This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
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
There is a serious lack of inline citations with some entire sections either completley or mostly unreferenced.
The division of the article into subheadings is very strange, particularly the "Contemporary" section which should probably be reworked completely.
Significant parts of the article are just listing of facts and trivia which are neither relevant to, nor well integrated into, the wider article.
The article goes into excessive detail on some aspects and is low on content in other important ways.
The article includes reference to a number of locations which are not actually in Bethnal Green.
There are many paragraphs which are very clearly not relevant to the section they are in. These should either be moved to another section or removed, as appropriate.
Note also that wherever the article history shows a paragraph being deleted with no edit summary by a sockpuppet/IP of User:Hopeful2014, it's probably been moved to another article. In the case of Bethnal Green, content has been moved out to Shoreditch, Spitalfields or Globe Town, London whenever Hopeful2014 thought they knew best, possibly without any regard as to whether the original article should still mention the landmarks in question.
Am on mobile so it is a pain to track the history. Not sure if the above comments were acted upon but the article still seems to be disorganised, eg: the comment about Mendoza & another boxer is out of place in the Growth section. I am currently reading The Blackest Streets by Sarah Wise and am surprised that I cannot spot it being used here - ISBN978-1-844-13331-4 - Sitush (talk) 20:25, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Section: Community, paragraph 4:
The Nomadic Community Gardens, once an area fenced off and overgrown, is now a occupied by a temporary project or "meanwhile use" run by a private limited company[122] on behalf of the property developer Londonewcastle, which leases the site to the garden operator for a peppercorn rent and provided start-up funding[123]. The space has been filled with temporary buildings and installations made up of found materials, street art, sculpture and allotments.[124] Londonewcastle gained planning consent for a development of "affordable housing, townhouses and apartments"[125] on the site in November 2015[126]. Construction on the Fleet Street Hill Project was intended to commence in 2016[123] but, as of June 2019, no work has begun on the site.
Not done for now: Probably too much about Nomadic Community Gardens there, also only from primary sources; without secondary sources (some newspaper coverage may be suitable), it's unlikely to be significant enough to be included. Peter James (talk) 15:57, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]