Skylines and skyscrapers on Wikipedia

[SlidellWx]

Amazing effort to get all of this skyscraper history completed for various cities. I look forward to your next update!

[MayDay]

Adding to the chorus of appreciation for the hard work

I speak from about 28 years of experience - I don't recommend doing this kind of thing for:

1. Accolades
2. The sense that everything is done

You will be very disappointed but it's still all worth it.

[LivinAWestLife]

Originally Posted by MayDay

Adding to the chorus of appreciation for the hard work

I speak from about 28 years of experience - I don't recommend doing this kind of thing for:

1. Accolades
2. The sense that everything is done

You will be very disappointed but it's still all worth it.

Yeah I realize I can't get too sucked in to it. It's kind of becoming a bit of an obsession for me already! Thanks anyway, I plan to work on the Ohio cities eventually

[LivinAWestLife]

A user named dallaz or dallaz95 has been badmouthing me and my work on City-Data because I had a debate with him a few months ago on whether Dallas' recent growth was "one of the most impressive in the country", a stance I've since changed my opinion on. Pretty disappointing to see but what can you do lol. It would have been better if anyone but him had brought it up.

https://www.city-data.com/forum/city-vs-city/3288791-top-25-us-cities-most-skyscrapers-82.html

Anyway, I've also edited the pages for Austin, Jersey City, Pittsburgh, and Detroit. Pretty big contrast between the first two and the last two: Austin is the clearest example of an American skyline with huge recent growth, while the last two were among the largest US skylines in the first half of the 20th century, with lots of gorgeous Art Deco icons, but have not built much especially after 1990.

I'm sorry for not doing the history sections of these cities yet because those are indeed very time consuming to do, even if I have an idea of what the general write-up should be like.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by LivinAWestLife

A user named dallaz or dallaz95 has been badmouthing me and my work on City-Data because I had a debate with him a few months ago on whether Dallas' recent growth was "one of the most impressive in the country", a stance I've since changed my opinion on. Pretty disappointing to see but what can you do lol. It would have been better if anyone but him had brought it up.

Pay him no mind. City-Data is a garbage dump full of garbage people posting their garbage.

[Wigs]

I highly suggest the thread poster and anyone else avoid City Data forums like the plague. It's so toxic, and way Worse than even skyscraper city!

[LivinAWestLife]

There's an ongoing discussion on whether proposed buildings should be included in the tallest building lists. While I have said yes, as traditionally these lists have always had them, they might also go against the "Crystal Ball" policy on the site, which says that Wikipedia shouldn't have speculative information on the site. Sometimes the proposed section does run quite long. What do you think? If you are an editor, you could participate in the RfC (request for comment) where this is being decided.

While this isn't related, there's a new discord server for all things skyscraper and high-rise! You can check it out here and I hope it could be a cool place to talk about skylines, skyscrapers and stuff casually, in a less structured way compared to this forum.

https://discord.gg/578b6A6P

[MolsonExport]

for every 10 proposals, maybe 2-3 actually get built?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by LivinAWestLife

There's an ongoing discussion on whether proposed buildings should be included in the tallest building lists.

I just "proposed" a space elevator to alpha centauri to be built right in my backyard.

PUT IT ON THE FUCKING LIST!!!





There is no discussion.

"Proposed" is a meaningless category.

When the tower crane shows up, then we can talk.

[mhays]

"Proposed" is pretty important, but the accuracy rate won't be that great. Also some jurisdictions have long entitlement and community engagement processes that mean we hear a lot of details far in advance, while other cities don't.

I wish there was a better version of "approved." This seems to be all over the map. Generally it seems to mean land-use permits but not building permits, though this is often not clarified. (I'm not sure some writers even know the difference frankly.)

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by mhays

"Proposed" is pretty important,

I disagree.

Anyone can "propose" anything anywhere anytime.

That utter ridiculousness in Oklahoma City comes to mind.

[mhays]

If cities are competing on their list of proposals, sure, a proposal doesn't mean much. But it's absolutely interesting and even useful to have a list of proposed towers in each city.

