This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Bias in the article
editThe following The current uproar over development of the Mount Sanctuary is misplaced and misleading. The Grenada Dove is not adequately protected under current management plans. Funding and properly arranged conservation easements with money-generating entities such as resorts not only provide protection but also increase the opportunity for tourism within the Grenadian economy. Conservation efforts for this species will only work when the needs of all stakeholders are addressed. If the Grenada Dove is to continue to exist then individuals involved in its conservation must reevaluate current methods of preserving this species, stop perpetuating inaccurate data about the species, and seek alternatives that are win-win for both the Grenada Dove and the Grenadian people is not neutral or unbiased and reads like a press statement from the developers. This article has undergone numerous edits from anonymous IPs from both sides of the debate. Wikipedia is not a battleground or a soapbox. There seems to be a lot of info that has been added to this and that is great but we need to make this article neutral and balanced. Sabine's Sunbird talk 05:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- Many statements in the 'current issues' section need proper referencing as well as neutralising the tendentious language. There are also inline references throughout the article that are not expanded or mentioned in the list of references. Maias 06:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- I have removed some blatantly POV statements but it still needs plenty of work. Maias 10:14, 9 May 2007 (UTC)