Talk:Skyline

This article was nominated for deletion on 1 April 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Skyscrapers Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skyscrapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to skyscrapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkyscrapersWikipedia:WikiProject SkyscrapersTemplate:WikiProject SkyscrapersSkyscraper articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

This article was selected as the article for improvement on 29 December 2014 for a period of one week.

Untitled

I have always found Seattle's skyline to be one of the best on the west coast. Included in region?

69.70.145.236: What is special about the montreal skyline? I am curious as to why user 69.70.145.236 keeps adding montreal pictures. I used Chicago because it is the city that gave birth to the skyscraper and contains 3 of the top 20 tallest buildings in the world (only Hong Kong can equal that). Hong Kong has one of the fastest growing skylines. I used Sao Paulo to demonstrate the city's density, Cairo to show the contrast of old and new, and Sydney and Frankfurt because they are their respective continents most noteworthy skylines. I don't feel montreal has any of these assets.

The pictures are too Western-oriented, neglecting the growing Asian skylines. I am changing it to one from each continent, to best compare trends and growth

You forgot the most beautiful skyline in the world: Hong Kong! Please post a picture.

I linked to the picture on the Hong Kong page, although it's not exactly a skyline...but it's good enough. Adam Bishop 20:44, 15 Nov 2003 (UTC)

How many more?

I changed the list to a table of images, what do people think? Should the images be split into another article? Here are some other cities we could add: [- PHOTOS REMOVED -].

Change

I believe Belo Horizonte can be better represented by these pics:

http://www.chicorulez.com.br/bhrulez/vistadarm.jpg http://www.chicorulez.com.br/bhrulez/bhrulez1.jpg

Doidimais Brasil July 9, 2005 00:35 (UTC)

There aren't any photos on the page anymore, so there is no need to dicuss which photos to have. If you want photos of Skylines see Category:Skylines on Wikimedia Commons. Edward 2005-07-09 07:01:48 (UTC)

Since this is an article about Skylines, we should have at least one or two photos on that page, in the right hand column or some such. Although, we'd have to nominate which one(s) of them of them to put there. -- BMIComp (talk) 9 July 2005 07:21 (UTC)

Insanedrivers added a photo

Bias/Excessive/Unnecessary

'Best Skylines'? I believe this should be renamed to 'Most Impressive Skylines', in keeping with what the source is actually attempting to rank. Whoever gave the title 'Best Skylines' probably did so to suit their city. I also think that the amount of photos is excessive. Perhaps there should only be photos of the top five skylines. You can go to the individual page of a city to see a picture of its skyline. Likewise the list should be reduced from top twenty to, at most, top ten. Very few Wiki articles have lists that are so long unless it is making a useful contribution (eg. team lists, lists ranking only twenty of something, etc.). Top twenty seems arbitrary and has probably been chose to, again, suit somebody's favourite city.

I've taken on board these suggestions and made some changes. I reduced the list to top 10 and the photos to top 5. The page is now much neater and is more in line with Wiki standards. Ben Barone 7 July 2006 22:32 (EST)

This article

This article was made up entirely of original research, and what little sourcing there was did not nearly meet wikipedia's requirements for reliability and verifiability. Just because some website publishes lists of the "best" skylines by a variety of arbitrary reasons does not mean this information needs to make it into wikipedia. Furthermore, the list of skylines by region was indiscriminate. This article essentially needs a complete rewrite starting from a dictionary definition, which I have stubbed it to.-Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 05:17, 9 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page ended up getting reverted, and I reverted again. Please do not just revert to the long but unsourced, unverifiable, list-filled, and POV version of the page. If there are specific parts of the previous version you want restored, you can do so using the page history, but please add reliable sources. Websites of unknown provenance that compile "best-of" lists are NOT reliable sources.-Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 04:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Non-Skyline Pictures

Image:Bangkok_at_Night.jpg, Image:Ortigas_full_moon.jpg and Image:New-York-Jan2005.jpg aren't depicting skylines. These three are pictures taken from an elevated point of view, depicting buildings more from above than as a silhouette or "the artificial horizon that a city's overall structure creates". In Image:New-York-Jan2005.jpg, not even a single building is projecting into the sky above the city! Therefore, nice as the pictures are, they don't fit into this article's scope and I will remove them from the gallery. Gestumblindi 23:06, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery deletion

I don't think it's appropriate for a single user to decide to delete a gallery, and to cite a failed AFD in defense of it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 01:11, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citing the failed AfD is very relevant. Just because an AfD failed doesn't mean that the discussion that took place there should be ignored. The consensus was there were too many pictures. The relevant views were - "Way too many pictures", "Ridiculously large galleries can be deleted to leave a short stub article", "needs massive cleanup", "take many pictures away", "toss the gallery", "Perhaps not the huge image gallery though", "the overload of pictures", "Article needs rewrite, clean up", "needs a rewrite". Also, note that there is already a link in the article to skyline images on Commons. Ha! (talk) 01:28, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is also not appropriate for a single user to decide to add a gallery, Bugs. The result of the afd was pretty much "It does not need to be deleted, but it needs to be cleaned up". The gallery was the biggest problem, so I got rid of it. Don't add a gallery without a good reason. --Plasma Twa 2 01:30, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the fact was that the pictures exemplified an article that couldn't be exemplified otherwise.IFCM (talk) 00:51, 27 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs attention.

