Talk:Tribeca Belfast
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Fattonyni in topic Wiki page for a non-existent development?
![]() | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | It is requested that an image or photograph of Tribeca Belfast be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
Wikipedians in Belfast may be able to help! The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Wiki page for a non-existent development?
editWhy does this page exist? It reads entirely like a promotional leaflet for the developers and development, and makes no mention of the ongoing disputes involved. I don't see much point in it being here, but if it is to stay, it should have all the advertising gumph removed and stripped back to the facts, and include some coverage of the campaign against the development, so that the bias is brought back to a neutral area. Fattonyni (talk) 20:18, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
- I found an old edit that user UAHS had provided info about opposition to the project, but had been removed by a bot due to a technicality. Reinstated and copyedited. Fattonyni (talk) 21:01, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- OK, in answer to my own question, I've updated the article from the ground up, keeping all original content (while refining any advertising-speak to make more encyclopaedic), adding further information about the work done by groups campaigning against the development and the reasons for same, and also adding a full development history from various sources. Hope it makes for better reading now! Fattonyni (talk) 14:39, 27 May 2018 (UTC)