Talk:Ryugyong Hotel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Ryugyong Hotel has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Korea (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the North Korea working group.
WikiProject Architecture (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Skyscrapers (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Hotels (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hotels, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to the hospitality industry, including hotels, motels, resorts and destination spas 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is not a hotel anymore[edit]

Being interested in architecture, I read up on this building with great interest. I have seen three sources that this is a now a multi-use building involving office space, residential space, hotel space. According to BBC, Orascom the construction company says " will be a mixture of hotel accommodation, apartments and business facilities." This makes sense, given the impracticalness of using this building completely as a hotel, given current tourist situation for the foreseeable future. As expected, other sources mention there will be revolving restaurants at the top as well. Mdrejhon (talk) 20:34, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Is it anything, or is this all future hope? Last I heard it was still unused for anything but to serve as a warning to others. Anyway, if you're saying this because you think it needs to be renamed, we'd have to wait for some form of official renaming. --Golbez (talk) 21:17, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
There is a new paragraph that should resolve this issue for now, without needing to rename the article. It was a good point that this is an under-served subtopic about this hotel because the article never even mentioned that this building will also have office/residential uses too, while I have found more than four sources on the Internet. I've cited two references, including BBC and Asia Times. (talk) 05:51, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
The "construction" that you see is merely a facade being built around the structure. There are no real plans for the dilapidated and unfinished interior. The use of this building is now for a very large and expensive mobile phone antenna tower. --KJRehberg (talk) 01:13, 18 December 2010 (UTC)
I suspect this as well, but do we have any reliable source? Rodface (talk) 15:10, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I have seen photos of the interior and work is being done. North Korea certainly has ambitions to use it as a hotel, which makes sense from an economic point of view as the structure is already built. I think they could reasonably expect to attract a lot of Chinese tourists. When I was there Yanggakdo Hotel seemed near capacity. I understand that occasionally tour groups are diverted to the Koryo Hotel because Yanggakdo is full.--Jack Upland (talk) 03:17, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Article is unclear[edit]

At the present time, the article gives the impression that the building is expected to be completed and opened as a hotel in the opening paragraph, but in other portions it suggests that the structure is unsound and will never be usable. This discrepancy needs to be addressed. (talk) 14:31, 4 January 2010 (UTC)

Here is a BBC story that has some information, it can be put in the article if someone has time. -Lөvөl 03:22, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
I did a little cleaning up. Hope it addresses your concerns. --RSLxii 22:53, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Completion Date[edit]

When I was in DPRK this June, we asked about the hotel to our guide and the official line is that it is scheduled to be completed by 2012, in time for the 100th year anniversary of Kim Il Sung's birth. Is this worth mentioning? -- (talk) 19:39, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

See the third paragraph of "Construction Resumes". Rodface (talk) 00:59, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ryugyong Hotel/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 01:33, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: None found

Linkrot: One found and tagged.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 01:39, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria[edit]

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    REasonably well written and sufficiently compliant with MoS
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Several citation needed tags, one dead link. Citations need to be correctly and consistently formatted so that the source is clear. page numbers need to be included for books and journals.
    What makes {} or {} reliable sources?
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Article covers the subject in sufficient depth, but one anomaly is mentioned on the talk page Talk:Ryugyong Hotel#Article is unclear. Can this be cleared up? As it stands this is confusing.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Tagged and captioned.
  7. Overall:
    On hold for seven days for above concerns to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:07, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
    OK, all good now, passing as GA. Recommendations for the future: Consitent dates on citations, e.g all in Britishor Us format. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:12, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

I've addressed all remaining issues. I'm trying to locate a physical copy of the Japan Economic Journal article to confirm that it's a source for the entire paragraph it's cited in. Should have that in a couple of days. Rodface (talk) 15:31, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Rice's collection is apparently gone, I'll be looking for this next. Rodface (talk) 21:46, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Tone of sentence in the introduction[edit]

This quote from the article's introduction has several problems imho:

Meanwhile the "hotel" has a 2012 completion date, at which point we expect they will announce that it is simply "too popular to take open reservations."

1. Needs a citation for the completion date.

2. Who are "we" and how does one know what they "expect"?

3. The "too popular" quote is cute, but who said it?

4. The tone of the sentence is, well, snarky. Is this NPOV?

I wish I knew more about the structure, but I do not feel qualified to make the edits. Cwelgo (talk) 22:08, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, that's been reverted as having very bad tone. --Golbez (talk) 23:06, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Pyramidal building comparison[edit]

I don't feel that the diagram adds anything to the article, I'm going to remove it soon unless anyone has any objections. Rodface (talk) 15:10, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't think it's a bad diagram--it helps show how really big a project it is to have undertaken. The diagram has shown up on some of the recent news articles (blog articles?) about the building, suggesting that others find it useful too. --RSLxii 15:28, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
Seriously, you've left in a diagram showing "The Bosnian Pyramid of the Sun" for comparison?!? How about you also add a section about hot the Ryungyong Hotel was built by ancient aliens and the number of floors supports the hypotheses that the world will end when the Mayan calendar runs out? Okay, maybe I didn't need to be that sarcastic, but I came to the talk page to see if any of you Wikipedians had even noticed that crap image. Seeing its use defended is really disheartening. I guess I could remove it anonymously... (talk) 04:32, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
When I created the image, I had pondered whether or not to include the contentious "Bosnian pyramid". Like you, I do not subscribe to the idea that it is man-made. To emphasise its disputed status, I have:
  1. Labelled it "(disputed)"
  2. Assigned it number 0
  3. Greyed it out
In a sense, its inclusion actually supports your position by showing how ridiculously large it is compared to the Egyptian and Mexican pyramids, for a building Osmanagić initially claimed to be built in 12000 BC. cmɢʟee 19:58, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
There is no need for pyramidal comparisons. Please remove that picture. Harpsichord246 (talk) 06:07, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Ryugyeong Hotel in Pyeongyang, North Korea on 12th October 2011.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

