Talk:Flight 93 National Memorial

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Protected Areas, a WikiProject related to national parks and other protected areas worldwide. It may include the protected area infobox.

	Flight 93 National Memorial is part of WikiProject Pennsylvania, which is building a comprehensive and detailed guide to Pennsylvania on Wikipedia. To participate, you can edit the attached article, join or discuss the project.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of the National Register of Historic Places WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of listings on the U.S. National Register of Historic Places. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.

	This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the Wikipedia:WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Architectural history.	Architecture Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale.

This article has been nominated for Selected article, at the Architecture portal.

Contents 1 Grammar 2 temporary memorial 3 controversy section seems POV 4 A depressing subject, sure... 5 Land owners

[edit] Grammar

This article needs a lot of grammatical help. User:Zoe|^(talk) 06:02, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

I made a first run at cleanup when I expanded the content from just the Crescent of Embrace to the larger National Memorial. I won't claim I caught everything. — Eoghanacht ^talk 20:21, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] temporary memorial

I just added the temporary memorial section. I went there earlier this year so I described it

[edit] controversy section seems POV

It would be nice if the controversy section at least acknowledged the fact that a non-trivial number of people thought that the criticisms leveled against the original design were misguided, if not nuts. --Cmdroverbite 06:51, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

The problem is that it can be difficult to document a "silent majority" for the purposes of WP:V. If you have a credible source for such an opinion -- or maybe a quote from someone involved -- you are welcome to try to work it into the article. — Eoghanacht ^talk 18:17, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A depressing subject, sure...

..but if you need a laugh, follow the footnote number 8. One of the best conspiracy theory-nut spoofs I've ever seen. Wait, it is a spoof, right...?

[edit] Land owners

I was wondering who owned this land and what it was used for before the crash. I always hear it described as a "field." Does that mean it was being used for farming? Are there any more details available about this "approximately 2200 acres, of which about 1200 will be privately held"? Does that sentence in the article need to be marked "citation needed"? Thanks. --Lkseitz 16:51, 13 September 2006 (UTC)