Talk:St Peter's Church, Bournemouth

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)