|WikiProject Urban studies and planning|
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)
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 188.8.131.52 (talk) 04:58, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
american only !
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 184.108.40.206 (talk) 10:20, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
Ad Tag Placed - This Article Needs MAJOR Work
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. 220.127.116.11 (talk) 14:38, 1 November 2010 (UTC)