Talk:Leverhulme Trust

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Apparent lack of neutrality

This article is not tagged with a warning concerning non-objective content, but parts of it read as if they are straight from a Leverhulme/Unilever press release. For example,

One special element in Viscount Leverhulme's legacy is the request that the Trustees all be drawn from the highest levels within Lever Brothers or now from its descendant Unilever plc. The Trust is therefore led by a group of colleagues with wide but self-consistent experience, with a high level of mutual understanding and respect built up over many years, and with a full recognition of the special qualities and achievement of the founder. The resulting culture for decision-making is free from disciplinary special interest but fully alert to the wide-ranging impact which research and education must make in modern life.

This is absurd. What does it mean to say that a group have 'wide but self-consistent experience'? Whatever the advantages of this kind of arrangement, there are surely serious disadvantages, as well. Most obvious, these include an inevitable homogeneity and failure to represent the population who will be affected by projects. A group consisting solely of the most privileged members of a single multinational corporation stands a much lower chance of appreciating the likely impact of projects on society as a whole because they are in a poorer position to appreciate the impact on members of groups they have little affinity with.

And if a qualification for inclusion in this group is the kind of hero-worship of the founder described, then you have to wonder which world they are living in, because it does not appear to be this one. Or do the founder's 'special qualities' include the exploitation of Congolese people in forced-labour camps? Perhaps this would be better classed as an 'achievement'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.78.244.158 (talk) 01:20, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Parts of the page are literally copy-pasted from the Leverhulme Trust website "About" page. There need to be much more balanced account of the references to the LT board and Lord Leverhulme's activities in the Congo, rather than parroting the Trust's self-justification. More discussion required. Gabrielbodard (talk) 16:29, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Leverhulme Trust. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101105022214/http://www.leverhulme.ac.uk/news/awards_in_focus.cfm to http://www.leverhulme.ac.uk/news/awards_in_focus.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:55, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]