Talk:Space Needle

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): RobertYe.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled

The hexagonal platform just below the top of the legs is a maintenance platform, not a permanent part of the Needle. Elde 01:36, 1 Jan 2004 (UTC)

(1 year and 21 days later): moved this information to the main body of the article where it belongs. Lee M 03:16, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

In the Google Earth discussion, coordinates are cited for the needle that are different than those in the existing Space Needle teplate. It is obvious to me that there are insignificant digits in the existing data. I would like to update and unifiy this data. Please let me know if there are any objections. Amorrow 23:59, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Who knows something about Geodesy?

Who knows enough about geodesy to determine the point of the Space Needle (or better still, the tip of the Washington Monument) to extra significant digits? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Amorrow (talk • contribs) 17:28, July 31, 2005

Relevance of "twenty dollar grilled-cheese sandwiches?"

Why is this comment in the second paragraph? There's already a comment about the relative expense of the food later in the article; this summary comment at the top seems dismissive, as though that's all they serve. Not to turn this into a restaurant review, but the "sashimi-grade" tuna steak I had when I visited on a business trip seems much more indicative of the quality of the offerings. --Markzero 11:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

i'm not sure about the phrasing of the $20 grilled cheese sandwich, but many tourists and visitors are shocked by the prices, which makes it notable. was the tuna any good? Justforasecond 13:05, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

It wasn't the best I ever had, but it was pretty good. As far as prices go, Antares in Reunion Tower is similar, and the view isn't as nice in my opinion. Given the exclusive locations of these restaurants and the fact patrons skip the ticket price, why would these prices be shocking? This is destination dining, and it's obviously going to be more expensive. --Markzero 04:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok, the minimum charge at SkyCity has gone up to $30/guest for dinner, $25 for lunch, and there's no cheese sandwich. Looking at the "new" menu, it does seem somewhat pricier than Antares is, currently. So I can see some of the concern, and it weakens my argument :) Still, it's fine dining. Go to the Salty's in Alki Beach, Seattle, and pay $26 for their Ahi dish. Now buy a $14 Space needle ticket. that's $40. SkyCity's similar entree is $38.50. Is the food at SkyCity comparable? I don't know. Maybe not. I couldn't find any dish that close at Ivar's Salmon House, but it probably would have been cheaper. But not by much. --Markzero 04:43, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Updated restaurant pricing in article. --Markzero 04:58, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

NPOV issue regarding photo pricing

"During the wait, Space Needle staff attempts to sell highly overpriced photos to patrons from around $30." How is "highly overpriced" a neutral statement? --Markzero 12:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

privately owned

Do we know who privately owns it? - Zepheus 21:31, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes; it's owned by the family of Howard Wright, one of the original builders. The Space Needle Corporation, which manages the Needle, is his company. Wavery2001 00:14, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

History

The history, as given, is in part verbatim from the official site's history page at [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.89.246.128 (talk • contribs) 15:08, July 20, 2006

Violation of Wikipedia's GFDL and a photographer's CC license

The following URL appears to be using a edited/modified screen shot of the wikipedia's Space needle article and appears to be in violation of both Wikipedia's GFDL and the photographer's Creative Commons license under which the article's image is licensed. There is no attribution, inclusion of the licensing terms, etc., etc. [2] I'm not sure what can/should be done about this. Hopefully someone can get in touch with the photographer and inform him of the violation of his work. I will also post this to "Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems" for anyone interested in the more general copyright violation. (note: that comment was moved to an archive page) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.201.53.207 (talk • contribs) 12:24, August 1, 2006

Image sizing

Please do not hardcode the size of images. This is explained:

• Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Images: In most cases the size of images should not be hardcoded.
• Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Displayed_image_size: "From MediaWiki 1.5 the default thumbnail width can be set in the preferences, so it is recommended not to specify "px", in order to respect the users' preferences (unless, for a special reason, a specific size is required regardless of preferences, or a size is specified outside the range of widths 120–300px that can be set in the preferences)."
• Wikipedia:Images#Image_preferences: "Logged in users can set the size of thumbnails want in special:preferences under "files". The default, used by those not logged in, is 180 pixels. Logged in users can choose from widths of 120px, 150px, 180px, 200px, 250px or 300px"

Thanks, Cacophony 18:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Expensive elevator car

"Completed in April 1962 at a cost of $4.5 million, the last elevator car was installed the day before the Fair opened on April 21."

That's one expensive elevator car (or a dangling participle). Gr8white 02:27, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

name flub under history

"""In a Seattle coffee house, Brendan J. Cysewski bore the first design of the Space Needle, originally named The Space Cage, while daydreaming. This first 1959 sketch was on a coffee house placemat. Carlson was then president of a hotel company and not previously known for art or design, but he was inspired by a recent visit to the Stuttgart Tower of Germany. Knowing that the theme of the 1962 World's Fair would be Century 21, he made a shape somewhat resembling that of a large balloon top tethered down to the bottom.""" see if you can spot the confusing detail concerning the name of the guy who designed the space needle in this paragraph!! also, is bore the right word? how about drew, or sketched. bore has a different connotation, and not a very accurate one. would change it myself, except that i don't know if the name of the guy who sketched the original design is Cysewki or Carlson.

