Talk:List of tallest buildings in Newark

Inconsitencies per July 2010

There appear to a number of inconsistencies in the two references used as a basis for the list. Gateway Center comprises four towers built in early '70s and mid '80s, but are not clearly define therein or this Wiki list. Fireman's Insurance Company Building is listed as building at corner of Broad and Market, which are not one and the same, though they may have had same name. Addtionally there would appear to be other buildings that do not appear on ref listings at all, NJT Headquarters among them. Appears a bit of field research is necessary and for the references themselves to be updated/corrected Djflem (talk) 13:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Prudential Insurance Company North Building

Prudential Insurance Company North Building
General information
Type	Office
Completed	1892
Demolished	1956
Height
Roof	224 ft (68 m)
Design and construction
Architect(s)	George B. Post
Main contractor	Hedden Construction Company
References

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of tallest buildings in Gary which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:32, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Sources/Verications

• Emporis discontinued, offline but partially archived
• Emporis Top Twenty
• Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat is considered reliable, but incomplete
• https://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?cityID=159 very informative, reliable
• http://www.skyscrapercentre.com/city/newark informative, incomplete
• https://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?cityID=159 informative, incomplete
• https://www.roi-nj.com/category/real_estate/ informative
• https://jerseydigs.com/ informative
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Iconiq_777_Height_description.png Most reliable source, architectural blueprint of the tower.

Djflem (talk) 08:59, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Vibe

• https://realtybiznews.com/newark-municipal-council-grants-tax-exemption-to-vibe-a-resort-style-apartment-complex/98761609/
• https://njbiz.com/newarks-vibe-building-offers-sense-of-place-in-growing-community/

Djflem (talk) 15:41, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Iconic 777

Based on available references and the building’s own website: NEARLY 400 feet. Provide references for anything different. Do not change/revert without them.

Rank	Name	image	Height ft / m	Floors	Year	Notes
3	Iconiq 777		369 ft (112 m) (estimated)	33	2022	Beyer Blinder Belle Boraie in partnership with Shaquille O'Neal

Djflem (talk) 06:35, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

So I got the correct information from a friend who worked on the construction of the tower. If you open the link below you can view it. This is 777 McCarter Highway. Ground floor is at an elevation of 21, the highest point of the building is at 390. 390-21= 369. If the author of the Wikipedia page could put down the correct information that'd be great.

File:Iconiq 777 Height description.png

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Iconiq_777_Height_description.png

If this is not good enough for Wiki then it’s a shame, choosing articles over the actual construction blueprint is a shame. Kalebrocks318 (talk) 12:58, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Have edited entry with appropriate disclaimer to explain that info has NOT beeb verified in reliable sources:

• 369 ft (112 m)
• (unverified )
• Multiple (January 2024). "Since Shaq2 isn't getting enough attention". Reddit. Retrieved January 16, 2024.
• "Iconiq777". 2024. Retrieved January 16, 2024.

Djflem (talk) 11:53, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

References

Images

Unfortunately the images used have been “lifted” from developers websites and other sources, despite the claim that the ‘own work’ of the downloader. They are not and therefore violate both Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedia copyright rules and are not legally usable without permission of person/agency that originally made them (or whomever holds copyright. Just the way it is at Wikimedia Commons. 18:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC) Djflem (talk) 18:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Image use policy Djflem (talk) 08:46, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Halo

It cannot be possible that Halo 2 and 3 are between 133 and 165 feet taller Halo 1 See renderings and information. Numbers provided were not reliable. Other sources vary and are inconsistent:

• https://newyorkyimby.com/category/289-301-washington-street New York YIMBY
• https://jerseydigs.com/?s=halo+newark Jersey Digs

Djflem (talk) 23:26, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Contributions/74.88.40.40 & 68.195.10.222

From User talk:Ad Orientem/Archive 26#Contributions/74.88.40.40 & 68.195.10.222

Special:Contributions/74.88.40.40 has been asked to back up changes to a couple of articles. Have reverted myself but getting in edit-war territory. You've blocked once b4. Mind to have a look? Thanks.Djflem (talk) 17:51, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/68.195.10.222 Same story; same pages. Djflem (talk) 17:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

@Djflem I've protected the page x 72 hrs. If this starts up again let me know. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:38, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Thnx. List of tallest buildings in Newark, too, please? Djflem (talk) 19:57, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

@Djflem  Done -Ad Orientem (talk) 20:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

https://www.reddit.com/r/Newark/s/qcDwqZPAir 74.88.40.40 (talk) 22:58, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Sorry. Reddit is not a reliable source. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

You may propose changes on the article talk page. But you will need a reliable source. -Ad Orientem (talk)

Djflem (talk) 15:44, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

National Newark Bldg/Summit Tower

https://www.reddit.com/r/Newark/s/qcDwqZPAir Reddit is not reliable. Buildings are measured by height NOT elevation.Djflem (talk) 19:33, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/newark/sections/development/articles/41-story-tower-in-downtown-newark-a-signature-building-gets-city-s-ok Article calls building height: 515, but are they referring to elevation?

Images for Under Construction, Approved, and Proposed

Are the images of the current site necessary for buildings in this category? I cannot think of a single other "List of tallest buildings" page that includes the picture of the current site for uncompleted buildings. Looking at some of the images, most of them aren't even useful, they are either too broad of an image, too narrow, or simply useless. I think they should be removed, and I will do so, but if you think they should remain please discuss here. Hij802 (talk) 04:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

• That they don't exist on other pages is not really relevant. And why would location be informative? Granted, some are more so than others. What do you mean too broad or too narrow? Djflem (talk) 05:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

  Almost all of the images are pretty useless and uninformative.

The Halo Tower 2 and 3 are just pictures of the construction of Halo Tower 1.

yes, tower 1 & side of site where tower 2 & tower 3 may be built

• The Arc Tower photo is just a photo of Washington Square Park, the 571 Broad Street address isn't even in the picture.

not ideal, but very much the section & context of Broad Street side (next to florist)

• The Summit Tower photo is a general photo of the street it's on, the actual site just blends in with everything else on the right.

shows location & context in historic district where it may be built, very relevant considering historic commission/city planning department decisions

• 96 Clay Street isn't even in view.

not great, but intersection of Clay Street & approach to bridge

• CitiSquare's photo only shows the small part of the site, not the main original field.

the location shows site of Lincoln Motel which is large part of the site, and context near train line

• Nova Towers photo is just a skyline photo.

shows parking lot & relationship to Government Center location

• Artside is just a photo of a light rail station.

shows key feature of future developent

• Based on this, only 2 out of the 10 photos under these categories are actually useful. That's pretty bad. Now, I could easily just screenshot street view photos from Google Maps to replace all of these, but overall I just do not think these photos are necessary to have. I think they should either be removed, or at least replaced with useful ones. Hij802 (talk) 19:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Useful fotos give context and demonstrate existing situation and how development will change landscape. Article are a historical survey of tallest buildings AND skyline and urban development and architectural works found in the city, all informative (and of interest to architects, historians, urban planners, visitors, locals, etc, etc) Some could be upgraded, but that is a process.Djflem (talk) 11:03, 24 April 2024 (UTC)