While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or
poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see
this noticeboard.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles
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
The reliance on
primary sources (see also
WP:SELFPUB and
WP:BLPSELFPUB) to cite the last two paragraphs of the "Legacy" section should be discussed. Generally, Wikipedia tries to avoid using primary sources to support statements or claims someone/something is saying about themselves/itself since it can be seen as a form of
WP:PROMO. --
Marchjuly (
talk)
03:44, 6 January 2019 (UTC)reply
I agree that the sources cited for the last two paragraphs of the Legacy section are strongly promotional. If there is no independent reliable source discussing the legacy of the Sarasota School, then those paragraphs should be removed. -
Donald Albury13:26, 6 January 2019 (UTC)reply
The first of those two paragraphs points out that two organizations exist whose purpose is to preserve Sarasota School of Architecture structures. I am not sure how that can be promotional, if the gist of the paragraph merely acknowledges their existence. Not sure where the 'promotional' aspect lies here. I replaced and added additional footnotes. The second paragraph, I have also replaced footnotes with ones that, hopefully, are less problematic.
Architecttype (
talk)
02:29, 10 January 2019 (UTC)reply