Thanks for your comments. I think that now a section on Charles Darwin main article features some recognition of the fact of the 200th anniversary commemoration that the original page can go. I understand the points about seeming 'commercial advertising'. The Darwin 200 sites cover much biographical information as well as listings of events (most now passed). Argubaly there is as much useful information on Darwin on each of the Darwin 200 link or project pages as there is commercial or venue interest. The same could be said of mention of commemorative coins by the Royal Mint as on-site advertising. However Darwin being a world figure, some recognition of the extraordinary range of his (controversial) anniversary celebartion should be retained in the main Darwin article. NqZooArchive1969 (talk) 16:49, 4 January 2010 (UTC)