SoftStage

Some people objected to Jimi Hendrix getting a plaque, because he took illegal stimulants. This was slightly ironic given that the first plaque in London (in 1867) was to Lord Byron, who did much the same.

Probably just standard racism, not ironic.

Does the plaque remain the property of English Heritage? What happens if the building ownership changes hands and the new owner doesn't want it? Or if they need to undertake work to the wall?

Would you ever put something negative like 'slave owner' or similar on the plaque itself as part of that context?

Which are the unofficial ones?