Talk:Natural burial

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	It is requested that a photograph or photographs be included in this article to improve its quality.
	The Free Image Search Tool (FIST) may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Contents 1 Requested move 1.1 Proper Names and Generic Terms 1.2 Redirected 1.3 Article name 2 POV 2.1 First paragraph 3 Linklessness template 4 Merge from Billy Campbell (doctor) 5 Excessive bio material 6 Image request 7 Neutrality dispute

[edit] Requested move

[edit] Proper Names and Generic Terms

The term “eco-cemetery” is NOT generally used to describe this type cemetery development. “Natural Burial” is the recognised term used in Canada^{[1] [2]} and in the United Kingdom ^[3] (where the concept began) while “Green Burial or Memorial Nature Preserve” is the term used in the USA^[4]

Eulogy4Afriend (talk) 04:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

1. ^ Natural Burial (webpage). The Natural Burial Association (2007-01-08). Retrieved on 2007-01-08.
2. ^ Natural Burial (webpage). The Natural Burial Co-operative (2007-01-08). Retrieved on 2007-01-08.
3. ^ Natural Burial (webpage). The Natural Death Center (2007-01-08). Retrieved on 2007-01-08.
4. ^ Green Burial (webpage). The Green Burial Council (2007-01-08). Retrieved on 2007-01-08.

• Support moving to 'Natural burial' or 'Green burial' - I don't mind which, but both are clearly more widely used than 'eco-cemetery'. Terraxos (talk) 02:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I've moved the page to Natural burial, per the above comments. There was a non-trivial history at Natural burial, which I swapped over to Eco-cemetery. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. -GTBacchus^(talk) 23:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Redirected

I redirected natural burial and green burial here, but not woodland cemetery since that word also has another meaning. To me it looked like the articles were identical - what difference there was, I did not check. I just changed those pages into redirects here. Merging the texts in their latest version would be kind of a waste, since they are POV-y pro-natural/ecological burial. Rewrite is needed. // habj 08:31, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article name

Google hits for eco-cemetary, natural burial and green burial gives 600, 24,000 and 43,000 respectively. I guess green burials are carried out in an eco-cemetary. The article name should follow the most common convention and have the other terms redirect to it. Green burial does hint at a purposefully ecologically benign burial whereas natural burial can happen without conscious action for all animals over all of history. Alan Liefting 23:48, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Another term now used is Conservation Burial. SilentBob 23:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] POV

Attempted to restore netural POV

[edit] First paragraph

This discussion was moved here from talk:natural burial

The 2nd sentence in the first paragraph needs editing for grammar/readability. it currently reads "This growing modern burial practice is an environmentally responsible option that spiritually fulfilling alternative to the conventional funeral."

An acceptable reading would be "This growing modern burial practice is an environmentally responsible option that provides a spiritually fulfilling alternative to conventional burial." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alethias (talk • contribs) 18:15, 7 June 2006

I did not make the suggestion, but it would be a good idea since from the second paragraph on they are virtually identical (woodland cemetary). THe article also seems to have some POV issues such as describing the practice as "spirtually fulfilling." I have made a few changes, will still need more work.Sosobra 22:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Forgot to mention it here, but recently I changed the paragraph to "is an environmentally sustainable alternative to existing funeral practices." I'd say that's true, factual and a neutral POV. Also removed some other blatant advertising/promoting. Rien Post (talk) 13:25, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Linklessness template

Can not a certain linklessness be expected, in articles on more narrow subjects? Adding links to it in all burial-related articles just because this article should have more links to it does not seem fair to me. // habj 08:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge from Billy Campbell (doctor)

Please merge any relevant content from Billy Campbell (doctor) per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Billy Campbell (doctor). Thanks. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-11 05:20Z

[edit] Excessive bio material

The bio material here comprises nearly 1/2 the article, that is excessive. There should be perhaps a sentence or two for each 'founder.' I will wait a day or two for those actively developing this article to prune it or I can do it if you'd rather. Also, please leave the cleanup tag in place until this article is written in a more encyclopedic style. If you have any questions, ask here or on my talk page. Thanks!--killing sparrows 03:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Addendum: I changed the tag from cleanup to tone, although I suppose either would do. The writing is just off for an encyclopedia, more like a promotional article. I'm not saying it's spam, just that it needs rewriting. Again, any questions please let me know. Thanks! --killing sparrows 03:03, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Edited bio material removing material that did not appear to advance the topic of green burial and removed double reference to the Green Burial Council Eulogy4Afriend (talk) 03:26, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image request

I notice that a few editors have done much work on this article and appear to have a great interest in the topic, is it possible that one of you could upload an image of an Eco-cemetery for use in the article? I realize that the point is that it doesn't look like or use land like a traditional cemetery, but still an image could illustrate some of the points mentioned such as a central memorial notice or the small markers mentioned. Visuals would add alot to this article.--killing sparrows 03:14, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Folks,

I agree this article now sounds more like a promotional spot than an encyclopedia entry. That said, it has been a work in progress, like the concept itself. On a related note though, I've posted Trust for Natural Legacies information here three times, and twice someone has deleted it. Many of us have worked together in the past. We're all in this together. If someone has a beef with me, then contact me directly. TNL is doing the same work as any other organization listed here, and thus has just as much right to be listed here. So do not play games with Wikipedia entries or everyone's info is suspect and this entire entry will get deleted. Markdahlby 16:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC) Mark Dahlby Markdahlby 16:37, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

As per Killingsparrows' requrest, I have gone through and uploaded two images with the permission of Billy and Kimberley Campbell of Memorial Ecosystems. Please notify me if any adjustments need to be made in order to bring this into complaince (licensing, content, etc). Silentbobsc 21:05, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality dispute

As people have said above, seems way too much like a promotional piece than an unbiased article. --209.222.210.85 19:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Portal	This environment-related article is part of the Environment WikiProject to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. See WikiProject Environment and Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.