Talk:Garden of 10 and 11 Downing Street

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Historic sites Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Horticulture and Gardening Low‑importance

	Gardening portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Horticulture and Gardening 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.Horticulture and GardeningWikipedia:WikiProject Horticulture and GardeningTemplate:WikiProject Horticulture and GardeningHorticulture and gardening articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

Roy Strong edit

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments2 people in discussion

I've used the Daily Mail article by Roy Strong as a reference for this article as he is a renowned historian on the history of horticulture, art and architecture, and garden designer. As well as FRS, CH, etc. I do not believe that the Daily Mail have altered or falsified his words in any way. No Swan So Fine (talk) 09:15, 31 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

@David Gerard: Could you explain why Strong's article for the DM was inaccurate in this instance? No Swan So Fine (talk) 14:49, 31 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Because it's a deprecated source and is generally prohibited per WP:DAILYMAIL in 2017, as reaffirmed in 2019. For an exception to these two broad general RFCs, putting it up at WP:RSN would probably be the correct move - David Gerard (talk) 15:02, 31 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. I of course would not normally consider it as a reliable source, but this instance I felt was exceptional owing to Strong's prestigious academic reputation in this specific area. No Swan So Fine (talk) 15:20, 31 May 2020 (UTC)Reply

Despite the slow-running edit-warring of the WP:DAILYMAIL into the article, consensus seems against you here - and Strong's opinion has indeed already been used in this article, and cited to an RS. The DM does not seem necessary to WP:NPOV here, as the relevant expert view is already present, but not cited to a deprecated source - David Gerard (talk) 18:16, 17 July 2020 (UTC)Reply

Add topic