This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
It woud help were you to discuss or simply give a reason for the POV tag on the talkpage, as the the tag template suggests one should do. What's the POV? Brendandh (talk) 01:05, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The obvious and unsourced material regarding the individuals housed there in recent years which seems like it was written by a campaigner rather than someone entirely neutral. Also this is a property with a long history and a notable original owner to focus on such a short episode of the life of the building is undue weight.RafikiSykes (talk) 01:12, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Also the naming of a non notable living private individual in there is against policies i thought? Plus the external links section contains various campaign sites? Surely only reliable sources/official links pertaining to the place itself should be there?RafikiSykes (talk) 01:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=small}