Talk:PAGCOR Tower

Height?

 * the hight of the tower is revised from 600m to 300m due to its close proximity to NAIA 01:24, 13 September 2009 User:120.28.153.195

Let's delete this article
- The only source of this article does not support the claim that a tower of 665 m (2,182 ft) is being constructed or is going to be constructed. - The official website is not giving details about the progress of the tower: http://www.pagcor.ph/index.php - The latest news articles about Pacgor Tower do not mention a 600+ m tall tower either. For example: http://www.gmanews.tv/story/187742/razon-enters-pagcor-bay-shore-project or http://business.inquirer.net/money/topstories/view/20100405-262530/Port-king-ventures-into-casino-operations.

Let's delete this article - the PAGCOR tower was just a proposal and should not remain an article.


 * This was written more than a year ago by IP 81.205.111.246 (which is actually me, Leodb). Another IP, see below, agrees with this. At this moment I have the same argumentation, in favor of deletion, this Pagcor Tower was nothing more than a small publicity stunt, which hanged around on the net for some time supported by some enthousiasts. No real building company, time schedule etc. etc., and it won't come either. Leodb (talk) 18:07, 18 January 2011 (UTC)


 * 112.210.196.239 (talk) 02:38, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

There are also some projects that have been scrapped for the PAGCOR City or not even intended to be constructed such the so called "Corazon Aquino National Stadium" and other sports venues. Luckily, someone had already removed these from the Pagcor City Article. 112.210.142.237 (talk) 03:00, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Status
The status of this tower is currently "proposal". I changed the article back to that. The official site and the news articles used as references in this wikipedia article about Pagcor City do not mention the tower being constructed at this moment. Please change the status to "under construction" only if the tower is really under construction and this can be supported by sources. Otherwise leave the status as it is at the moment: a proposal. Leo de Beo (talk) 23:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

If it's still not deleted. I think the article should be tagged for speedy deletion
Debate for deletion seems to be going nowhere. Very few people are responding. 112.210.152.50 (talk) 15:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC)