Talk:List of tallest buildings in Seattle

Proposed Move
I have listed this page at WP:RM as an uncontroversial move, with the goal of moving the page to List of tallest buildings in Seattle.

Per this FL discussion related to the List of tallest buildings in Dallas page, it was decided that United States building lists that contain only one freestanding tower (with all other entries habitable buildings) should not be dubbed with "and structures" in the title. The change would be consistent with other U.S. tallest buildings lists, and reduce confusion, as "structures" more or less implies multiple structures, not just one observation tower. As long as a note is added to the observation tower entry, the clarification in the title is not needed. Rai - me 01:48, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

The two towers in the Proposed at 1901 Minor have been Approved, I would move them but it is locked. Here is a source. http://news.theregistryps.com/miami-based-crescent-heights-approved-move-forward-737-unit-residential-project-seattles-denny-triangle — Preceding unsigned comment added by IanScott1337 (talk • contribs) 17:18, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ Please put comments at the bottom of the talk page next time and use Edit semi-protected.  Sounder Bruce  17:32, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Pictures
I just wanted to mention: there are pictures of most of these on the Commons. Someone might want to add a column to the tables with a 100 px picture of each (perhaps rather than having quite so many larger images in the article). - Jmabel | Talk 05:47, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've changed the list to this format. It's consistent with list of tallest buildings in New York, Chicago, Miami, etc. Doing this also fixed the whitespace below the table and removed the need to keep the captions up-to-date (One Union Square was called 17th tallest in the caption even though it's 18th in the list, presumably due to the later addition of 1918 Eighth Avenue). —Mrwojo (talk) 22:52, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Timeline of tallest buildings
The succession box at the bottom of the Alaska Building article lists the Hoge Building as its successor for the tallest building in Seattle, while Timeline of tallest buildings lists King Street Station (Seattle) as having this distinction. This apparent conflict should be resolved or explained. &mdash; Myasuda (talk) 03:57, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Old Tall Buildings
This list excludes interesting buildings that were very tall for their time, such as the 1927 Seattle Tower (347 ft), while including comparatively uninteresting buildings of our own time, as 400ft is not especially tall by today's standards.

Rather than a blanket cap of 400ft, it would be more interesting to have a moving cap based on building completion date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greglovern (talk • contribs) 17:39, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Dependent and dated information
The information in this list seems highly dependent on other information. For example, I've tried to fix issues where values in feet didn't match the given values in meters by using convert. There were numerous statements that were out of date (simple things like "the list below contains 22 buildings" when it has 24 now). Some of the proposed buildings haven't been talked about for years, so who knows when those should be considered "not proposed". The statement that the "skyline is ranked [1st, 3rd, 11th]" is based on looking at the Emporis lists for the major cities of the US – so if any of those cities change, the statement can become out-of-date. Some simplification might be in order. —Mrwojo (talk) 23:26, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Space Needle not a Building?
Can someone provide some context for the Space Needle not being a building? That seems at least contentious enough to require a cite. The nearest footnote to the claim ( http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=1294 ) refers to it as a building. Wikipedia's 'Building' page defines a building as "Any human-made structure used or intended for supporting or sheltering any use or continuous occupancy". The 'any use' certainly seems to apply, since there's a restaurant that's being both supported and sheltered. The implication seems to be that it's not continually occupied, but of course that applies to office buildings as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Simianvector (talk • contribs) 00:53, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of tallest buildings in Seattle. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080318052537/http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/bu/sk/?id=101046 to http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/ci/bu/sk/?id=101046

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:13, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of tallest buildings in Seattle. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120705094337/http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2010835965_office20.html to http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2010835965_office20.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:00, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

37 or 39 buildings
I'm not 100% certain because I haven't compared side by side all the entries for all 37 (or 39) buildings, but from what I can tell, The Skyscraper Center has 37 buildings over 400 ft, and Emporis has 39. From what I can tell the Hayatt Regency, 520 ft, 45 floors, completed 2018) is missing. So I'm not sure who we're matching our sources. Emporis has precedence, and the Center only verifies some of them, without contradicting the other? --Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:34, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I generally prefer The Skyscraper Center, since it's maintained by the CTBUH (an organization that, among other things, decides what qualifies as a "skyscraper"). Emporis is fine, but it's a looser database and often gets details wrong because it's partially fed by user data. Skyscraper Center is slower to update as a result, but has more consistent data. The Hyatt Regency has not been completed (and thus not eligible for the Skyscraper Center listing), given that the sidewalk hasn't re-opened and the roof isn't fully furnished. It's only topped out at this point.  Sounder Bruce 


 * OK, I think I was able to match them all up and compare the three lists, Emporis, The Skyscraper Center, and our first list here. Quite a few have different aliases to unmask. I don't have a problem with the criteria for any of these three versions, but if the lead says 39 buildings, we should have a list of 39. Or if The Skyscraper Center is the best source, then the first table, Tallest completed buildings should say 37 and we should have a table of 37 items. In that case, Hyatt, McKenzie, Stratus and Space Needle can still be included in the page, just not on that first table. Any version is good; I only want to be consistent. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 18:32, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

"Tallest seattle" listed at Redirects for discussion
A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Tallest seattle. The discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 25 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC  678  16:30, 25 September 2020 (UTC)