Talk:Observation deck

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Architecture Low‑importance 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 Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Piazzale Michelangelo in Florence may fit the description, and due to its celebrity it could perhaps be included among notable "belvedere" spots. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.217.251.44 (talk) 10:14, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see the request for pics. I have a brilliant pic of a viewing platform (which redirects here) but my pic does not meet the restricted criteria of this article! PeterClarke 21:52, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Viewing platforms on natural features don't meet the criteria for inclusion in the actual list of observation decks, but an image placed in the lead (which is where viewing platforms are described) would be very suitable. Cheers, Rai•me 00:19, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should the World Trade Centre be listed on the list (as it had a famous observation deck and would be second tallest if standing today), and in notes listed as "destroyed"? I see that it is listed in the historical record-setting observation decks, but I figure it should be in both. M.nelson (talk) 00:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any reason why the Rialto's observation deck isn't in here? It's Wikipedia article lists its observation deck at 234m, making it the highest in Australia. Q1 on the Gold Coast is taller, but its observation deck is slightly lower down. 165.142.249.81 (talk) 08:17, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I mean second-highest! 165.142.249.81 (talk) 08:23, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I saw the post about the references interfering with the sort order. Why not just move all of the references to the "notes" column?
— V = I * R (talk to Ω) 00:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The observation deck on the CN Tower is not on the 147th floor. Since the tower is mostly a solid concret pillar, there are less than ten floors total. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.250.46.223 (talk) 19:09, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There's none from Finland, for example Näsinneula 168/124 and Puijo Tower 75/74. Another to add is swedish Kaknästornet 155/128. First total height and then deck. Don't wanna mess with those tables. 85.217.38.115 (talk) 20:28, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article is completely missing "observation decks" on church towers. While church towers, minarets and other similar structures don't qualify as "buildings", many of them (at least in Europe) feature observation platforms that are usually accessible by foot rather than by elevator, are open to the public year-round or at least during spring, summer and fall, function as major tourist attractions and can reach considerable heights. One example is the Cologne Cathedral with an observation deck at 97 m and a total height of 157 m, which makes it higher than e.g. the platform of the Statue of Liberty, and certainly more list-worthy than some of the high-rises and skyscrapers currently listed. And I am sure that there are dozens of similar observation decks of heights greater than the current cutoff of 60 m. 93.242.101.49 (talk) 18:57, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ulm cathedral has a deck at 143 meters. Much higher than many that are mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 139.193.139.70 (talk) 13:10, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Washington Monument in Washington, DC is 555 feet tall and has windows at the top from which you can see out. Is it a reason why this wasn't included? 98.169.111.167 (talk) 22:23, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Its article's details section tells this: Height from lobby to floor of observation level: 500 feet (152 m). 85.217.36.50 (talk) 19:54, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The observation Deck of the Istanbul Sapphire Tower is at 236m (putting it at No 31) with a total height of 261m. It was completed in 2010. I tried to edit the table but was totally bamboozled by the page that came up. Amp-qld (talk) 11:33, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously the list is not complete and can never be complete, however the Macau Tower with on observation deck heigth of 223 m (ranked currently in the top 40) should probably be mentioned - in particular because of the unique "variety of adventurous activities" up there.134.100.111.78 (talk) 11:24, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Quite an amount of decks missing: 7 above-mentioned (first total height/then deck's height), of which 4 are towers: Näsinneula in Tampere, Finland 168 m/124 m; Puijo Tower in Kuopio, Finland 75 m/75 m; Kaknästornet in Stockholm, Sweden 170 m/128 m; Macau Tower in Macau 338 m/223 m; one church: Cologne Cathedral in Cologne, Germany 157 m/97 m; one monument: Washington Monument in Washington, DC 169 m/152 m; and one skyscraper: Istanbul Sapphire Tower in Istanbul, Turkey 261 m/236 m.
But the most obvious absence is Milad Tower in Teheran (Iran), which is the 6th tallest tower in the world. Currently would rank #15 on the list with 435 m total and 312 m deck.
One quite strange one missing is One World Trade Center with 546.2 m/382.2 m. It has already been included in many lists, for example List of tallest freestanding structures in the world, though it will be opened only in "late 2014", as its article says.
I might add those myself some time, but editing the tables is not that easy. And the ranking numbers will also change drastically, if all 8 or 9 decks are added. 82.141.126.28 (talk) 06:03, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PDF output using Google Chrome's built-in distiller produces poor results with this page. (Use the Ctrl P command in Chrome to preview). Issue may be with the template used or (more likely) the the way content was entered (coded) into the template and saved by the contributor. For example, when printing this article with Google's PDF printer, the first page has too much white (wasted) space. Note that the font size should not dynamically scale up or down to fit a page; font size of the main-body text content should be about 12 points on outputted PDF page(s); it is the images and table cells that should dynamically scale up or down to fit the info box and template in order to maintain the two-column Wikipedia layout. The offending elements appear to be caused by the separation of the tables and images. Refer to this Wikipedia article for a proper printer-friendly layout using tables with images -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_German_Navy_ships Printchecker (talk) 18:25, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if the Cupola module on the International Space Station could be considered an observation deck? (See space tourism.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Atommalac (talk • contribs) 13:14, 29 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I added this item per OTRS ticket:2017020110000604 request. I did not update the rankings, decided to wait to make sure others agree this inclusion is warranted.--S Philbrick(Talk) 22:22, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is also an observation deck in the Los Angeles City Hall. It is on the 27th floor, which would make it about 383 feet, or 117 meters, off the ground. I'm guessing this isn't on the list since I can't find a source to verify the official height. Ant314159265 (talk) 00:09, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Observation deck. 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://archive.is/20130105010001/http://www.cityguide.travel-guides.com/city/16/further_attractions/North-America/Boston.html to http://www.cityguide.travel-guides.com/city/16/further_attractions/North-America/Boston.html
• Added archive https://archive.is/20060313045927/http://www.endex.com/gf/buildings/liberty/libertyfacts.htm to http://www.endex.com/gf/buildings/liberty/libertyfacts.htm

