Talk:CTV Building

New Zealand High‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/ctv-construction-manager-not-up-to-the-job/7IX4AMETYYJCCCN26PXILIVAZI/

This article is written in New Zealand English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, analyse, centre, fiord) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

A fact from CTV Building appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 25 April 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that more than 100 people died in the CTV Building (ruins pictured)?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2011/April.

Wikipedia

Updates

There's been quite a bit of discussion and a special coronal sitting for the inquests which probably need to be covered. As well as the usual media sites there is http://www.justice.govt.nz/courts/coroners-court/christchurch-earthquake.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuartyeates (talk • contribs) 14:13, 14 July 2011‎

Reliability of building design info

I have commented out some info in the article that appears unreliable. All the stuff about ductility and the building design, and the material from the "Death Zone" article needs to be checked. The Death Zone article says the building was designed in the 1970s. It is difficult to believe the CCC gave consent in 1986 to plans drawn up in the 1970s. Nurg (talk) 03:08, 18 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ductility Statements

Why are those comments regarding non-ductile design being obsolete in this article? The building had ductile coupled walls and flanged walls that were designed to the loading standard and concrete codes from 1984 and 1982.

I suggest that those sentences are removed as they were likely made by someone who did not know the history of the structure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.184.60.99 (talk) 12:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i agree the paragraph seems strange. If the ductile design was already required, then what does it matter that the non ductile design was old. Unless the design was too heavily influence by the older style perhaps because the standard was somewhat new but the article doesn't state this. Of course sice the building was potentially non compliant, perhaps it wasn't a proper ductile design but I don't know if this is the case. Alternatively perhaps the ductile design being somewha new meant either the designers or the inspectors were less competent at what they were doing. Either way the section doesn't really seem to explain the relevance. Nil Einne (talk) 02:03, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Floor identification

The Commission uses Level 1 to Level 6 for the building; many New Zealand buildings use the term “ground floor” with the floor above being the “first floor” though some have floor 1 at ground level American style. Level 1 to 6 is unambiguous. PS: a lot of "finger pointing" by engineers involved and other engineers! Hugo999 (talk) 12:08, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on CTV Building. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110429150004/http://www.cbsnews.com:80/stories/2011/02/28/ap/asia/main20037576.shtml to http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/02/28/ap/asia/main20037576.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:15, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on CTV Building. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110409084145/http://www.ipenz.org.nz/ipenz/forms/pdfs/ChChFactSheets-Overview.pdf to http://www.ipenz.org.nz/ipenz/forms/pdfs/ChChFactSheets-Overview.pdf

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 19:29, 28 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]