Talk:International Finance Centre (Hong Kong)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Design Architect[edit]

This project was designed by Cesar Pelli and Rocco was the Executive Architect. Unless there is proof for Rocco was the design architect for the building. Check this out http://www.hld.com/en/propertieshk/ifc.shtml Whywhy99 07:45, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Symbolism[edit]

anyone else notice that its resembles a giant... phallus?

Check this out

http://www.skyscraperpicture.com/2ifc16.jpg

The section on "World-Class Office Accommodation and Services" looks like advertisement and certainly is not written a neutral language. I suggest that it is removed. Opinions?

- It certainly looked like an advert to me, it did not have any worthy objective information. I've removed it.

Sorry if it's a stupid question... I'm new to wikipedia, now that subjective information is removed, can we remove the clean-up tag? Thanks!199.111.230.195 22:50, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Two ifc" or "two ifc" (branded names)[edit]

Is it branded as the former or the latter? Thanks. — Instantnood 18:39, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Notice the capitalization usage here. SchmuckyTheCat 18:59, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I've seen both in real life. — Instantnood 19:00, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I would say Two IFC is more appropriate - NOOB
Yes, grammatically. As a brand name they can break whatever english rules they wish. SchmuckyTheCat 17:39, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I see de-capitalisation a rising trend in the English language, like the news heading appeared in BBC News and the cover of Beckham's book. Is it a sort of enhancement of visual art, I guess? -- Jerry Crimson Mann 04:26, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Moreover, I've just changed the branded names from "IFC One" and "IFC Two" to "One ifc" and "Two ifc", per the company website, currently. BUT, does anyone know if the towers were previously officially known as "IFC One" and "IFC Two"? If so, that is, if the official names have changed, we should note it here. Onanoff (talk) 18:46, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I agree that we use 'IFC' in the article, except when identifying the development's branding as 'ifc'. Onanoff (talk) 19:01, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is branded as 1IFC and 2IFC but it is known as IFC1 and IFC2, no one has ever called it 1IFC 2IFC

Hong Kong Station[edit]

Hong Kong Station is directly linked to the ifc, or at least the ifc mall. Was it built in coordination with the ifc or built later? Afterall, the two parts of the ifc mall is connected by a walkway which spans above the check in facilities. Should the answer to this Q be put into the article?

Pictures[edit]

Does anyone else feel that there are one too many pictures about IFC on here? Luke! 03:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Percent ownership[edit]

Currently the background states that Bank of China owns 5% of the development, and while they may have when it was originally built, they were bought out by Henderson Group. I don't have any sources for this other than a tour I went on of IFC today and I was told by someone working for Henderson Group that Bank of China had been bought out. I was also told that it is now split 50/50 between Sun Hung Kai and Henderson. Anyone know if this is correct and should be changed in the article to reflect the real figures ? samh004-talk|con 15:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject class rating[edit]

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 05:15, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Price[edit]

The price may mix up billion and 10 billion, it is not so high to have a HK$100,000 per floor area (sq.m ), because average is HK$10,000. Matthew_hk tc 19:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Logo ifc.gif[edit]

Image:Logo ifc.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 13:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Height[edit]

7th tallest? Where is this information from? Also, unfortunatly they need to be corrected. I am fairly certain numerouse towers are taller and if you include the as-of-yet uncompleted but still tallest tower on earth Burj Dubai stacks up to it.

71.11.140.56 (talk) 22:45, 6 February 2017 (UTC) I would like to see the number of stories mentioned in the introduction. 71.11.140.56 (talk) 22:45, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Floor count[edit]

I find this part confusing:

This 415-metre-tall (1,362 ft) building, currently Hong Kong's second tallest, is quoted as having 88 storeys and 22 high-ceiling trading floors to qualify as being extremely auspicious in Chinese culture. It is, however, short of the magic number, because "taboo floors" like 14th and 24th are omitted as being inauspicious – because 4 sounds like 'die' in Cantonese.

If it falls "short of the magic number" (88), then the floor count in the infobox should not be 88. Citobun (talk) 10:29, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on International Finance Centre (Hong Kong). 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 02:13, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on International Finance Centre (Hong Kong). 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 02:03, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this page about the IFC have a description for the ICC?[edit]

? 61.18.38.207 (talk) 10:38, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Because someone keeps vandalizing the page. Fixed. -- GreenC 12:56, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:International_Finance_Centre_(Hong_Kong)&oldid=1207725582"