This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Surrey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Surrey 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.SurreyWikipedia:WikiProject SurreyTemplate:WikiProject SurreySurrey-related articles
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
Surely the temple imported from Leptis Magna and apparently now in the grounds of Fort Belvedere demands more coverage. Presumably it was one of the most important structures at Leptis. Is it accessible to the public?
Redcliffe maven (
talk) 19:42, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
In fact it is close to a public road, and can be seen in Google Street View.
Redcliffe maven (
talk) 12:54, 5 February 2013 (UTC)reply
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Is there a reason why an image of Edward, Prince of Wales/King Edward VIII was not included? It would seem that much of the structure's notability is because it is the scene of his actual abdication.
Shearonink (
talk) 19:11, 11 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Photo was added by nominator.
Shearonink (
talk) 18:34, 12 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
At this time the only improvements I would like to see going forward would be to put the references into two columns so they don't stretch down the page so far and to consider placing one or two of the images on the left side so the text would be broken up a little bit and the right-side of the "page" would't be so visually heavy.
Shearonink (
talk) 18:34, 12 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Comment
Occasionally one comes across an article that is nicely-written, well-sourced and a delight to read. I know there are probably improvements that could be done to this article but other than an image of the King, I am somewhat hard-pressed to think of much of anything in that regard. I especially like the explanations of the various leases - I have a much-better understanding of this type of "ownership".
Shearonink (
talk) 19:11, 11 January 2017 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.