Talk:Playscape

This

Tihs page reads like an ad. It tells me nothing useful, only who to buy them from and how "great" they are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.225.222.10 (talk) 13:00, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top.
The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:45, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possible image

I believe that this image shows a swing (seat) with a natural rock for the part you sit on. I'm not sure (and I wrote the description for the image at Commons; the uploader hasn't responded to me), but perhaps someone here will know more about it than I do. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:45, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

July 2 2012, I think the page looks a lot better than when it was suggested for deletion or merging. Right now it looks rather nice, especially the density of links to academic articles. Good job. Id vote to keep and to not merge — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.125.251.13 (talk) 19:31, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Page fundamentally attracts promotional material

It strikes me, looking at the history, that this is a page that fundamentally attracts promotional language from people with highly probable conflicts of interest. Contributors to this article include:

The initial author Gardens for Living, who contributed 5kb, who has claimed to worked in landscape architecture building playscapes and natural playgrounds; whose account was created two hours before this article; and whose only contributions are edits to this article and defenses of its existence, including removing the PROD template.
4811jc, whose only contributions were to add what I suspect is their own website as a source based on the common use of the letters "jc".
Awhite73, whose only contributions are to this article (and, humorously, the sandbox); who added their own work as a source; and thus is apparently the Adam White so mentioned in the article.
Simbear, whose only surviving contributions are to this article, including adding a source they may have a close connection with, given their apparent proposal to create an article for this source, which has since been deleted from AfC due to user inactivity.
Thailand IP address 182.52.34.83, whose only contribution was to block and copy text from the source Simbear later added. Building Trust International engages in significant work in Thailand and lists playscapes among their project galleries.
Guelph, Ontario, Canada IP address 99.225.34.108, whose only contributions have been to add the Ontario-based Earth Artist website as a source and to format tables on the article for the 2014 municipal elections in Guelph, meaning the IP address probably belongs to Earth Artist.
Minneapolis-area IP address 75.72.84.69, who added a source to Landscape Structures, Inc., which is based just outside of Minneapolis. This IP has also made multiple contributions to Danish hearing aid company ReSound whose North American headquarters are in Bloomington, Minnesota, the article for which is also tagged as an advert, and added this company to a new section on the article for Bloomington, Minnesota. However this IP appears to have made a few useful contributions to Wikipedia as well.
Finally, Earthplay, who, of all of these, was actually tagged and banned for adding promotional material.

Now, I figure that people usually write about what they know, but a few of these are, or are really darn close to being, violations of NOR. I would submit that "playscapes" are notable enough for Wikipedia, if only because designing them is apparently such a competitive field that so many people are compelled to use Wikipedia as ad space. I also submit that it would be a good idea to protect this article from new and unregistered users. Shmuser (talk) 17:57, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]