Moved on maps

Can someone explain what this paragraph means:

In June 1987, the Space Needle moved 312 feet (95 m) to the southwest. This movement only occurred on maps though, as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) had begun a 10-year endeavor to re-map the world by satellite images. Major structures and landmarks such as the Space Needle were the first to be mapped out.

At least provide a reference or link to NOAA's remapping project. I'm rather skeptical -- is this a joke? Pfly (talk) 22:25, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

As fast as raindrops?

In the architecture second, the article says, "In 1993, the elevators were replaced with new computerized versions. Traveling at 10 mph (16 km/h), the elevator descends at the same speed as raindrops." Wouldn't raindrops in freefall be accelerating at the regular gravitational rate of about 9.8 m/sec^2 ? I feel like a smartass for mentioning it, but I don't think it brings anything to the article anyways. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.71.193.150 (talk) 05:48, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

The Rain article says raindrops reach a terminal velocity between 2 m/s and 9 m/s, which is between 4.47 MPH and 20.13 MPH. The elevators travel at 10 MPH, which -is- within this range, but only a very specifically sized raindrop, which is a bit like saying a human can run as fast as a cheetah because it can match it's speed up to 20 or so mph. I'll take it out. 71.234.60.152 (talk) 17:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Earthquake Resistance

"It is built to withstand winds of up to 200 mph (320 km/h) and earthquakes up to 9.5 magnitude". We definitely need a citation for the seismic comment. I can find only the first part in the references (see below). The name of the design engineer should also be in there - John Minasian. It would be wrong to write that the architects themselves designed it to resist any sort of force. I must say, however, that I find it unlikely that the Space Needle was actually good (as originally designed) for such high levels of earthquake, although I could be wrong. I remember hearing something about a seismic retrofit in recent years, which would seem to reflect this, although I cannot find anything on the web about it, and it may have been disguised as part of an upgrade (hearsay). It has become increasingly clear in recent years that the US building codes are not adequate for the design of tall buildings (see latest report from CTBUH). This is not to say that all tall buildings designed to code are necessarily sub-standard, but there is probably a need to reassess some of them. This is particularly true in places like Seattle where the seismic risk is significantly higher than originally assessed.

I propose to remove the reference to it being able to resist a 9.5 magnitude earthquake unless someone can come up with a reference. The websites that I can find make reference to it being designed to twice the force levels specified in the 1962 Building Code, and I propose to insert that instead.

I have added the name of John Graham and Company as architect since this is stated in two references. I have not removed the reference to Victor Steinbrueck, although it is not supported by any citation. If a citation is not added in the near future, then I propose removing the statement that "Victor Steinbrueck really designed the Space Needle", since this is not NPOV. Comments welcome.

Some additional references on the web:

• The history on the official site
• Article at Howard S. Wright Construction Co. website
• Unofficial Space Needle website
• Article by Carl Molesworth, 2004

--Muchado (talk) 04:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Radiotechnical installations

What kind of radiotechnical equipment carries or carried the tower? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.46.238.151 (talk) 10:54, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

None. The article states that the tower isn't used for broadcasting. —Quicksilver^{T @} 03:58, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

WP:FOOD Tagging

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) 11:10, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Nighttime image

OK, there is already a nighttime image in the article, but I happen to think the one I just took is better, at least given that the Space Needle is the subject.

• 
  The one in the article.
• 
  The one I'd like to use.

I won't replace this myself - I'm sure everyone in Seattle thinks they've taken a great picture of the Needle - but I'm just bringing it to people's attention and suggesting adding it. - Jmabel | Talk 07:27, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Radio transmissions section

Is it a common misconception that the space needle is used for public broadcast? Perhaps I've just lived with the space needle for too long, but this section seems rather superfluous. If we're going so far as to mention one thing that the space needle is not, then I think we should need to list everything that the space needle is not. "The space needle has never been used as a giant kabob." Know what I mean? Littelbro14 (talk) 04:27, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I think a lot of Seattle tourists think that the Space Needle is used in the same way as the CN Tower, as a radio broadcasting tower. Silly tourists. Bubsty (talk) 16:59, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

As a radio professional (albeit not engineering) now I'm embarrassed, but yeah- I guess I assumed it was a broadcast site, in fact I've always thought/understood it was World's Fair Decor first (a lá Knoxvilles' Sunsphere), broadcast site second and everything else incidental; couldn't have been more wrong. Silly air talent.

