Talk:Sky Tower (Auckland)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search


I changed the picture to an another one which is the same with better colors. Since i am the owner of the picture i can do that :). --Chmouel Boudjnah 09:55, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)


the title of "tallest free-standing structure in the Southern Hemisphere" is under threat from towers being built in oz.

It still is the tallest........hemisphere at the moment.--IanRitchie 08:56, 30 April 2006 (UTC)


I'm a Aucklander and i've never heard of the Sky Tower being refered to as a spark-plug. Maybe this should be removed from the article?

I agree. I have worked at skycity since opening, and this is not a common description of the tower.Scottbeck


A few years ago there was a jeep or some large car attached to the side of the skytower. If anyone has more definate information, or even better a picture, that might be interesting.

Adult Entertainment[edit]

The article currently states that the tower is used to broadcast "adult Entertainment". Apart from the misuse of caps, it seems to be saying that the tower broadcasts lots of porn. Sounds like rubbish to me, but maybe I just lead a sheltered life...

Yes, that's incorrect. I have fixed that section of the article. --James Pole 04:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Metric conversion[edit]

Could someone please convert the metric units to Imperial? I know you can look it up in all sorts of places, but most news and informational sources include both whenever possible. My favorite site for such things is, just in case anyone needs a quick link in the meantime. (Not affiliated with that site, I just use it a lot for these things).

Thanks. 04:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC) -- random anon browser


They're interfering with the menu on mine, those pictures are, btw i'm on cologne blue layout. If no one minds i'll change that. The Person Who Is Strange 01:50, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:FOOD Tagging[edit]

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Restaurants or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. You can find the related request for tagging here -- TinucherianBot (talk) 11:08, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

C Class[edit]

This article seems to meet all the criteria - its much past start class - so i've gone and moved it up. A few more citations and this article should be up to scratch.

  1. "As well as for entertainment, the tower is used for telecommunications and broadcasting with the Auckland Peering Exchange (APE) being located on Level 48. Several radio broadcasting companies co-locate transmitters and share antenna systems, while television company Canwest (who runs the TV3 and C4 channels) has secondary transmitters on the tower, their primary one being at Waiatarua." - this has been tagged with a cite tag, and a (limited) google search doesn't retrive anything.
  2. The lighting section could certainly use some cleaning up, and a graph might be better for the colour listings.
  3. The pictures could be better organised, they look a little messy to me.

Once these things are fixed, this article should be moved up to B class and with some general cleaning up could be GA material. I'll do these myself in about a week, but i'm pressed for time studying for exams. Thank you, --MattWT 06:36, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


Hello all,

I noticed the link to the reference for the assertion of the tower being 12th in height among those in the World Federation of Great Towers was broken. I fixed the link, then went to the Wiki article for the federation. There, the tower is listed as 13th in height. I went to the federation's website, but didn't see anything there that actually ranked the towers. There's no source at the federation's article, so someone might have ranked them himself or herself. Perhaps it would be best to remove the ranking and just state that it's a member of the federation. Doonhamer (talk) 21:18, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Looking at the WFGT website there are clearly 12 higher towers so I have changed this fact and removed the reference of it being 12th. CStubbies 14:31, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

"The top observation deck ... gives views of up to 82 km in the distance"[edit]

The above line, based on info on the referenced website, seems to me to be basically meaningless. Assuming good light, good eyesight, clear air etc, the 220m height of the deck would allow one to see something of zero height on the horizon about 53km away. Something about 310m high on the horizon would be theoretically be visible from the 220m tower at a distance of 82km. But there are many hills, mountains etc in the distance higher than 310m. For instance the peak of Great Barrier Island at 621m some 90km away. And of course one can get a view of the moon, sun and a few stars (at night) even further away :-). So although the 82km distance is from a quoted source, I don't think it has any great meaning (perhaps there is a particular object they had in mind?), and shouldn't be repeated here without some qualification. --Tony Wills (talk) 23:33, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:36, 14 October 2018 (UTC)