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) 11:40, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Stratosphere tall enough in the list? Stratosphere Las Vegas. Thanks, Marasama (talk) 02:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The 101st floor opened to the public in June 2019, meaning Taipei 101 would not have had the highest observation deck from 2004-2008 as stated in the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:647:4400:8AF0:5413:75C8:BB6A:A955 (talk) 20:13, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There should only be the highest floor for each building. If we start adding every accessible deck the list will get to complex. I would suggest to remove the second deck from Burj Khalifa. T-Jak-T (talk) 15:32, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like he fixed this issue a month after making this comment. - Burner89751654 (talk) 23:25, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does the Lounge Burj Khalifa (on the 152nd to 154th floors of the Burj Khalifa) count as an observation deck? It looks like it has glass walls on the outdoor terrace on the 152nd floor, so that might count. If so, then it should be added to the lists of tallest observation decks here and here. And if not, then it should be removed from the list of tall observation decks here.

In any case, how tall is it? It says here that it's 584 meters, although that doesn't come from the sources it cites, which seem to be references for other things in that paragraph. But here it says it's 585 meters, and it cites a source, although the header of the source says it's 545 meters, and the body of that same source says 575 meters. If that lounge is spread over three floors, then its height will depend on which floor you're referencing. I suspect (although don't know) that the 154th floor is 585 meters, and the 152nd floor (with the terrace) is 575 meters. - Burner89751654 (talk) 23:28, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I found another source here, and I think I sorted out the height. - Burner89751654 (talk) 00:39, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the Burj Khalifa has the highest observation decks in high-rise buildings, and we should add it to the section for highest observation decks by type. But are they (and there are several) enclosed, outdoors, or both? That'll affect how they're listed. - Burner89751654 (talk) 00:39, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]