That said, it is a silly little section.68.166.5.42 (talk) 22:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps it should be noted elsewhere in the article that it isn't used for broadcast. But I do believe this section should be removed. Would anyone mind a great deal? Littelbro14 (talk) 05:26, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

When it was completed it was the tallest structure west of the Mississippi River.

At de-WP there are efforts right now to bring the article up to GA or possibly even FA... Well, the question was raised whether the bold statement above is true because, well, the Golden Gate Bridge, built in the 30s, is a structure too, isn't it? Maybe change it to "building" or something... --X-Weinzar (talk) 13:33, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Use in Fiction

The Space Needle was used prominently in the Playstation 4 exclusive video game, Infamous: Second Son. Some missions involve the Space Needle directly as your character fights enemies on top of the structure and flys around it to break off equipment installed by the enemy organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trakx (talk • contribs) 13:38, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Do you ever forget that you're on a Wiki and can edit whatever you want? 198.209.162.180 (talk) 00:15, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Matt Jackson

Disgraced Aspie "Jeopardy!" player Matt Jackson received a deluge of postcards from the Space Needle after he missed the question to the answer on Final Jeopardy! on his fourteenth appearance on the show. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.49.156.51 (talk) 18:01, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

"With time an issue"?

The problematic sentence is:

   With time an issue, the construction team worked around the clock.   

So "With time an issue" is supposed to be better than "With a time issue"? But IMO "With time an issue" sounds like

"There is time an issue" versus "There is a time issue"

or "An elephant is big an animal" versus "An elephant is a big animal".

85.193.250.181 (talk) 17:26, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

"With time an issue" is the shortened form of "With time [being] an issue" and fits the statement. SounderBruce 19:07, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, this is a common English idiom. Google "with time an issue", or "with money an issue", etc.[3][4][5][6]. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:41, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you both. You were very helpful. But, since readability matters, we should use plain English, and therefore avoid idioms. Then

1. Why not to use "With time being an issue"?
2. Is "With a time issue" ungrammatical?

85.193.250.181 (talk) 21:21, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

This idiom is plain English. It's a common phrase. Adding "being" wouldn't be wrong, but it adds no information, so it's wordy. Plain English certainly includes common idioms, but it is not wordy. I've already given you evidence that it's not ungrammatical.

With Poland your location, I'm wondering if English is your second language? ESL is often plagued by false grammar rules meant to simplify learning the language, or with folk grammar rules that persist as superstition. Often the teachers of these rules cling to them passionately.

The wording is not a problem and it doesn't need to be changed. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:04, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

By the way, edits like [7] and [8] are not terribly harmful, but your reasoning is incorrect, and you're changing the intended meaning slightly. It's fine to change the meaning if that makes it closer to what the source says, but if an editor is ignoring the source and simply doing it because they think apparent is vague and obvious is not, it's harmful. The cited source in Dry run actually used "apparent". Apparent mostly connotes something easily sensed, with the eyes primarily, and by extension the other senses. Obvious means almost the same thing, but it is broader, i.e. more vague, in that it more strongly connotes easily detected via the mind, by reason or deduction, and not necessarily the senses alone. The scope of both words overlaps enough to cover the same meaning, but this change made it more vague, not less, and made the article less like what the source intended. In Pauli effect, the cited source also used the word apparent, not obvious. You've made this change on a number of unrelated articles, which suggests you're trying to banish apparent based on a misunderstanding of its definition.

Here, changing immense to vast was less harmful, because it's not clear from the source which was intended. But you did change the meaning: immense implies the trees don't just cover a large area, but are also very tall. Vast only speaks to the large land area. Primeval or old growth forests are understood to have very tall trees, and more tall trees packed closer together. The do look immense, in addition to possibly being vast. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 01:32, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

My mother tongue is Polish, and I live in Poland. But I want to improve my fluency in English to the level of native English speakers - not to ever leave my country (I am too old) but to feel better. Even now I feel as if I was born again in a second language. Polish teachers of English, graduated from Polish universities are not very competent because English studies in Poland teach only about English but not the language itself. Most people I know have learned English for many years in schools and are not able to say the most basic phrases after that. That's why I have decided to learn English by myself. The "false grammar rules" you mentioned are not only for students, but also for (formally qualified but incompetent) teachers.

But getting back to the subject:

Your explanation is very impressive. This is exactly what I have been waiting for. Thanks to you, I am beginning to understand what the word "apparent" really means. This word always drove me crazy because my scientific mind loves logic, and the word "apparent" seems to be very vague and ambiguous. Even a very reliable source like this was not much help. The word "immense" was almost unknown to me - I knew the spelling and pronunciation but not the meaning ;-) I am ashamed of my harmful edits and I have reverted the ones mentioned by you, and will check the rest. OMG, I've just mixed two tenses in one sentence, was it correct? (Excuse this digression). You have help me a lot, and I am very, very grateful. Thanks.

PS. It is 2 AM in Poland. I must get some sleep :-) 85.193.250.181 (talk) 01:20, 1 March 2017 (UTC)