Talk:Supportive housing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Urban studies and planning  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning 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.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Architecture  
WikiProject icon 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.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 

Cleanup[edit]

I tried to clean-up part of this article. There is no need to place "quotes" around certain terms like mental illnesses. I also removed link to specific types of centers as I see that as messy for the area I cleaned up, if you wish to link to specific types of centers for follow up information please do that when talking about the center or at the end of the article. Celtic Labyrinth 18:59, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

During my first visit to this article, I too worked to replace value judgments with NPOV. Given my interest and past work in this arena, I hope to contribute more after I become better informed and enhance my Wikipedia editing skills. In the meantime, other contributors may wish to see www.atlastahouse.org for information that might be incorporated into this article. //Don K. (talk) 20:32, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Vapid Article[edit]

The content is massively biased, disingenuous and completely without substantive evidence to support most claims made e.g. the entire economic impact section is a farce, the only factor considered there is the cost to government of care. This reads like a government brochure for those as malleable as wet clay, not a well researched article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.51.248 (talk) 04:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

american only ![edit]

the article, as normal gives an american view of funding, provision and feasability bias. In the UK the systems are totally different, and funding makes it quite viable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.133.44.18 (talk) 10:20, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Ad Tag Placed - This Article Needs MAJOR Work[edit]

In addition to the concerns noted above (some in place for years now), and the fact that the request for citations template has been in place since early '07, I placed the "advert" tag on the article in hopes of attracting attention to the list of problems with the entry. I might get to it eventually; somebody else can probably do it sooner and better. 67.187.111.107 (talk) 14:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC)