|WikiProject Environment||(Rated Start-class)|
--Alex 13:23, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
Personally, I think the penultimate paragraph ("While Building Biology...") seems a bit on the POV side. --Djbb2 11:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC) This seems highly POV, as this has been described as an example of pseudoscience in other articles, such as in Feng Shui. Wee Jimmy 01:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
"Building biology (or Baubiologie as it was coined in Germany) is a pseudoscientific activity that investigates the indoor living environment for a variety of irritants." Pseudoscience is a rather serious charge, and the statement is not backed up with any facts. It seems more appropriate to remove the word "pseudoscientific" from the introductory paragraph and instead have a later paragraph detailing charges of pseudoscience complete with specific criticisms and rebuttals.----Marc —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 6 September 2008 (edit) (undo)
- Pseudoscience charge removed due to lack of citation and lack of details. Added "criticism" section and "response to criticism" section, which could use some citations. --Ceramic catfish (talk) 23:16, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Building Biology → Building biology … Rationale: Per WP:NAME, it is not a proper noun and should be lowercase, and someone has already accidentally created the destination as a blank page. — Saxifrage ✎ 00:22, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
Too narrow scope?
This article seems primarily concerned with a single idea within the "healthy" building movement. The field has greatly expanded since this article was written. It may be more informative to link to or discuss other building standards or provide a disambiguation. Some examples of more recent developments include the WELL building standard or the Red List building materials. --Eaterofmicrobes (talk) 19:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)