Talk:122 Leadenhall Street

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 articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-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.

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.

Untitled

I just noticed that this paragraph is incorrect: "This unusual design's main drawback is the building's relatively small floorspace for a building of its height (500,000 square feet/ 47,000 m²). " Disclosure: I work for RSHP. So I think it would be a breach of the wikipedia guidelines if change this myself? However, here is a link to the correct information on the RSHP website. The gross floor area is 84,424 m², which is considerably higher than stated in the article. See [1]. 80.254.147.68 (talk) 12:32, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update tag

Hello. I've update-tagged this rather good article because it's got a few things saying "is expected to" or "will commence" or words to that effect referring to dates in the past. I'm tempted to just change them to "was expected to" or whatever but that's really a bit feeble - could a more knowledgeable person please help by updating some of this stuff to reflect what actually happened? Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 12:27, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the photos of the pre 60s buildings? (e.g. that used before war, XIX century, etc.)

Would be great to see it, and most probably are in free use... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.75.70.254 (talk) 16:53, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Status

This building is now completed and is no longer under construction. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-28458454 Wrightie99 (talk) 15:53, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]