Talk:CN Tower

Restaurant

I added back the semi-POV link and some text on the restaurant. On one hand its removal makes sense, but the info on the restarunt in a less POV version made sense. As for the link, there are a lot of POV links on the wiki and since its about a actual persons experience rather then a opinion I guess its not entirely pov. If anyone has links to actual review, such as on a culinary site, that would be a better choice. Greyengine5 19:12, 2004 Jul 23 (UTC)

Enviornmentalists

I added a line on the enviornmentalists who scaled the tower in 2001 to protest Bush's policies. I don't remember what the exact date of their adventure was, but I do remember it was the day after I had visited the tower when taking a vacation in Canada.

JesseG 03:46, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

==Failure in broadcasting

I think it's more than a bit of a stretch to suggest that CN was a failure for broadcasting; the only other facility in Toronto, First Canadian Place, is markedly inferior in every respect except rent; there would not be any broadcasters on First Canadian were it not for the fact that CN is absolutely, chock full. (Speaking as someone who has seen the broadcast facilities at CN, about the only tighter squeeze is Empire post-9/11.) 18.26.0.18 04:50, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

TV & radio statios

Should there be a list of TV and radio stations which transmits from CN? - Hinto 01:25, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Inspired the Space Needle

Why is it that the CN Tower inspired the Space Needle, when the needle was built in 1962?

Is it taller?

The Ostankino Tower is actually taller now, after a renovation raised the height of it by about 100 feet. Made this correction in the article. Zeipher17 2 July 2005 04:16 (UTC)

I changed "believed by some to be the world's tallest freestanding structure" to "is the world's tallest freestanding land structure". If Worlds tallest structures is to be believed, the CN Tower's status is only in question due to three factors:

the existence of taller TV towers (which are not "free-standing")
the existence of the Baldpate Tower (which is not a "land structure")
the fact that it isn't a "building" as such (but it's still a "structure").

"is believed by some" strikes me as very wishy-washy. Are there any other serious claimants to the "world's tallest freestanding land structure"? - user:Montrealais

I would dispute that the Skypod is "tiny". I've been there with several other people, and I wasn't bothered by claustrophobia at all. But rather than just calling it tiny we should have the actual dimensions, if anyone cares to supply them. -- Lee M 01:48, 11 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Ostankino Tower, Moscow is since 2003 taller!

The CN Tower belongs to the dead. Matthew McVickar 14:49, May 18, 2005 (UTC)

NOTE. The Ostankino Tower was NOT increased in height in 2003 as some websites suggest. A new antenna was fitted but the spire was not increased in height. The tower may be increased in height in 2007 to 1863ft thus beating CN tower height.

Inconsistency

The text of the article states that the glass floor could hold the weight of 14 adult hippos. The trivia section says 11 hippos. Cmadler 02:14, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

>> its actually 14 adult hippos and the article has been changed to reflect that (source: http://www.cntower.ca/portal/SmartDefault.aspx?at=907 ) (Organicaudio 20:57, 5 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]

Is that the weight of moving hippos or standing hippos? --TheLimbicOne(talk) 07:58, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The C.N Tower is the most respected and the most wonderful TOWER ever!!!

There you go, i FIXED it, and thatnx to that i deserve a medal

What's this? That doesn't make sense. Someone fix that! I don't feel qualified to do it myself. Thanks.

I think there's some out-of-control vandalism...is it enough to propose locking the page? Ardric47 05:57, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following quote is inconsistent:

"The Glass Floor can withstand a weight of 600lbs per sq inch (109 kg per sq cm)"

600lbs/sq.in is equivalent to about 42kg/sq.cm. Which figure is correct? (Does anyone know how much a hippo weighs? :p )

P.S. I think any comments saying the Ostankino Tower is taller are wrong. According to any reliable sources I can find, it was renovated a few years ago but is still very close to it's original height.

i work at the tower, its 600lbs per sq in for the glass floor weight

Speculation

The following is idle speculation. If someone can find a source for it, it can be reincluded but if not, it should remain out of the article. Even if it is sourced, it should be made clear it is just one opinion. I don't for example think of the CN Tower or the Sears Tower or the Empire State Building that 'emotionally' andjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj I definitely don't think of them as in the same league as the Taj Mahal or the Eiffel Tower. Sure I would probably visit them if I went to their cities but they are just IMHO rather boring buildings (although the CN Tower is probably the most interesting of the 3 to me). This is of course a personal opinion but I suspect a lot of people share it.

