Talk:Canary Wharf
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Bomb
The IRA bomb that killed two people was at South Quay, not Canary Wharf - after the foiled attempt to blow up Canary Wharf itself (following two equally large bombs in the City of London) security at the Canary Wharf development was tightened considerably, so the IRA instead hit South Quay, just to the south. Because most people (in Britain at least) have heard of Canary Wharf, there's a tendency to call almost everywhere on the Isle of Dogs Canary Wharf.
I'll also update the South Quay DLR station entry accordingly.
- The whole article rather conflated CW and Docklands. CW was something that happened to LDDC not something they did. I've fleshed out the history, meaning that my vast amount of time working in or writing about the London property market wasn't entirely wasted. Icundell 18:30, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
-
- Great job! The article looks much better now. honeydew 21:44, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
-
-
- Nice to be appreciated - and ta muchly for the copyedit jon on the Economic geography page. Wow, I left some howlers in there. Icundell 21:52, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
-
[edit] Tallest?
I may be mistaken, but i believe they are no longer the tallest buildings. I think that award has to go to the Spinnaker tower in Portsmouth. Can anyone confirm?
- Someone is messing around with this. Canary Wharf does have the top 3 tallest buildings in the UK. The NatWest tower (or Tower42 as it is now) is NOT the tallest. Tallest buildings in the London are 1st - 1 Canada Square (235.1m); 2nd (equal) - 8 & 25 Canada Square i.e. HSBC and Citigroup buildings (199.5m) and 4th Tower42 (183m). (Source: http://skyscraperpage.com). The Spinnaker Tower is even shorter than these at 170m (Source: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/4326932.stm). I will try and edit the page accordingly, but I suspect that this is one of those where people will keep editing it back. Mister Ant 07:38, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] How high is it?
Can anyone put how high the building is and how much office space does it have ? [[User:Robin48gx|Robin48gx]Sat Aug 27 13:31:34 BST 2005]
Which building? Canary Wharf is the name for the whole development. 83.245.24.88 19:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] See also
Does the see also section make any sense at all? Many of the linked articles have an almost identical 'see also' sections, so I guess the idea that all these cities have similar business/industial suburbs. If so they could all use a better introduction to the see also section. -- Solipsist 23:50, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
HafenCity in Hamburg, Germany is also more or less similar (in idea) to Canary Wharf -- 172.178.182.82 12:26, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Huge deletions
Where did Howard Dawber's additiosn go? Did someone just rv to the an ancient version? Icundell 12:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Banning of the protest march
The banning of a protest march in a major section of the capital is very important socially, economically, and in terms of basic human rights in a free democracy
The “despicable” banning of the protest march is an important point in the continuing story of the liberalisation of labour and the widening gap between rich and poor in Anglo-Saxon economies.
The trite drivel of the current page does nothing to tell the reader of the huge undercurrent of resentment that such high-handed treatment and oppression idiots such as those at Canary Wharf are causing.
The entry is truthful, accurate and topical. It is also part of the history of this ghastly development and the awful oppression of its poorly paid workers.
- Yes, the Wharf has many hidden aspects. Gordo 21:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- There are persistent rumours about the quality of the original building work and planning violations. For example there are claims that the LDDC failed to enforce planning controls so that 1 Canary Wharf is 3 stories higher than it should be and that the estate roads had been laid to a standard less than that that the Council (who become responsible for them at a later date)were required to reach.--Esthameian 05:50, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- Eh? the planning application is a matter of public record. Three extra floors? So *that's* where Torchwood is. No need for "persistent rumours" about such utter drivel. "quality of the original building work"? That would be the (compared with the 25 year standard typically used in the UK - see for example Broadgate, already being redeveloped). And the roads on the estate are still operated by the estate. And the £1m per metre Limehouse Link is one of the few decent stretches of road in East London. But apart from that...Icundell 08:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- There are persistent rumours about the quality of the original building work and planning violations. For example there are claims that the LDDC failed to enforce planning controls so that 1 Canary Wharf is 3 stories higher than it should be and that the estate roads had been laid to a standard less than that that the Council (who become responsible for them at a later date)were required to reach.--Esthameian 05:50, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
- "...100 year construction standard used throughout... " allegedly used - this is private sector work, so anything they claim is suspect
-
-
[edit] Copyvio?
Part of the section "The Idea of Canary Wharf is born" seems to be copied from [1], which states that copyright of the text is held by English Partnerships, having inherited the copyright of LDDC. Almost the same section is found in the article about G Ware Travelstead. Maybe someone should take a closer look at this. /130.243.135.41 22:25, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- I believe that we have permission to use the LDDC text. Howard Dawber 03:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Well, apparently you do, as you seem to be the one who added it to the articles. However, Crown copyrighted material, as I think the LDDC text is, is usually not allowed in Wikipedia. If English Partnerships agrees to publish the material under the GNU Free Documentation License or a compatible license, as described on the page Wikipedia:Boilerplate request for permission, the text can be included, but otherwise it will unfortunately have to be deleted. /217.208.24.136 21:47, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Canary Wharf protest
This comment should remain. Why remove it?
[edit] Reuters Plaza
Hello. Does anybody think that this image could make it onto the page? It kind of shows what the Canary Wharf area is like after work. By the way, the area with the clocks outside the station is called Reuters Plaza. The Blackfriar 22:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Neutrality tag
Added to the "Significance" section. There's a bucketload of POV in there that requires attributing. Specific examples:
- Canary Wharf is not just an office scheme. It has had impact at the local level, at the metropolitan level and, to a lesser extent, at the national level.
- At the metropolitan level, Canary Wharf was, and remains, a direct challenge to the primacy of the City of London as the UK's principal centre for the finance industry.
- In this respect, Canary Wharf could be cited as the strongest single symbol of the changed economic geography of the United Kingdom.
- Its symbolic importance was bleakly demonstrated...
One Night In Hackney303 07:38, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
[edit] errors in article
In the local opposition section, there seem to be several errors. the isle of dogs didn't declare independance in the 80's in protest at development, this actually occured in 1970.
Also, what's up with the sheep and bees? it sounds stupid, so i think this needs to cited or chucked asap!!!
there's probably more within the article, but i haven't the time!
if anyone has any thoughts, please let me know or i'll try to get rid of these bits over the weekend —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grahamhopgood (talk • contribs) 12:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

