Talk:Better Society Capital

Latest comment: 8 years ago by Klbrain in topic Review

Speedy Deletion

edit

Tagging an entity with over 86k GHits for speedy deletion within 2 minutes of a stub's creation must be something of a record for trigger-happy behaviour :-). Please use the myriad of sources and improve the article, don't whack things even if you might not like them. NBeale (talk) 11:41, 13 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

  • Nope, not a record. And Ghits mean nothing, if not reflected in the article. Generally, it would be considered a bit hasty to tag articles having no context or content within the first ten or so minutes. The Big Society Bank was tagged as promotional, due to the attempt to establish notability through speculation of future events. Wikipedia is not a news source or public relations outlet. I think the article would best be added to the encyclopedia once it truly becomes notable. While I often work on improving various articles, I don't spend my time with those that meet Wikipedia's criteria for deletion due to the promotional nature. Best regards, Cind.amuse 11:49, 13 February 2011 (UTC)Reply
You should read WP:BEFORE - that nomination was a clear voliation of policy. The result was speedy keep but really! Please be less trigger happy. Best wishes. NBeale (talk) 14:53, 13 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Santander

edit

What is said here about Santander is misleading. Santander withdrew from "Project Merlin" which was a wider discussion between the UK banks and the government, of which the Big Society Bank was only one item. NBeale (talk) 14:54, 13 February 2011 (UTC)Reply

Review

edit

Greetings, I am a communications adviser to Big Society Capital. I would like to suggest an overhaul to this page to make it more useful, factual. For example, Big Society Capital was launched in 2012, and reference to the Big Society Bank is probably confusing and irrelevant - perhaps this should have its own stub?. A section referring to the UK social investment market would also be good to build context around the work of Big Society Capital. AndrewRobinson42 —Preceding undated comment added 08:29, 31 May 2013 (UTC)Reply

Most of these issues seems to have been resolved. The mention of a Big Society Bank seems relevant as part of the history development of Big Society Capital, and isn't sufficiently independently notable (as it didn't eventuate, as far as I'm aware; see WP:CRYSTAL). Klbrain (talk) 11:11, 27 May 2016 (UTC)Reply