Its about skylines, and there is not mentioned anywhere about the ranking of Skylines ..... There should be the list of top 15 skylines from a reliable source(Emporis).

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 10:58, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How do you rank a skyline? I'm sure there are too many different ways of doing so... Does everything need to be ranked? Not all Wikipedia articles are lists. --timsdad ^(talk) 12:06, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a standard of measuring the skylines of cities you can find it in Emporis, and if anywhere it is neccessary to mention the list so it should be menitoned. When this article was created, it has a list but i dont why it has been omitted ? Well i am currently working on it. I know that there are alot of confusing sites which have there oen criteria of ranking skylines, e.g: Emporis ranks Dubai 11th, while i have seen on other source, which ranks Dubai 3rd, but i think it is not reliable source, so we can relie on Emporis. wht do you think ?

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 10:52, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a look at the Emporis skyline ranking and I can understand how it's all done. However, if we were to create a section of this article, or a new article called something like List of skylines, for example, we would have to explain all about the ranking system. Not that it would be all that hard, I'm just trying to stress my point that not every bit of information out there needs to be transcluded to Wikipedia. I think our best option would be to link Emporis' skyline ranking in the "External links" section of this article. Which I can see now has already been done long ago. --timsdad ^(talk) 11:06, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But i suggest to add a new section in this article, 'Worlds best skyline'.............. so here we can add the criteria about ranking..this should be done. i am not in favour of creating new article by the name of List of skylines, it will definately fails, because its is just a unnotable article...............

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 11:06, 30 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agreed with timsdad that Wikipedia should not be attempting to rank everything out there, especially something such as Skylines which is soo subjective. As an encyclopedic reference, Wikipedia can contain an article about "skylines", and make reference to other external sites which attempt things such as rating them. I do not believe including a ranking/ list in this article is helping to build its content. Feel free however to make mention of some of the great skylines if it helps explain a point. -MyFavco (talk) 03:30, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yes we can mention some of the worlds best skylines, thats what i am saying.

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 09:10, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was under the impression from your very first comment that you were saying we needed a list of the skylines ranked. MyFavco worded fantastically exactly what I was trying to get across. The 'External links' section is the perfect place to add a link to a reliable skyline ranking page, such as Emporis's. Maybe a paragraph on some of the world's best skylines and opinions from experts is needed. What's not needed, however, is a full-on list. --timsdad ^(talk) 09:14, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The pic

I think the Hong Kong pic works perfectly for the article. I would like to keep it for the following reasons:

NYC pic is outdated and grainy. Using it only draws attention to the twin towers.
Hong Kong pic is more symbolic of modern emerging economies.
Hong Kong has the world's greatest number of skyscrapers.
The Hong Kong pic gives a very clear delineation of what a skyline is.

--Louiedog (talk) 17:47, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New picture

Wikipedia EN is a american website, and having hong kong's skyline instead of New York is kinda anti american. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Beatlefan97 (talk • contribs) 17:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is a global website, and the best examples of some topics are not found in America. Take, for example, tourism or buses.--Louiedog (talk) 18:03, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ya but that skyline is crappy and dumb, and NY's is more Pretty and a better example for skylines.Beatlefan97 (talk) 20:36, 16 September 2009 (UTC)beatlesfan97[reply]

You are still yet to provide a reason for why it is a "better example for skylines". Louiedog has provided multiple reasons for the Hong Kong image being the more suitable choice above, all of which I agree with. --timsdad ^(talk) 07:05, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The NY Skyline shows more mordern life, it has a better look , and it if wikipedia has an encylopedia it would be better for the book.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Beatlefan97 (talk • contribs) 02:57, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How is the New York skyline more modern? If anything, it is less modern-looking than the Hong Kong skyline, in my opinion. However, this is besides the point. The purpose of the image is to accurately depict a skyline. I'm not saying the New York image doesn't do this, it's just that you have no valid reasons for it to replace the Hong Kong image. I fail to see how it "has a better look" and why it would be "better for the book" if Wikipedia were to be made into one. --timsdad ^(talk) 07:07, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have taken a photo of the Denver skyline at blue hour, which I believe to be of more relevance and higher-quality than the Hong Kong photo. Since it is my own work I will not add it to the article myself, rather, I will leave it up to the wikipedians to decide what to do with it. Thanks, Bpapantonio (talk) 06:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons the Denver Skyline photo is more appropriate:

