Talk:Topgrading

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 12 November 2015 by reviewer SwisterTwister (talk · contribs).

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Contested deletion[edit]

How is a page deleted when it's not actually an article yet? In additional, what is being advertised in the article? Please read the article and the references. I read your rules on tone and referencing and believe that I followed them 100%. Not sure why there is so much want to delete an article about this term.

Neutrality?[edit]

This reads like an advertisement. Where's the section on controversies, of which this method has plenty? 97.113.132.31 (talk) 19:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum (same user, I just hadn't logged in when I wrote the above): all your references appear to be either written by the developers of the Topgrading method or by blatant enthusiasts for it. That is not an effective way to get neutral, encyclopedia-appropriate information. I would expect there to be at least a few key sources which oppose this controversial system, and ideally the core of the article would be taken from sources which have no opinion and are simply reporting, if such can be obtained. But to use nothing but such blatantly preferential sources is inherently biased reporting. Quibbitzer (talk) 19:23, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]