Talk:Southwark Towers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Architecture Portal
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.
WikiProject Skyscrapers
Architecture Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skyscrapers, which aims to create, expand, and maintain articles that relate to skyscrapers, high-rises and towers. To participate, visit the project page for more information.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

I've got a better picture, but my account won't let me upload it! Here it is: [1] [User:Oliver7649|Oliver7649] (talk) 19:50, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

We need a better picture as it doesn't actually look like that. Secretlondon 23:12, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merger

I suggest merging with the site as the building currently stands at 32 London Bridge and will be replaced with another building to give a full and accurate history of the site I think merging is needed. Also this article will lack notability when the building is demolished.--Lucy-marie (talk) 11:55, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The article currently at 32 London Bridge is probably about to be moved back to Shard London Bridge, see Talk:32 London Bridge#Requested move. This is reversing a unilateral move made by the proposer of this merge, who has been involved in the discussion there from the start, so the merge proposal is really part of that move discussion. Suggest that this discussion be centralised on that talk page, where the proposer has already created a section for it, see Talk:32 London Bridge#Merger. Andrewa (talk) 20:42, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

The above statement is pre-empting the outcome of an ongoing open discussion. The merits of the merger should be discussed on it merits and not on the perceived outcome of another discussion.--Lucy-marie (talk) 23:53, 23 December 2007 (UTC)