Talk:Kingdom Hall

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

A great thank you to the JW PR Department for your valuable contribution. ;-)

I am deleting some wordiness in the paragraph about the design of KH's. It was just too wordy. It also seemed argumentative. The text is thus before my deletion:

Kingdom Halls vary in size and design. They are usually modest, functional structures, clean and attractive, but essentially practical. They do not include a steeple, bells or recordings of sounding bells, stained glass windows or cathedrals and vaulted ceilings, organs or Grand piano's, although many congregations do have a simple piano which a member pianist plays in order to accompany the congregation while they are singing. There are no "Confession booths" or candle stands. As Witnesses do not use religious symbols, such are not displayed on or in Kingdom Halls. But "this years theme scripture" is displayed in each Kingdom Hall. The theme scripture is the same for all Kingdom Halls worldwide and it's changed simultaneously each year at all Kingdom Halls.

george 03:41, 26 Dec 2004 (UTC)

DannyMuse: thanks for the security mention, I debated putting it in but ended up leaving it out, I'm glad someone else thought better of it and added it. Kyle Maxwell 04:50, 16 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV and Sources

I tagged the line as NPOV becasue to say something is "clean and attractive" is a very subjective viewpoint. The building that is pictured I would not call attractive, for instance. Really it should be be removed since it's just someone's opinion. Can't you just say practical and leave it at that? Sourcing the information from The Watchtower isn't really a solution either, as it's not a neutral source. Djlayton4 | talk | contribs 10:41, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As far as subjectivity goes I think you are perhaps being a little picky. There are some magnificent works of architecture (like cathedrals for example) in this world which many people would describe as beautiful, yet the next person would describe as ugly. To answer the latter part of your comment, sources all over this wikipedia, and on many other subjects concerning Jehovah's Witnesses, fall into 3 categories: Favourable, Neutral, and Critical. As you can see, many fall into the Critical category, but still remain referenced. Feel free to find your own sources no matter what category they fall into. Personally I think articles require adjectives, etc. to make pleasent reading. Joseph C Talk 14:07, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]