Talk:4 World Trade Center

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 4 World Trade Center article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

United States: September 11 High‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject September 11, 2001 (assessed as Top-importance).

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

New York City High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Pictures of 4 WTC

I am going to be expanding on this article and would like some pictures of 4 WTC. If anyone out there has some put them on here or send them to me and I'll put them on the page. Thank youRooney McFaddy (talk) 19:55, 20 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

I'd like to fashion this article like the article for 7 World Trade Center. It is a format that may prove itself useful. | ^help _dןǝɥ | 01:00, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

split contents

I split out contents for the old building into a new article, 4 World Trade Center (1975-2001). This way will work better with the way that Wikidata handles interwiki links and associated data. I hope nobody minds. --Aude (talk) 10:39, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Aude, I am not sure if you saw this, but an IP editor merged the article a few weeks after you created it, saying: there really is no need to have a separate article for the original building. we don't have separate articles for the old and new 3, 5, and 7 WTC buildings. This one is no different and the old 4 WTC article will never expand. I may have agreed with the IP user at the time. However, it is becoming increasingly clear that we need separate articles for each building (and, in fact, the pages for the WTC complex and 3 WTC have been split already). Additionally, it is no longer true that the "old 4 WTC article will never expand" - in fact, there is quite a bit about the old 4 WTC's architecture and history that is not mentioned in this article.

I support the proposal to re-split the 4 WTC page, since it's really hard to adequately cover both topics in one article. If the two buildings continue to share an article, we need to have top-level sections for each building, which is really awkward. Having two articles about two separate buildings barely has an impact on the servers, and it also clarifies the subject matter for the reader. Similar articles, such as 270 Park Avenue (split into Hotel Marguery, 270 Park Avenue (1960–2021), and 270 Park Avenue (2021–present)) have been split in this way, with the only consequence being that we needed to fix the links.

@YitzhakNat, given your edit here, you may also be interested in this discussion. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:09, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, I agree that it needs to be split (with Other places or About template on top), since the current article is a mix of information about the existent and non-existent building and infobox covers only the current one.

The original building has its own history, not related to the new one, other than the grounds it stands on. It is done the same way with World Trade Center 1973-2001 and World Trade Center 2001-present articles. Appropriate would be a small paragraph included about the original building (about what happened) which has a main template redirect to its own page and 9/11 attacks pages, like it is already done in new WTC article having "Original complex and the September 11 attacks" paragraph. YitzhakNat (talk) 19:12, 15 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Also @Aude this has been going on for a long time. Do you mind closing it?

TheCorvetteZR1^{(The Garage)} 23:22, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Huge space

Can someone fix the huge space between introductory paragraph and the table of contents?--Player072 (talk) 21:57, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 4 World Trade Center. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 00:53, 23 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 4 World Trade Center. 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:

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 06:42, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article Evaluation

The article is very detailed and retaliated to the actual building. The formatting is useful. Events and milestones in the building's follows the timeline of the building being constructed. Thank you fo the good read. --Lil Beastea (talk) 15:48, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]