Talk:Brown's Hotel

Fair use rationale for Image:Rfbrownshotel.jpg

Image:Rfbrownshotel.jpg 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 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 (talk) 21:04, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Factual Error: Ford family could not have bought the hotel as claimed

The article indicates that Henry Ford and his family bought the hotel in 1859 and, along with modernizing the hotel's amenities, combined it with St. George's Hotel in 1889. This is historically impossible. Henry Ford was born to a poor family in 1863 and did not even start the Ford Motor Company until 1903. http://www.hfmgv.org/exhibits/hf/chrono.asp. This particular claim seems to be drawn from Brown's Hotel's own informational brochures and should not be relied upon. Sleepyjl (talk) 18:42, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I was about to write something about the Henry Ford claim, and then noticed it had already been highlighted. It's clearly crap. The Ford family were not wealthy, but were poor immigrant farmers.

This highlights how questionable it is to rely on one website for the article's information, especially when that website is just a hotel brochure. I am going to remove the claim and it should not be reinserted unless someone can find a proper source. BearAllen (talk) 20:19, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Neutrality

The interior section of this article reads like a brochure. It does not just note the hotels features and amenities, but tries to show them in a very positive light. Is this section really noteworthy/necessary?

193.176.235.94 (talk) 14:42, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

The first paragraph is obviously an addition, cut and pasted from official publicity material, so why not just delete it, as I have? Abberley2 (talk) 15:55, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Oldest hotel?

The intro stated (before my edit of 1st july 2010) that this is the oldest hotel in London. This may be true, but the source in the references section clearly states: 'The Rocco Forte Brown's Hotel dates back to 1837, which makes it the oldest existing hotel in London.'The oldest existing hotel is not the oldest hotel. Besides, this source is obviously a brochure and not really trustworthy. Therefore I edited the section, though I still think a more convincing reference should be found.

193.176.235.94 (talk) 14:42, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I think most people would parse, "oldest" as "oldest existing", so really the two claims are the same, but your edit removes any ambiguity. I have a pretty good knowledge of London hotels, and I am almost certain that the claim is true. Abberley2 (talk) 15:56, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

The claim still needs to be sourced, otherwise it should be removed or changed to "the hotel claims to be the oldest etc.". Kayman1uk (talk) 11:44, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Leading Hotels of the World

The intro says that the hotel is on some LHW list - is this interesting? Is it significant enough to be in the article? The link goes to the LHW article, and visiting that is hardly reassuring. If people can't be bothered to create a half-decent page for that organisation, why should we assume it's important enough to appear in the intro to Brown's? To put it another way, if some list called "the worst hotels in the world" had Brown's on it, should that appear in the intro? Kayman1uk (talk) 11:44, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://web.archive.org/web/20070127090021/http://www.brownshotel.com/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:43, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Brown's Hotel. 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/20140106034315/http://www.thehandbook.com/blog/browns-celebrates-its-175th-anniversary to http://www.thehandbook.com/blog/browns-celebrates-its-175th-anniversary

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 15:02, 26 July 2017 (UTC)