Talk:Lendlease

message: :Image:LLlogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:LLlogo.gif

message: I'm willing to be corrected but the compliments slip I have shows this division as Lend Lease Retail -if someone more knowledgeable would like to check and make the change please--AndyCPrivate (talk) 14:41, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Lend Lease Shopping Centres

message: I note that Lendlease Project Management & Construction, Lend Lease Residential Development, Civil & Civic and Valemus have all been merged into the article. While merger proposals should really be discussed on the talk page in advance, I think in this instance it has worked well given the previous proliferation of Lend Lease articles. My only thought, would however whether it would not be better to split out the material on C. W. Bovis prior to acquisition by Lendlease in 1999. The logic would be that C. W. Bovis was not acquired until some 40 years after Lendlease was founded. I would propose that the article would be titled "C. W. Bovis" and would only cover the period up to acquisition in 1999 (notwithstanding the fact that the Bovis brand continued to be used for some years afterwards).  Views welcome. Dormskirk (talk) 00:37, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I note that the merging of these have now been reversed. However, in the process the extensive subsequent work to improve the article(s) including the addition of additional projects and additional referencing has been lost. I would suggest that if these articles are to remain separate Lendlease Project Management & Construction should become C. W. Bovis and only cover the period up to 1999. Also Lend Lease Residential Development should revert to the name Crosby Homes and only cover the period up to 2005. In any case discussion should take place here. Dormskirk (talk) 09:35, 29 October 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: This article feels awfully promotional. While Hatgreg has done a better job than most paid editors, namely in the controversies section, the main article is still packed full of editorialism, unspecific language ("recently") and puffery - constant mentions of "communities", listing projects of questionable relevance (is it normal for construction companies' pages to list the majority of their work?)
Nothing at all against Hatgreg - like I say, they've done more than most paid editors. Feel like the article could do with some work that I'm not confident undertaking myself, though - maybe a more experienced editor could add the "this article reads like a promotion" banner, and make some changes? Couruu (talk) 10:29, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I have trimmed mention of "communities", although it seems to be the name of one of their divisions so it is difficult to remove it completely. Lists of projects are normal for most construction companies (see Bilfinger#Major projects and Balfour Beatty#Notable projects for example. Arguably such lists are more useful and factual than much of the puffery than we see in company articles. Please feel free to trim if you see more puffery. Dormskirk (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the insight and trimming, much appreciated. Couruu (talk) 11:02, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem. Best wishes, Dormskirk (talk) 11:25, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV/NOTADVERT