[LivinAWestLife]

There is a potentially big discussion on whether or not a section on proposed buildings should be included on Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_...building_lists#RFC_on_proposed_buildings

Looks like it might be trending on the "no" side. While I would accept this decision if it was final, it does seem that many of the "no" voters are generally uninformed outsiders, while most of the "yes" votes have been actual editors and members of WikiProject Skyscrapers - the people actually maintaining information about skyscrapers on Wikipedia. I'm not really sure what instigated this wider discussion, since these proposals have been on Wikipedia for many years without issue.

If you have an opinion on whether or not they should be included, please add in your opinion below to the discussion in the link! You can leave a comment without having an account.

I asked around on skyscraper-related Reddit and discord too and the vast majority of people there would like to keep the proposed buildings.

[LivinAWestLife]

Made a page for the US cities with the most skyscrapers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_in_the_United_States_with_the_most_skyscrapers

Surprised it didn't exist before tbh. Let me know what you think.

Advertising this stuff is hard because most sites are heavily biased towards image-based posting, especially r/skyscrapers. Personally I'm tired and don't really want to do another write-up because my ADHD addled brain finds it exhausting

[MolsonExport]

Fantastic. Very informative and clearly laid out, with great skyline shots too.

Any chance you might do this for Canadian cities?

[Steely Dan]

Seeing Jersey City now in the top 10 nationally for 500+ footers is a bit eye-opening.

[craigs]

FYI, there are two 300-footers at Barrington Plaza in LA now: the new one at 303' and Building A at 300'.

[LivinAWestLife]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Fantastic. Very informative and clearly laid out, with great skyline shots too.

Any chance you might do this for Canadian cities?

Thank you! And maybe someday. A lot less cities to rank, but that list would be more dynamic since Canada builds more. Someone on reddit also suggested doing one for North America as a whole (but info for Mexico or Panama is more sparse)

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

Seeing Jersey City now in the top 10 nationally for 500+ footers is a bit eye-opening.

Yeah they have about the same number as heavy hitters Philaelphia and Atlanta. Doesn't look like it perhaps because JC doesn't have anything too tall and it's dwarfed by Lower Manhattan nearby.

Originally Posted by craigs

FYI, there are two 300-footers at Barrington Plaza in LA now: the new one at 303' and Building A at 300'.

That's correct, they are be listed here iirc: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Los_Angeles. The new one is called The Landmark Los Angeles

[LivinAWestLife]

Hey guys, it's been a while since my last update. I worked on a lot of cities since then but I never bothered to talk about them lol, even though making these posts takes less effort than the actual editing. I guess I'll post about the cities I've done over the next few weeks.
I've also stopped writing new history sections as it takes up too much of my time unfortunately.

Last week I worked on Phoenix's article, a city often maligned for its very short and small skyline. Indeed it has the lowest high-rises per capita of any 5 million metro.

Recently though there's been a (small) boom downtown in residential high-rises, and it looks like a surge on the chart for 200 feet buildings.


There's less growth in the 300 ft region as most new buildings fall between 200 and 300 ft, with The Maeve and SOL Modern surpassing it this year.

The downtown distribution of skyscrapers is pretty normal. You can see lots of new buildings have extended the skyline northwards, ironically surrounding one of Phoenix's oldest high-rises, Westward Ho. Built in 1929, Westward Ho was the tallest building in Phoenix for over 30 years. It also has this really tall, ungainly spire.
Most famous views of the skyline are taken from the south, though, where the new buildings are hidden. That, and a lot of photos online are just outdated.

[LivinAWestLife]

Stretching north of downtown, there is a smaller cluster in Midtown that is basically a line around Central Avenue Corridor. It boomed earlier than downtown Phoenix, starting in the 1960s, but since 1990 there's been little growth here.

From above:


All the good skyline pictures on Wikipedia are severely outdated btw.

Currently downtown has two more 200 ft buildings going up. The 2nd phase of X Phoenix which would've been a 300-footer has been on hold since 2023. So like many other US cities there will likely be a slowdown in the next 5 years. Astra Tower, 500 ft tall, is planned to start in 2026 after multiple delays.