The Hong Kong skyscrapers are backdropped against large hills, not the sky
You can actually see the sky in the Denver skyline photo
Image quality and resolution are far superior —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bpapantonio (talk • contribs) 06:37, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Too much depth for a silhouette, tons of non-skyline objects in the immediate foreground (having a body of water fixes this problem), and a duller, shorter, less impressive skyline with less definition, and minimal architectural diversity.--Louiedog (talk) 15:41, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between cityscape and skyline

What is the difference between a cityscape and a skyline? I want to know. -- Extra999 (talk) 18:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago skyline

What about Chicago's skyline? -- Extra999 (talk) 18:40, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Its not impressive at all, Skylines of New york, Hong Kong and Dubai(With newly built Burj Khalifa) is more eye catching.Nabil rais2008 (talk) 16:10, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Show a pic and we'll compare it but I think Hong Kong is ideal. It's an impressive modern vibrant skyline, clearly defined by a body of water, shows emerging economies, and architectural diversity.--Louiedog (talk) 16:18, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The skyline picture of dubai is hardly present in Wikipedia, so how we can compare, search on google and then compare it yourself, but in terms of clusters of skyscrapers hong kong is winner all the way but we cant say anything about future becuse dubai is growing very fast in terms of skyscapers and soon Dubai will beat hong kong, but surely it will take time to achieve such a feat.Nabil rais2008 (talk) 16:27, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Three points:

1. If you want a different skyline picture, you can go through the work of making the case for it. I'm perfectly happy with leaving the Hong Kong pic.

2. The ability to change the picture does depend on its availability to Wikipedia.

3. What goes up here is a picture, not a skyline, which means which skyline is chosen is dependent on which picture is chosen. Some pictures are better than others.

--Louiedog (talk) 16:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No there are several staggering images of skyline of Hong kong, in Wikipedia, if the ability to change the picture depends on its availibility to wikipedia then no doubt it goes all the way to Hong kong, there are alot of reasons for that, Hong kong's skyline is eye catching with hills on the backdrop and sea water with the lightining of skyscrapers, which can not be observed else where in the world, and also Hong kong's skyline is considered the worlds best skyline.So we even can not think to consider the skyline image other than Hong Kong

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 16:44, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We can consider other images if you present them here and make the case for them. As of right now, we have a very nice picture that was freely available that nicely demonstrates the concept. Others may prove better but I'm not aware of any that are.--Louiedog (talk) 17:09, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What about these two skylines? --Extra999 (talk) 17:22, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago's is relatively drab, grey rectangle after grey rectangle, plus you've got all this non-building stuff in the foreground. Houston's is partially blocked by trees and contains all of 12 buildings.--Louiedog (talk) 14:38, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trees don't affect the Houston one so much and what is the problem if it contains 12 buildings. -- Extra999 (talk) 15:08, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But the Honk Kong one should be replaced (a image of Honk Kong only, if you all want)? That picture is not very eye catching. --Extra999 (talk) 18:07, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes we should repalce the existing image with an eye catching skyline pic of hong kong as you said !

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 11:57, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This image should replace the existing image, it clearly shows the true image of hong kong's skyline in a nutt shell, its an eye catching image and as well as Featured picture !

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 16:38, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this picture is also very good but I have thought to put this one on. It will look good as it an excellent panorama. Nice?? -- Extra999 (talk) 07:42, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pauliyas Hongkong.jpg

Best skylines in the world !!!

I am considering that this article should have some content regarding the "Worlds Best Skylines" by the heading of "Worlds best skylines" and the content should be as follows:

Worlds top 3 best skylines (from reliable source like Emporis, it has already a list of best skylines)
some content regarding the history of best skylines in past and what is expected in future (as Dubai seems to overtake hong kong (in respect of number of skyscrapers taller than 200 meters, only one skyscraper remains to be built to beat hong kong !)

Wht do you think and give more suggestions that what more we can add in this respect !

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 16:43, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you find any Dubai Skyline. As posted earlier we don't have much quality pictures of dubai. And the third city? -- Extra999 (talk) 07:48, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No. We only need one picture for the article, otherwise it becomes a coatrack for every city's skyline. We do not need any arbitrary rankings in this article anymore than physical attractiveness needs a list of the most beautiful people in the world according to some guy with a blog.--Louiedog (talk) 03:27, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two pictures should be there of two best cities. If not, please replace with the above one - the panorama. -- Extra999 (talk) 16:18, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There should be three pics, as 1:Hong Kong, 2:New York, 3:Dubai. As all these cities skylines are prominent, but the skyline pictures in wikicommons is limited in case of Dubai. While there are bundle of skyline pictures of hong kong and new york.And there are no updated images of skyline of dubai !!!

