Talk:Crown Sydney

Skyscrapers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skyscrapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles that relate to skyscrapers 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.SkyscrapersWikipedia:WikiProject SkyscrapersTemplate:WikiProject SkyscrapersSkyscraper articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Australia: New South Wales / Sydney Mid‑importance

	Australia portal Crown Sydney is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject New South Wales (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Sydney (assessed as Mid-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of New South Wales.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Gambling Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gambling, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gambling 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.GamblingWikipedia:WikiProject GamblingTemplate:WikiProject GamblingGambling articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Gambling To-do:

Current collaborations:

Improve an article to FA

Improve an article to A

Help with the Gambling articles needing attention.
Tag the talk pages of Gambling-related articles with the {{WikiProject Gambling}} banner.
The link to the Missouri gambling site is now out of date and needs to be updated.
Japan section reads as though it was written by the gambling industry - quotes of 160% returns are 'citation needed'.

Travel and Tourism: Hotels Low‑importance

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Travel and Tourism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of travel and tourism related articles 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.Travel and TourismWikipedia:WikiProject Travel and TourismTemplate:WikiProject Travel and TourismTourism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Hotels.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Crown Sydney topped out 2.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:36, 23 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

Mass blanking of controversy section edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

One user keeps mass deleting referenced content from the controversy section on the basis that it is 'opinionated'. The whole point of documenting controversy is to document opinions - if it is reported in reliable sources. The deleted section is balanced, recording both favourable and unfavourable reviews published in reliable sources. We record public reception of films, plays, even people - why should so-called "Packer's Pecker" be accorded a different treatment? Please discuss here and obtain consensus before you delete again. --49.255.252.131 (talk) 01:38, 22 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Add topic