Talk:American Society for Quality
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
Fair use rationale for Image:ASQ-Logo.gif
Image:ASQ-Logo.gif 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 Wikipedia articles 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.
If there is other 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 17:13, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Just for my two cents, I would say if the company - or its agent - (see my comment below) is the primary author of the page, then putting the logo in there would be legal, right? I mean, they hold the trademark, they can do what they want with it, right? (this is somewhat sarcastic, as Wikipedia, IIRC, is not a forum for advertisement or promotion by a company or its agent) Brettpeirce (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
The first line states "American Society for Quality (ASQ), formerly known as American Society for Quality Control (ASQC), is a knowledge-based global community of quality control experts, with nearly 85,000 members dedicated to the promotion and advancement of quality tools, principles, and practices in their workplaces and in their communities."
I will never agree to the word "expert," but I will use it here. ASQ is not only a group of quality control experts, but is also a group of quality assurance experts, process improvement experts, and organizational excellence experts. Quality control is an outdated, but not obsolete, concept and a minor part of what ASQ promotes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 14:20, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
I deleted the tag that was critical about this article's external links. There was no discussion of the tag when it was placed on the article. It looks like at that time, and certainly right now, there are only two external links -- one to the ASQ web site, and one to an important and well-known quality award. If someone has objections to these, or to my removal of the tag, please discuss the matter here. --Lou Sander (talk) 02:06, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
I don't know about the "External Links" (if by that, you mean the links listed in the "External Links" section), but I notice that there is only one link to any site other than the company website or another wiki page... EVERY reference is from the company's website - noone else finds that discomforting? (concerning the neutrality of the article's content) - this is aside from the not-incredibly-neutral voice used in the article itself and the ASQ website's sitemap that takes up half the article. -- Mind you, I'm not a huge editor, and I don't know every rule, but this seems like it must at least infringe upon SOME Wikipedia standard. I also don't see six of the eight key things I look for in a neutral, factual, and non-biased article (8 for articles on companies and products, that is). It certainly makes me suspect that the company (or its agent) had a significant hand in creating this content, which leads ME to suspect the QUALITY of its product - yes that was a pun. Brettpeirce (talk) 14:22, 6 May 2011 (UTC)