Talk:List of future tallest buildings

India Tower

Hi everyone who might be viewing or editing this page. I was just writing to say to could keep on eye on the edits of ADR 1000. I spent hours the other night updating the page only for this user to effectively undo my edits through their insistence that the India Tower is under construction and will soon become the tallest building in India. This is not true in the slightest. -

• CTBUH (the governing body of tall buildings) classifies India Tower as 'never completed'
• SkyscraperCity classifies this building as 'cancelled'
• SkyscraperPage classifies this building as 'cancelled'
• Wikipedia itself classifies this building as 'on hold' which still fails to meet the criteria to be included

Please use CTBUH prior to edits as it is the most reliable source for the construction status of skyscrapers in the world. If you believe a building is under construction than please use this talk page prior to your edits as they will likely only have to be undone at the timely expense of another user. Thanks!

Azerbaijani building and scope of this list

In this diff, editor Robynthehode removed an Azerbaijani proposed building with edit summary that this is a list only of buildings under construction. But, the lede of the article states it may include proposed buildings. What has been consensus (and decided when/where) for the scope of this list? --doncram 18:57, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

P.S. I see there was discussion of scope at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of future tallest buildings in the world (I participated there, and see it was closed no consensus.) The article then was clearly including proposed buildings, and a number of editors supported that. There were other editors who wanted to restrict it to be buildings under construction, which some argued might be covered well enough in other lists so these tended to want to delete the article. The article survived though, and the reasoning for including proposed buildings was supported in the discussion. It remains to define "proposed" clearly: include only those currently proposed/planned? move previously proposed ones which have been cancelled to a separate section? must "proposed" include having detailed architectural drawings, or being "approved", or what? Definition of "proposed" must differentiate between list-worthy serious proposals vs. merely some blogger's suggestion. :) Were criteria discussed elsewhere? I hesitate about pinging all the AFD participants (who were: Fausan, Northamerica1000, KDS4444, Lugnuts, LabradorGroup, Orser67, GRUcrule, Ansh666, Spinningspark, Unscintillating, OccultZone) because of the "no consensus". --doncram 22:20, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your message. I was editing boldly as it seems there is an obvious division between articles. Already built buildings, buildings under construction and proposed buildings. There needs some editing to be done to keep this logical division between articles (tallest buildings in world article has section on buildings under construction but this article is already too long so this section should be moved to the future buildings article). Mixing buildings under construction list with proposed buildings mixes two different categories of building and makes the list confusing reading. There are so many buildings that are proposed by some designer but are never built that it becomes difficult to select which proposed buildings are of enough significance to include in any list other than one that purely lists proposed buildings. Similarly a list of buildings under construction can have buildings being built but also buildings on temporary hold where some of the building has already been built but not buildings that are merely proposed. I propose that the discussion of the criteria for inclusion in the current list articles be discussed here but I propose that the articles should broadly follow the criteria I have already mentioned. Robynthehode (talk) 23:24, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Nobody has commented on my above proposal since I wrote it in March 2016. I will without further comment change this article to the proposed format I made then Robynthehode (talk) 08:13, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

I have now started editing this article to correctly show only under construction and proposed tall buildings. Criteria for meaning of proposed and under construction can be seen at the CTBUH link I have added to the article. All visionary building 'proposals' should only be at the list article I have linked to - namely (and confusingly called) Proposed tall buildings. I haven't had time to change that articles name which should be altered to something like 'visionary buildings' to accord with the definitions shown in the CTBUH article on defining tall buildings. Please read that before commenting here. Thanks Robynthehode (talk) 19:09, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Add a construction started column?

It might be good to see if/when construction has started on some of these buildings, it's probably a more reliable way to know if/when they're going to be built! Tom W (talk) 05:26, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Formatting

The formatting at the top needs a cleanup. There was a massive gap of whitespace. Put 3 photos in a table to try and fix this but more work needed. David Crayford ☎ 08:58, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Tallest by City/Tallest by Country/Tallest by Continent

There was a recently mini edit-war over the two sub-sections, Tallest by City, Tallest by Country. I agree that these two sections should be removed as redundant (and incomplete), since the primary list can be sorted by city/country already. (But I also agree it should be discussed first.)

And on that topic, it should be possible to add sortable "Continent" column in the main list and remove the incomplete "Tallest by Continent" section as well. -- PaulxSA (talk) 01:25, 24 September 2018 (UTC)