Wikipedia

Talk:Belgrave Trust

Latest comment: 3 years ago by SchreiberBike in topic Still in existence?

This article would otherwise be a good first draft it has many citations to support its information with links and references to notability-establishing mainstream media. However, it reads like it was written with an agenda.

Leading the article with a "Controversy" section seems highly questionable (this isn't common on Wikipedia is it? I thought even extremist political figures typically get their bio and history before the controversy section right?). In general the article presents what seems like a one-sided view of this organization's values, rather then describing them as they are in factual terms.

Though we must assume good faith this puts off the strong sense of being written by a competing company, or at least some sort of advocate. If you're the article's author returning to read this, your good faith is assumed but please edit to achieve a neutral tone.

Note the inline markup and tagging of unsourced or poorly sourced sentences or phrases (hint: a random person's tweet is not a citable source on Wikipedia) as well as multiple words or statements that use non-neutral wording/tone (such as "elitist" or "touts" or "even going so for as to") or contain implicit value judgements, like the digression about the plane and car company.

This could easily be fixed up with some simple changes which as the original author perhaps you could tackle -- I hope you'll address them as it will be good clean article if you are up for some minimal cleanup and attention to point of view.

TobinMarchbanks (talk) 05:46, 7 April 2010 (UTC)Thank you for the constructive criticism and not completely rewriting it. I have a point of view of my own I guess. i don't work for a competitor by the way, keep that assume good faith thing going please. But I have tried to use clearer phrasing to convey the information. I also reordered the sections after looking at pages for similar companies. I still believe there is controversy in their approach, they probably agree they have bring it up in public comments so I used the CEO's own words to make the same point, which I don't think should be ignored, it's one of the main reasons they are notable. Also, I believe the sentence about "luxury carbon" is accurate from news and blog searches, but how to you link to a citation of the absence of something prior? I would actually be curious to know. I left it in, I believe it's also notable, but I don't know how to "link" to "proof" of something being one of the first unless someone says it, even if obvious. Also I changed the tone of the phrase, but do I really have to make a citation saying that those on the left are less excited about the "power of markets" and isn't that something basic enough that the term's definition itself is a citation? Lastly, I took a company logo from google image search because I wanted to add a pretty box. Of course that's copyrighted to the company but using it on a page about them is allowed right? I have seen it on lots of other company pages.Reply

Still in existence?

edit
Latest comment: 3 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The website is currently (March 2014) being used by a very different organization, the blog link is dead, their twitter hasn't been updated since 2011 - anyone know if this page shouldn't be rewritten into the past tense? Squalk25 (talk) 22:11, 21 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

To repeat @Squalk25:'s question from seven years ago, any reason why we shouldn't rewrite this in the past tense? I can't find any reliable sources indicating that it shut down, but I can't find anything indicating that it's still alive either. If there's no objection in the next week or so, I'll do the edits. SchreiberBike | ⌨  23:52, 8 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
  Done, though I'm sure other eyes would help. SchreiberBike | ⌨  03:46, 24 August 2021 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Belgrave Trust. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 05:59, 30 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Belgrave Trust. 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:

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) 10:35, 17 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Belgrave_Trust&oldid=1199795971"