This article is within the scope of WikiProject Civil engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Civil engineering 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.Civil engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Civil engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Civil engineeringCE articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somerset, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somerset 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.SomersetWikipedia:WikiProject SomersetTemplate:WikiProject SomersetSomerset articles
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
POV template should not be removed until article has significant coverage of the massive fraud Beazer was convicted of engaging in and its role in triggering the Subprime mortgage crisis and Great Recession. Sources here: [1].E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
A condensed summary of Beazer Homes USA should be added; tag should not be removed until this is done.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:54, 15 February 2016 (UTC)Reply
Hi - The history of this company ended when it was sold to Persimmon in 2001. There is a separate article on Beazer Homes Inc. I have looked at the "sources" you have referred to above but I cannot find any that go back as far as 2001. So I don't believe there is anything wrong with the article as currently presented. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 20:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)Reply