Talk:Maytree

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Serious issues with article

Sorry, but I've put notes at the beginning of this article questioning it's notability and neutrality.

The article seems to be an advertisement for this organisation. That's a shame, because if it's work is really notable then I'd like to know more about why this is so. And just because it's a charity doesn't mean that it's OK to write about how good it is - after all, there are presumably a group of staff people who have just as much interest in selling this organisation as if they were employed in a business.

'Unique' is a very very big claim for an article on Wikipedia (which is read all over the world). Anyway, further down the article it says that the Samaritans first used the phrase 'befriending' so this rather suggests that what Maytree does isn't 'unique'.

IF the Maytree is really 'unique' and so different that it deserves an encyclopaedia article all to itself, then it should be possible to prove this (where are the citations to external sources - and the Guardian one isn't convincing evidence by the way) - or at least to talk in convincing terms about its uniqueness.

Sorry to be so critical. As an external observer you've given me little to tell me about why this article deserves to exist. Every charity I know about says that what it does is really good... and some of them, even those with passionate staff and volunteers, do more harm than good.

Please improve this article - I'd like to know more about what's special about this organisation, or I'd like to see this article removed completely. Hignopulp (talk) 20:06, 20 February 2008 (UTC)