Image-x-generic.svg An image used in this article, File:Ryugyeong Hotel in Pyeongyang, North Korea on 12th October 2011.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:07, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Orascom denied this as a rumor[edit]

"This report, however, picked up by various news outlets, appears to be false. “Orascom is not related to or involved in operations or hotel developments in North Korea,” says Mamdouh Abdel Wahab, the company’s director of investor relations."

Does Orascom claim to be the ones renovating it or not?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:29, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

This is just an old article with obsolete information. Check out its date. Ri hwa won (talk) 12:40, 7 March 2012 (UTC)


I am posting a better picture for the infobox. Harpsichord246 (talk) 03:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)


I have restructured the article to put the criticism of the building in the "Construction Halts" section, rather than having its own section.

It seems rather out-of-date to focus on the "Hotel of Doom" theme when it appears that work is progressing.

The claim that the DPRK denied the existence of the building seems rather weak. It is not surprising if it didn't include the unfinished building on maps and airbrushed it out of photos. On the other hand, a building that size could not be covered up, and there are plenty of reports cited in the article attesting to its fame.

In general, the focus on controversy, while an important part of the hotel's story, does become biased when it becomes a chorus of ill-informed negativity.--Jack Upland (talk) 06:58, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

I note that someone has reinstated a lot of the obsolete negativity into this section. I think that says more about the self-righteous critics of the DPRK than the regime itself. I mean, really, who cares???--Jack Upland (talk) 10:27, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

I have removed the following:

Former CNN international correspondent Mike Chinoy likened it to the calcium deposit on the neck of Kim Il-sung; both were clearly visible despite official attempts to hide them.

This is merely a reporter's snide remark. It is out of date and was never notable, as discussed above. The comment about the growth on Kim's neck says more about the Western media than the DPRK regime. It is normal that the North Koreans didn't include this growth in photos or statues: the Americans have rarely depicted FDR in a wheelchair. However, as Kim was known to press the flesh, and give "field guidance" down to his dying day, a lot of the population would have seen the growth, just as they would have seen the gigantic eyesore that this hotel was when in Pyongyang.--Jack Upland (talk) 21:23, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Daily Mail[edit]

I've removed a reference to a Daily Mail report for 2 reasons. Firstly, it is innacurate. It claims the reporter was the first Westerner to get inside. However, the Koryo Group visited there previously and have photos to prove it. The attached video is of the Yanggakdo Hotel, not this one. While the reporter seems to have visited North Korea as a tourist, most of the information could have been gleaned from this article. I suspect, in fact, that the story of the early morning jog is an invention. Secondly, this story adds nothing to the article. The Koryo Group have provided photos of the interior which are far more informative and convincing than this.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:09, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Deleted again.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:38, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Image used to illustrate the hotel may not have been taken in February as it is claimed[edit]

Because the trees look very green I have doubts on the date of the picture (Feb 2013). Temperature barely go above 0 degrees in NK in Feb and it looks more like a spring/summer picture than anything else. Please could the author comment on that since I am not entirely sure? Is it real picture? And if yes when was it taken?

Antoine — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:17, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

The uploader appears to put the upload date as the date the picture was taken (it might be the program they're using and not deliberate), so I think we're safe with removing the February bit (As I agree with your assessment) until we find out exactly when the picture was taken. --Golbez (talk) 15:28, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

There's no reason to doubt the picture is real as it looks like other recent photos. (And it looks like the hotel did when I was there last year.)--Jack Upland (talk) 01:49, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Based on this user's upload history, the nature of the file, and the fact that they are a banned user, I would bet that this image is both a photoshop and that they did not even create it. — RockMFR 00:39, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

But look at the other recent photos!!!--Jack Upland (talk) 21:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

BETTER THE PICTURE FROM 2011. MORE CLEAR-- (talk) 02:01, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Mocked up photos?[edit]

The entry states that the NK government removed the building from official sources/photographs. However, none of the sources on the page provide a primary source, i.e. they are all journalistic articles without actual evidence of modified photos released by the NK government. Can someone provide a primary source to validate this claim? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:07, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

I've removed this. It doesn't seem notable anymore, if it ever was.--Jack Upland (talk) 02:11, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Estimated Completion[edit]

The estimated completion was changed to 2021. Was there any reason or is this a joke?--Jack Upland (talk) 08:41, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

It's been changed back to 2021, and I've changed it to unknown. If you want it to say 2021, please explain why.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:27, 14 March 2014 (UTC)


As of June 2014 several central columns and floors in the main structure have collapsed or are in a state of collapse, and the Hotel is no longer accepting visitors of any kind. The building is now regarded even by North Koreans as unsafe to enter.

I've removed this. It doesn't have a citation, and I can't find any confirmation that it is true. Moreover, the hotel wasn't accepting visitors anyway.--Jack Upland (talk) 02:35, 24 July 2014 (UTC)