This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

London Low‑importance 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. Politics of the United Kingdom Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Is this a page about the interconnected group of right-wing/free-market lobby groups located at 55 Tufton Street ("The Nine Entities"), or is this a neutral listing of all current and former residents? Because https://feedingbritain.org/ are currently there, and CECA https://www.ceca.co.uk/ were there until 2009. There are many other current and former residents. This page needs to decide what it is for before adding anyone else, as the implication of simply adding anyone who rents space there is that the statements in the lede apply to them, without any substantiation. This is not NPOV. Void if removed (talk) 11:26, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Completely inappropriate to put LGBA in a section whose lede talks specifically of relationships to Matthew Elliott, Nigel Lawson etc. No source is provided for any of that here. Start a new section for "other" tenants if you must, and be comprehensive. Void if removed (talk) 14:43, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the citations. Extensive media coverage. Lots of blue links in the article, too. It's like an office building that has a wikipedia.

And it's not an encyclopedia's job to list *every* tenant of a building just because the building/org is notable. If you think a tenant should be added, you should do that. Sativa Inflorescence (talk) 15:15, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The lede for "lobby organisations" talks about Matthew Elliott, Lawson etc. All of the orgs listed have links and revolving doors and opaque funding that are well-documented. What is completely inappropriate is adding anyone to that section unless there's a clear indication of links other than sharing that address. Plenty of other unconnected organisations have - or had - offices there.

Either this is an article about orgs with demonstrable links between them, or it is an article about all occupants of 55 Tufton Street. If it is the latter, it needs a separate section to indicate that the listed tenants aren't related to "The Nine Entities". Void if removed (talk) 15:33, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The lede for "lobby organizations" does seem out of place there. I think that whole paragraph would be better in the Influence on government policy section. That way it's not implying *every* organization is centered on those specific people. Sativa Inflorescence (talk) 23:45, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There's a place for historical Tufton Street information in the main Tufton Street article, which is linked from here. That page was previously little more than a duplicate of this one, but I changed the emphasis back in May 2021 and it's been developed further since then. Tufton Street has a rich history, dating back to the 17th century. It's not only about think tanks. But there's no need for that information to go here. Sfjohna (talk) 14:05, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The way this article is set out does not make sense

The Lobbying organisations section is about "a network of opaquely funded organisations that centre around Matthew Eliott" yet there is no source connecting all the organisations listed with Matthew Eliott. In particular, LGB Alliance has no connection with Brexit, global warming lobbying, or economics. It does not make sense to have all the organisations under the Lobbying organisations heading. The list of organisations occupying the building should be under a separate heading: 'Organisations using offices in the building. Sweet6970 (talk) 13:58, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Sativa Inflorescence has moved the ‘Lobbying organisations’ intro text to the ‘Influence on government policy’ section. That is another solution to the problem, which is fine with me. Sweet6970 (talk) 20:17, 21 December 2022 (UTC) [reply]

Minor points

How is Elliott spelt? one t or two?

Presumably the list of organisations is supposed to be in alphabetical order. In that case, LGB Alliance comes after Leave Means Leave.

Sweet6970 (talk) 13:58, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The lead said:A group of these lobby groups, dubbed "The Nine Entities", use the building for biweekly meetings to coordinate policy and public messages. The references (which are defunct) date from 2016 and 2018. Bearing in mind that the organisations campaigning for Brexit are no longer active, I am changing ‘use’ to ‘used’. Sweet6970 (talk) 15:13, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]