Talk:Citigroup Centre, London

Architecture Low‑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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Skyscrapers Low‑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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move[edit]

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 Citigroup Centre, London. Rai-me 05:27, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

25-33 Canada Square → Citigroup Centre, London — 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[edit]

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 - Name does not refer to one building the previous article gave that impression they were one building (ambiguity). The postal address is not going to change over time and gives the impression that move than one building is being talked about. Also names neeed standardising and the easiest way to prevent future article renaming is to use the postal address.--Lucy-marie (talk) 20:15, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support. No evidence that the street address is a common name for this building. Andrewa (talk) 00:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence I am going to have to state the the official name of each of the two buildings is 25 Canada Square and 33 Canada Square [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]--Lucy-marie (talk) 12:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Okay then, if you make articles for the two individual buildings, then the pages should be titled as the addresses. But this article is about the commercial center, and only mentions the buildings. Cheers, Rai-me 16:43, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Furthermore, if you look at this piece of "evidence" provided by Lucy-marie, it clearly states that "25 Canada Square, along with the neighbouring 33 Canada Square, make up the Citigroup Centre - I 170,000sq m (1.8m sq ft) office complex occupied by the Citigroup group of companies." I think this actually supports this article being located at Citigroup Centre and not 25-33 Canada Square. There is no dispute of what the correct building names are, but again, this is about the complex of both buildings, and whether "25-33 Citigroup Centre" is more appropriate than Citigroup Centre as the name of the building complex. Clearly, it is not; not one of those pieces of evidence supprts the title "25-33 Canada Square". Those "pieces of evidence" are therefore irrelevant and do not support your argument. Cheers, Rai-me 01:29, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Rai-me 14:01, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Any additional comments:

Also names neeed standardising and the easiest way to prevent future article renaming is to use the postal address. You might like to contribute at User talk:Andrewa/systematic names where I'm asking for views on exactly this issue. Andrewa (talk) 00:44, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I can see both sides of the dispute here. I'm actually tempted to side with Lucy-Marie; the article is about the buildings, whose tenants may at some point change. Disputes about which name is more 'recognisable', however, are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned - redirects are already in place for all the common names. The reason I'm refraining from voting at the moment is that these disputes have been going round in circles for quite some time. Until some firmer guidelines are in place, there's little point in supporting or opposing articles being moved back and forth which will inevitably happen anyway. Seaserpent⁸⁵ 12:22, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:NC for the current policy, and user talk:andrewa/systematic names for a draft proposal to be more systematic in article naming. Andrewa (talk) 12:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From survey section above: I am going to have to state the the official name of each of the two buildings is 25 Canada Square and 33 Canada Square... No, that's irrelevant under current policy. We're interested in common names, not official ones. They are often the same, but where they differ we generally go for the common name. So assuming all these links are supporting the idea that the existing name is more official, they don't help. Andrewa (talk) 12:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

None of the links above call either building Citi group centre 1 or Citi group centre 2 which implies that Citi group centre is not a name used. This is where policy is ambiguous as there is no definition of a "common name" and it goes against common sense. If all another name for the building redirect here then I cannot see a problem, after all what are redirects for. Also the "common names" are stated in the first line of the article which removes any confusion within the article itself.--Lucy-marie (talk) 23:38, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - There is absolutely no evidence to support that the title is "25-33 Canada Square". ~~If anything, 25 Canada Square, may be approprite, but I would still argue that this is the official and not the common name (see John Hancock Center in Boston, which is officially "Hancock Place").~~ But, that has to be decided by a requested move, with discussion. I have moved this page back, as Lucy-marie moved the page without any discussion to begin with, and this is clearly a controversial topic. If you would like to see this page moved it its address (which is 25 Canada Square), please see WP:RM and begin a discussion. Cheers, Rai-me 14:01, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is two separate buildings being talked about in one article. It also appears the discussion has not been concluded. A discussion has been initiated to move to the new title and that is not concluded. I also believe it inappropriate for someone who took part in the discussion to move the page as they have a stated biased outcome. Evidence was asked for in the discussion and that was provided giving 25 and 33 Canada Square as the names of the two buildings the article refers to. No evidence at all was given regarding the name Citigroup centre as the names of the buildings.--Lucy-marie (talk) 14:14, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is an article about a commercial complex that discusses the two buildings in the complex. You gave evidence that the buildings are not named Citigroup Centre 1 or 2, but 25 and 33 Canada Square. But that is irrelevant; you did not provide evidence that the entire commercial center is not commonly known as the Citigroup Centre. Cheers, Rai-me 16:40, 30 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.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Citigroup Centre, London. 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/20071021181727/http://www.cwcontractors.com/projects25Canada.asp to http://www.cwcontractors.com/projects25Canada.asp

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 06:30, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]