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 17:05, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why three and not four, five, or a hundred? We only need the one pic to demonstrate the concept. Wikipedia is not emporis or skyscrapercity.com.--Louiedog (talk) 19:17, 12 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Three are OK. Not more than it. -- Extra999 (talk) 21:26, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have numbers of images of Dubai. But almost none of them are a appropriate skyline and are mostly for a single building. So first, lets upgrade the Honk Kong one and add a New York skyline. After doing of these two, we will think of Dubai. Extra999 (talk) 22:49, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a skyline gallery. Please visit it. It has panorama for New York and Honk Kong (above). -- Extra999 (talk) 22:54, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hong kong one is good but new york one lacks Empire state building which is currently the tallest building in new york, so we should upload the image which have Empire state building !

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 14:30, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So, I am going to replace the Hong Kong one. Any douts?? Please post now. -- Extra999 (talk) 21:18, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replacing with which new image ??? hong kong one ? i will suggest you to put hong kong's image.

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 15:13, 21 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I have done with Honk Kong only. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 04:05, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And how is this one?? Please see this also. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 04:09, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please

Someone please, add a note on the article about dubai's skyline. My computer is not letting it add. --Extra999 (Contact ^me + _contribs) 12:11, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

New York

Can we please keep a picture of New York's skyline on this page? PLEASE!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.39.110.23 (talk • contribs)

Editor, please sign your posts with 4 tildas like so ~~~~~. As to why we're using Hong Kong and not New York, the Hong Kong pic is a clearer demonstration of the subject matter. Also, New York is pretty cliche choice for the pic when so many examples that exist are more modern and exotic. If you can make a good argument to switch to New York, we might change it, but there needs to be good reasoning. We're definitely not going to have more than one pic in this article since that would be begging for a unending list of every city someone thinks deserves inclusion. Every individual city article already has a skyline pic.--Louiedog (talk) 18:18, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That's the poorest excuse I've heard in a while. To have a skyline article without a NYC skyline picture is laughable. I agree with 184.39.110.23 (talk • contribs). Both NYC and HK should be the featured skylines, as the world's two most prominent, far and away. Also, the Colosseum belongs in the historical section. Castncoot (talk) 14:58, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Definition

Why should the article be limited to the skylines created by a city structure? Are there not others that might not have their place in the article?

SovalValtos (talk) 01:48, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A decision on whether skylines other than those of cities are to be included would help the direction and structure of the article. SovalValtos (talk) 19:52, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be room for at least two definitions. See [1] Whether it is best to keep them within one article I am not sure. Maybe Urban Skyline and Natural Skyline could make two articles?SovalValtos (talk) 22:25, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article is terrible

It's one of the lowest-quality Wikipedia articles I can remember reading. A few specific complaints:

The thing I came for, an explanation of what determines where a city's canonical skyline is viewed from, is absent. So is just about any other explanation of the concept, apart from a very basic but also excessively ostentatious definition.
The article is too unencyclopedic overall. It reads like random sentences taken from a proper article about skylines. I think this could be solved mainly by expanding greatly on what's there, with attention paid to proper sourcing.
The article consists mostly of images and galleries, and lacks text. I'm not saying they don't belong (especially in this article), but there needs to be a bunch of text alongside them. The text that is present consists almost entirely of one-sentence paragraphs, of which there are no more than two in any section.
The section titles and organization are nonsensical. For example, the "subjective ranking" section describes objective ranking (though the decision of which objective criteria to use is subjective).

Unfortunately I'm not sure which WP:CLEANUPTAG(s) to put on this article, so if you can find one or two that suit it, please go ahead. – PointyOintment (talk · contribs) 23:31, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Skyline. 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/20110604164900/http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=skyline_ranking to http://www.emporis.com/application/?nav=skyline_ranking

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:33, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mess

This article is a big mess!!129.127.32.138 (talk) 02:15, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lead image

Some current disagreement about what lead image this article should have, with File:Taipei_Skyline_2021.jpg being replaced with File:City_of_London_skyline_from_London_City_Hall_-_Oct_2008_-_Aligned.jpg and now File:SingaporeCBD2.jpg in the past 24 hours. An IP attempted to lock down the latter by adding a "Do not change without prior, established consensus and discussions on talk" comment, but I can't see that this particular image of Singapore has been used or discussed in the past. It doesn't seem the best possible image, to me, as half of the photo is the dark surface some kind of lake, at night.

Commons has a lot of great photos at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Featured_pictures_of_skylines, with File:Skyline Frankfurt am Main 2015.jpg and File:Pudong_Shanghai_November_2017_panorama.jpg standing out for me. What would be a good pick? --Lord Belbury (talk) 17:47, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]