Regardless when a taller structure is erected, the CN Tower will continue to resonate emotionally in the global community, in much the same way other recognized and beloved structures do (e.g. Sears Tower in Chicago, the Empire State Building in New York City, the Eiffel Tower in Paris, Big Ben in London, Taj Mahal in India...)

Nil Einne 18:21, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed what...huh????? im confooosed!

tower vs building

buildings are also freestanding structures so technically, Taipei 101 is the tallest freestanding structure in the world. Here's my [reference]

A tower differs from a building in that the latter has floors, and is designed for residential, business, or manufacturing use. The structures listed here are principally telecommunications towers, and while they may have observation decks or restaurants, they do not have floors all the way up. Towers and buildings are freestanding structures; this list does not include masts supported by guy wires.

--TheLimbicOne(talk) 04:44, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see that this is might be a "hot button" issue and will offer no resistance to changing it back. However, all of the archetectural sites I viewed prefered the simple terminology "tower" for a structure with no guy wire or support that also floors only at the top. --TheLimbicOne(talk) 05:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What would you know. I have seen the BIULDING, thats right a BIULDING, you know why, because any free standing structure that alows people to at least move, is a biulding. It has a restaurant, thus, it is a BIULDING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'm sorry to say this, but the word is spelled "B-U-I-L-D-I-N-G". SupaStarGirl 12:58, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would dispute that the CN Tower does not count as a building. Webster’s dictionary definition of a building is “a usually roofed and walled structure built for permanent use (as for a dwelling).” The CN Tower fulfils this definition. While I can find no definitive definition for “High Rise building” the CN Tower does not fulfill the generally accepted “A building 35 meters (12 stores) or greater divided at regular intervals into occupiable levels.”

The CN tower has five seperated occupyable levels. I think that helps it fit that description and criteria. --Matt0401 18:42, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat recognizes Taipai 101 as the world's tallest building. This should at least be noted in the article. If the CN Tower were "a USUALLY roofed and walled structure...", would the title of world's tallest building be so hotly contested? I don't believe it would be. As an authority on the subject, the word of the CoTBUH is being completely ignored here.Yodamite 11:18, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Canadians call it a building, but, from what I've been reading, the authorities who solve disputes like this don't. SupaStarGirl 12:58, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How do these authorities define "building"? --Kmsiever 14:34, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hippos?

"and can withstand the weight of 4,137 kPa (600 pounds per square inch) or 14 large hippopotami."

Who cares? I take it this was just taken out of a tour guide's monologue. If it's going to have a ballpark "reckoning" comparison, use something that people can actually reckon, like the weight of a car or something. Otherwise, just leave this out. — Omegatron 05:26, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The CN Tower itself is fond of using Hippos for the comparison - that's the origin there. WilyD 14:41, 12 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinates

I think we should move the coordinates to the top (See Arc de Triomphe for example). 69.195.147.138 20:44, 28 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The CN Tower and Film

I thing the trivia section should include the CN Tower's important role in the movie Canadian Bacon, writen, directed and produced by Michael Moore and starring John Candy. After all, this was the focus of Honey's terrorist obsession, the location of the missle controling computer and the site of movie's climax.

Consistency

This page was not consistent with the rest of Wikipedia. CN Tower is the tallest freestanding structure on land according to the Wikipedia page on this subject, not the tallest building. Since someone reverted my change, I have put up a {{disputed}} tag until the inconsistency can be resolved. Uris 17:45, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One other page does not constitute "the rest of Wikipedia". Conversely, one could say the World's tallest structures article is not consistent with this article. Just because one article says it, does not make it so. While the other article does give the impression that their definition of building is official, they do not provide a source for this definition and thus it's classification of "building" cannot be deemed authoritative. --Kmsiever 18:53, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]