Template talk:World Trade Center

Remove WTC Towers II
WTC Towers II needs to be removed from alternative proposals. The plan was never considered during the design competition; it was never submitted. Skimlatte (talk) 18:18, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Why no events?
How come events related to the WTC, such as the 1993 bombing or the 9/11 attacks, aren't included in this template? In a template named "World Trade Center" I would very much expect them to be found, especially when one group heading is "2001–present". /Ludde23 Talk Contrib 15:23, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Tenants section
I suggest that the "Tenants" listing be transferred to the pre-2001 section. The list and article seems to describe more of the former complex, rather than the new one. H-Man (talk) 04:18, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Use of strikethrough
The use of strikethrough on links in the template should be accompanied by a note indicating the meaning. For example, with Deutsche Bank Building, which I undid. I would have added the note myself, but wasn't sure from the context what it's exact meaning was. Feel free to undo me when adding it. Senator2029&#8239;•&#8239;talk 19:33, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
 * In your response, the Deutsche Bank Building is no longer existing, as it was heavily damaged by the September 11 events and consequently demolished. Furthermore the new site doesn't call for a new Deutsche Bank Building, and the article refers exclusively to the demolished building. Therefore, why would one include a building in the section about the new site, if it is demolished and not being replaced entirely?


 * Technically this link should point to 5 World Trade Center. HOWEVER: That article refers to the original 5 WTC, which was destroyed by the attacks. The proposed 5 WTC is on the site of the former Deutsche Bank tower, but due to real estate issues and the financial crisis, there is no future for the proposed building. Several agencies, including the LMCCC, have not even mentioned it recently, therefore it might have been scrapped entirely. Check the talk page for WTC 5 for the sources and pictures. The tower is not getting built based on the foundations etc... It is not definite on what is going to be there. We hear that the Greek church might be there, and a park may be constructed over the site. But right now, if the other user wanted to keep Deutsche Bank in there, it will have to be crossed out. The Liberty Park thing has very little info, and we will not include that unless we have more information.H-Man (talk) 23:01, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

I was the one who added the Deutsche Bank Building to the template, because while it isn't part of the WTC it was adjacent to it and was directly affected by 9/11. Therefore, I feel it should be grouped together with other WTC-related articles on this template. I chose to put it with the post-2001 group because it was not destroyed during the attack and was deconstructed only recently. So I'm not certain this is the best placement for it logically, but I do feel it has to be on here. Jmj713 (talk) 01:34, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Point. However, wouldn't it be more related to the attacks and collapse? H-Man (talk) 01:40, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure. It's related to the collapse, but moving it to the "Terrorist attacks" group seems wrong. I'm open to any discussion though. I'm glad this template is getting some attention it deserves, so hopefully we can continue working on improving it, adding any articles that might've been overlooked. Jmj713 (talk) 01:45, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The article doesn't fit too well with 2001-present category either. I was considering "other", but I honestly don't see an important significance of the Deutsche Bank building to the WTC such that it would warrant its addition to the template. It's really the damage of the building that had warranted the deconstruction, and nothing really much is going to be rebuilt. For all it matters, one might as well included the Fitermann Hall for the same logic. H-Man (talk) 02:25, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
 * After much thought and consideration, the Deutsche Bank Building should not be included on the template's post-2001 category, and instead be placed elsewhere, for the following grounds:
 * It was not part of the original complex, nor is the building proper part of the new complex.
 * The building has been demolished for a new infrastructural project (Vehicle Security Center), a new park and a church, with no further details on a proposed Tower 5, which is slated to be part of the new complex.
 * User:Jmj713 has made a valid point that the destruction of the Twin Towers has resulted in widespread damage to the Deutsche Bank Building (130 Liberty Street). However, this alone cannot justify its placement there. Other buildings that have received significant damage include the Fiterman Hall of CUNY's BMCC college, which was consequently demolished and rebuilt, and numerous buildings in the vicinity including the World Financial Center and the Winter Garden. Light structural damage was sustained by WFC 2 and 3, if I recall correctly, while the Winter Garden sustained more severe damage. Thus, I think User:Jmj713 is trying to stress the aftermath.
 * Another point I would stress is that the category "2001-present" is vague in the sense that the time frame it describes straddles the aftermath, cleanup and the reconstruction. Much of the other entries in this category would fit into a "2001-present" complex or a new WTC complex. I believe User:Jmj713 had misinterpret the usage of this category. It would make more sense to reorganise the first three groups so that we have:
 * -1966-2001
 * -Terrorist attacks and aftermath
 * -Post-2001
 * This would allow the categories to be chronologically consistent, and would give the Deutsche Bank Building entry a proper placement. I will immediately rectify this. H-Man (talk) 05:58, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
 * So should anything else be added to the Aftermath section? Fiterman Hall? Or anything else? Is anything missing from the other sections? (I can't think of anything right now, except the 1998 Bank of America robbery, but I'm not sure how to fit it in, it's not a "terrorist attack".) Jmj713 (talk) 15:29, 19 August 2012 (UTC)