Talk:Deutsche Bank Center

Deutsche Bank Center 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.
Review: January 7, 2022. (Reviewed version).

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.

New York City Low‑importance

	New York City portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City 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.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Cuozzo, Steve (16 November 2013). "Don't Trust Anything on Wikipedia". New York Post.

A fact from Deutsche Bank Center appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 October 2021 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the apartments and hotel rooms at Time Warner Center didn't have internet from Time Warner because it was too expensive?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2021/October. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Deutsche Bank Center.

Wikipedia

Another Photo

Article seems full of photos. This photo is conspicuously obstructed by C. Columbus, so wasn't sure about adding it to the article. Any comments?? Jnn13 (talk) 00:14, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ive added your image to Columbus Circle, think it`s better suited there. Too good an image not to be included--Rockybiggs (talk) 11:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The "New Twin Towers"

I found a source for the "new twin towers" comment, but it seems that the source is most of this article's content posted somewhere else. Now I feel conflicted that this page might possibly be a copy vio of that page. Pacific Coast Highway ^{(blah • lol, internet)} 22:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Better source: [1] Wl219 20:17, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Time Warner's Office

Prior to 2003, where was the main headquarters of Time Warner or AOL Time Warner located? Is the new Time Warner Centre their new head office? --58.69.20.10 10:25, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Time Warner Center does indeed house the corporate offices of TimeWarner. Before 2003, the corporate offices were in rented space in Rockefeller Center, at 75 Rockefeller Plaza. 64.131.229.210 06:50, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rewrite

I rewrote this article top to bottom (though I kept the original framework) because it was indeed an obvious copyvio of the link cited above. I also removed the bit about education zoning, because it seemed irrelevant to the article at hand.--Dmz5 02:53, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I added the education part back in when I noticed that a lot of other articles on NYC buildings include it. I am going to bring it up somewhere, though, because while it is indeed a fact, it seems irrelevant.--Dmz5 02:57, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image in mobile view

I looked at the mobile view for this article. The image File:4.4.10TimeWarnerCenterByLuigiNovi.jpg seems to drop off the end of the "History" section, creating huge whitespace. By contrast, in this view, the image fits perfectly into the "Design" section. I prefer that the article be changed back to this version for that reason. Epic Genius (talk) 21:32, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think we've already established in another discussion about another article that there's something funkly going on with your mobile phone. I've checked the article with an iPhone and anandroid and there's nothing whatsoever odd going on. UNtil you can figure out why your phone is giving anomalous results, please don't make layout changes because of what you see on it. (And, in any case, the problem, if there were on, would be a pbone problem, not a Wikipedia problem.) BMK (talk) 21:37, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Um, what I saw was on my computer, with all the headers expanded. And it's an image alignment problem, not an image size problem. Epic Genius (talk) 22:00, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So, why would we lay out an article for what it looks like when looking at the mobile version on a computer? As I've already said, there's no whitespace whenlooking at the mobile version on two different cell phones with two different operating systems running two different browsers. BMK (talk) 22:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But what you see on the phone is the same, in this case. If you expand the header in the current version of the article, there is still whitespace to the left of where the image File:4.4.10TimeWarnerCenterByLuigiNovi.jpg is placed. Epic Genius (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2015 (UTC) Actually, scratch that last comment. The image is centered in the middle of the page anyway, within under the collapsed header. Epic Genius (talk) 22:16, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Subway entrance "inside" building?

Article states, "The building has an entrance to the 59th Street – Columbus Circle station of the New York City Subway inside it." Where is this entrance? As far as I can tell, all of the entrances to the subway are outside of the building. The closest two to "being inside" are next to the Trump International across the street or under the canopy outside by 58th and Eighth. Kmh2011 (talk) 15:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rebranding

Does anyone know if the name of Time Warner Center be changed to WarnerMedia Center? SportsFan007 (talk) 22:15, 15 June 2018 (UTC)SportsFan007[reply]

I think it probably will be renamed, but I also think we should wait for a reliable source announcing this before making any changes. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 23:44, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, WarnerMedia is moving out of Time Warner Center next year, so it's possible that Time Warner Center might rebrand to something else entirely -- especially since then-Time Warner sold its stake in the building a few years ago. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 20:11, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, WarnerMedia is moving to 30 Hudson Yards along with Kohlberg Kravis Roberts and Wells Fargo. It should be taking place sometime in 2019 or 2020. So it is very like the company that now owns the current Time Warner Center will most likely rename is since they will no longer have license to use the Time Warner or WarnerMedia name. YborCityJohn (talk) 06:54, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WarnerMedia Center

Change into WarnerMedia Center. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.255.217.165 (talk) 06:30, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Except that the name of the center apparently hasn't changed yet. WarnerMedia's own website still lists their address as "One Time Warner Center". See here. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 07:45, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do math

Deutsche Bank can't take over space that for 25 years had been Time Warner's because this building is not 25 years old.74.64.104.99 (talk) 17:43, 10 November 2019 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson[reply]

This is mistaken. The lease by Deutsche Bank runs for 25 years, not that Time Warner has occupied the space for that long. epicgenius (talk) 18:14, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming

