Talk:St Peter's Church, Bournemouth

Architecture Mid‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anglicanism Low‑importance

	St Peter's Church, Bournemouth is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AnglicanismWikipedia:WikiProject AnglicanismTemplate:WikiProject AnglicanismAnglicanism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Dorset Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Dorset, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics connected with Dorset. If you would like to participate, you can visit the WikiProject Dorset project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.DorsetWikipedia:WikiProject DorsetTemplate:WikiProject DorsetDorset articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Discussion of editorial changes

It seems like there might be a good amount of other material yet to add to this article, so let me explain the changes to what there is so far.

1) Statements like "best examples of alabaster" have two problems. It's important to prove such strong statements by citing independent sources. (That is, not your church's Web site.) The larger phrase read "best examples of alabaster anywhere to be seen". That has the additional problem of not following Wikipedia's style guide, because it's hyperbole that cannot be proved. (The policy is WP:PEACOCK.) Basically in Wikipedia, if you cannot prove something that's open to question, you should not write it.

2) The article is clearly drawing on specific resources for dates and names. Those references should be cited. If the only one available is the church's Web site, it suggests more research should be done to find other sources.

3) The long section on the Shelley family has very little to do with the church, itself. Wikipedia is not a tourist travel guide, it's an encyclopedia. This is an article about the church. It should describe its features, purpose, congregation, role in the town, etc.

4) Naming the present clergy is appropriate, but adding biographical details such as his being a vice-chairman on a board which has nothing to do with the church is inappropriate.

I hope some of this is of use to you.

24.130.18.213 (talk) 14:51, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]