Talk:One57/Archive 1

Archive 1

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on One57. 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/20150524194003/http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20140316/midtown/fire-breaks-out-at-problematic-one57-construction-site to http://www.dnainfo.com/new-york/20140316/midtown/fire-breaks-out-at-problematic-one57-construction-site

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) 06:18, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Crane image uploaded

There is an October 29 image request above for "the damaged crane similar to this or this". I think File:One57 Crane Collapse.JPG is pretty close to the first photo. Does that work? --Closeapple (talk) 04:21, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Additions

I work for Rubenstein Communications and I propose the following additions on behalf of Extell Development Company. To mitigate conflict of interest issues, I ask that an editor review the edits and take them live, as they see fit. If no objections are had and no edits are made within five days, I will go ahead and update the entry myself. NinaSpezz (talk) 17:20, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

• Integrated proposed additions into the entry. NinaSpezz (talk) 14:14, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Tallest residential building?

I don't think One57 is going to be the tallest residential building anymore. That honor is going to 432 Park Avenue at 1,398 feet. Source: http://gothamist.com/2013/03/20/heres_what_the_tallest_residential.php#photo-1

Crane Removal

I work for Rubenstein Communications and I'd like to add the following at the end of the "Crane Collapse" section on behalf of Extell Development Company. To mitigate conflict of interest issues, I ask that an editor review the edits and take them live, as they see fit. If no objections are had and no edits are made within three days, I will go ahead and update the entry myself. NinaSpezz (talk) 22:37, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

• The crane was safely and successfully removed from the building on November 11, 2013. [1]

Thank you. I figured there was more need to explain which crane this was and why, to our audience of mostly non realty, non construction, non Midtown people. Sorry for the day and a half delay.  Jim.henderson (talk) 12:20, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, Jim! NinaSpezz (talk) 14:28, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Say what?!

{{expert|reason=Height apparently self-contradictory.}} Could someone explain (in the main article would be nice) how someone could sell (let alone inhabit) the 89th and 90th floors of a 75-story building? - Embram (talk) 16:02, 17 January 2015 (UTC) Addendum: I may have got an indication of how this might've happened when I recently visited New York and stayed at the Grand Hyatt New York on 42nd St. There was the lobby, then a couple of mezzanine levels, and then came the 14th floor! Floors 2 through 13 apparently don't exist. Perhaps something similar is going on with this building. I guess this is not a new trend—skipping at least the first 13 floors for psychological/marketing reasons (so no one has to live on the 13th or a low-numbered floor, presumably), but I'd never heard of it before. So does One57 start with the 17th floor right after the lobby? That would explain how the 75th floor could be called the "90th floor," but I have no direct knowledge of whether that's true in this case. - Embram (talk) 14:05, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

We say: "One57, is a 75-story (marketed as 90-story) skyscraper". The question is why? We don't seem to have an answer. Are they claiming something they don't have. If they do, this is serious matter. We can't have number of stories give and take 15 (more or less). werldwayd (talk) 03:08, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

Penthouse #1 is located on 75&76 [2] while Penthouse #2 is located on 89&90 [3] so there's a seeming empty zone from 77 through 88 -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:58, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Why future tense

We say: "The building will have 92 condominium units on top of a new Park Hyatt Hotel with 210 rooms, which is set to become the flagship Hyatt property". This reads like the building is in planning stages. It will have or it does have 92 condos. The hotel will be the flagship or is actually the flagship of Hyatt. Our article is so ambiguous and incomplete. A section should be added about completion status, official opening, or is it already occupied or not etc. werldwayd (talk) 03:02, 27 February 2015 (UTC)