When was it renamed from AOL Time Warner Center to Time Warner Center? The lead should include a sentence about AOL being removed from the name and he date at which it happened. 15 (talk) 19:59, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15, after looking into the matter, it appears AOL Time Warner Center was only the name from November 1999 to approximately October 2003. The name was changed before the first part of Time Warner Center opened. Epicgenius (talk) 20:32, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Good to hear that this has been sorted out and great work expanding the article! Happy editing, 15 (talk) 20:40, 7 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 01:33, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

Time Warner Center

... that despite the September 11 attacks, apartment prices at the twin-towered Time Warner Center (pictured) were raised five times in the following two years? Source: Reinholz, Mary (October 3, 2003). "Center of Controversy". Newsday. pp. 139, 140.
- ALT0A: ... that despite the September 11 attacks, apartment prices at Time Warner Center's (pictured) twin towers were raised five times in the following two years? Source: Reinholz, Mary (October 3, 2003). "Center of Controversy". Newsday. pp. 139, 140.
- ALT1:... that one resident of Time Warner Center (pictured) bought a condominium there because he didn't want to rent an apartment? Source: Neuman, William (May 29, 2005). "New Home Off Broadway". The New York Times.
- ALT2:... that Time Warner Center (pictured) was classified as an "alteration" to the demolished New York Coliseum because the old building's basement garage was preserved? Source: Dunlap, David W. (May 20, 2001). "A New Colossus Begins to Rise". The New York Times.
- ALT3:... that the apartments and hotel rooms at Time Warner Center (pictured) didn't have internet from Time Warner because it was too expensive?
- ALT4:... that in 2006, the monthly fee for a parking spot at Time Warner Center (pictured) was more than the monthly payment for some one-bedroom residences in the U.S.?

Reviewed: Amarin Plaza
Comment: More info and hooks to be added later, I just nominated this as a placeholder so I would not forget.

5x expanded by Epicgenius (talk). Self-nominated at 04:41, 7 September 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Article was SIX times expanded since first major edit and considering the lead itself is over 1,500 characters it's safe to conclude it's also long enough. Although the building is near Trump Tower the article remains neutral and is also backed with sources, and a copyvio search declares roughly 25% of similarities, but only really comes from direct quotes. I prefer Alt0 as it is the broadest from a too fancy of an explanation, other than Alt3. I would like to comment on the use of "twin-towered" here, however, as it follows the September 11 attacks and I think it's too, for a lack of a better word, "ironic"? I'd suggest linking September 11 attacks, too. Panini!^🥪 19:18, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Panini!: Thanks for taking a look. (Technically it's right next to Trump International Hotel and Tower (New York City), so that would've been the better joke.) I linked the 9/11 attacks in ALT0. I do agree that it is ironic, doubly so given today's date, but I'm not sure of a better way to reword it, since that is the astonishing factor in the price increases. Epicgenius (talk) 19:49, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I get that now, I was thinking it was ironic because of money struggles. In that case, I would suggest changing to "that despite the September 11 attacks, apartment prices at the Time Warner Center (pictured) towers were raised five times in the following two years?" I guess I also need to get my vision fixed because I saw "Trump" and "Tower" and nothing else in that hyperlink. Panini!^🥪 21:16, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Sorry for the delay, got busy IRL for a bit.) Panini!^🥪 21:18, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Panini!: It's alright. I proposed ALT0A as a modification of ALT0, though I kept the "twin tower" aspect, since the twin-tower design is the specific reason that one would expect prices to go down, rather than up. Epicgenius (talk) 23:24, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AH I did it again! Sorry for the wait for a second time. Prefer Alt0A; looks good! Panini!^🥪 21:20, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Panini: would ALT3 be approved too? That seems like the catchier hook to me. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 18:45, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

oops, Panini!? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 05:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Theleekycauldron, Ha! Of course, and I approve of that one more now actually. I didn't see the irony of the situation at first. Panini!^🥪 12:49, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ahaha, fantastic, Panini! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/them) 01:33, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

ALT3 to T:DYK/P5

Anachronistic Reference to 10/1 Columbus Center's Current Name in Photos of It Taken Before May 2021?

I don't think it's appropriate to only use a current name (in this case, the Deutsche Bank Center" at 1 [formerly 10] Columbus Circle) that was introduced after the taking of any photos of a particular building that are being used in that building's article before that building's current name is even thought of. I'm rather avoidant towards this. This is something that a guideline/policy like "WP:ANACHRONISM" would cover.

What do you think, EpicGenius, and which should be the way forward? Should we just go with, say, "10 (or 1) Columbus Circle in May 2010", or something else (because there was no "Deutsche Bank Center" in New York City in 2010 and this complex was named "Time Warner Center")?Jim856796 (talk) 19:16, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jim856796, I was never notified of this message (if you want to get my attention, you should either link my username or post on my talk page). For what it's worth, I'm fine with the captions saying "Time Warner Center in May 2010" and the like. I've made sone adjustments to the captions, but overall they seem all right. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:36, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]