Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foster Natural Gas Report

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Delete - Not notable at the moment. Wikipedia is not a directory of publications. WP:COI editor even admits it's "new" to the scene. At some point in the future this may warrant an article, but nothing it it closely resembles notability under WP:CORP (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 23:59, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

FOSTER NATURAL GAS/OIL REPORT

FOSTER NATURAL GAS/OIL REPORT (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable product produced by a company of no discernible note. PROD declined by author (with no explanation). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:48, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:35, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

• Delete, unless the article is rewritten with independent references to assert notability. . . Mean as custard (talk) 09:51, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
• Delete. A Canadian trade publication: The Foster Natural Gas/Oil Report addresses significant regulatory and business events that impact all segments of the natural gas and oil industries. Topics of interest can include, but are not limited to, production, marketing, transportation, distribution, and end use. Advertising: was started ... (by) a group of noted economists under the auspices of a new company – Foster Associates, Inc.... Over the years it has grown and become a media source that is well-respected beyond the field of economics. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 16:09, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
• Comment If the outcome of this discussion is to delete the article, please note that the article has been moved to Foster Natural Gas/Oil Report. The deleting admin should delete both the original title (now a redirect) and the final article. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:10, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

• Keep Please keep this article. It is about a great company in the natural gas and oil industry and a very important player. The admin who proposed that this article should be deleted stated that he did not find it on google? Clearly he did not look hard enough (or not at all) and knows nothing about the natural gas/oil industry. Foster’s competitor Platts has a page. Why are they allowed to have a page and Foster isn’t? If you delete this page, please delete the Platts page as well. Otherwise it’s not fair and you are creating a monopoly on the market.

Also WikiDan61 (who so adamantly wants this page deleted). Said that “PROD declined by author (with no explanation).” What does this even mean? And I never declined anything. I tried to explain to him/her what Foster is. And he/she just deleted the page without any warning or explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katya Foster (talk • contribs)

Comment Some points for Ms Foster to consider:

• I am not an admin. I'm just another editor.
• Claims that this is a "great company in the natural gas and oil industry" and "a very important player" need to be backed up with references in reliable sources, of which none have been provided, nor can I find any.
• If my searches on Google have been ineffective, perhaps Ms Foster can provide the sources that I was unable to find.
• Ms Foster has already been informed that the existence of other articles on Wikipedia is not a valid argument for keeping this article.
• Ms Foster removed the proposed deletion template from the article after I placed it.
• Clearly, I did not delete the page, as it still exists. I merely nominated it for deletion.

I can understand that, as a new user, Ms Foster may be somewhat confused by the deletion process. Hopefully, as this discussion continues, she will become better informed about what is required. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:36, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Just to clear some things up. I am not Ms Foster nor am I in any way related to the Foster company. I simply chose it as a user name as I am a fan of their work. Moreover, I have provided you with the company website on several occasions. Please refer to your talk page. Furthermore, if you believe that Foster does not have enough of an internet presence, it is because it is an established company in the natural gas/oil industry which everyone knows about. Foster does not need to advertise themselves. However, if you would like to know more about Foster and its work you are more than welcome to speak to any major oil company in the United States and I am sure they will be happy to enlighten you.

Furthermore, I did not delete any deletion template. And if I did do so, it was done in error. I am a new user and I beginning to feel very unwelcome in the wikipedia community. Perhaps Wikidan61 could refer to the following link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers. It is very helpful and educational site about how to speak and treat others.

Furthermore, I would like to ask you to leave this page and any other page that I create in the future alone and let other users of the wikipedia community to determine if it is appropriate or not. I feel like you are being hostile toward me personally.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Katya Foster (talk • contribs) 15:56, 3 November 2011‎

Please see WP:CORP for guidance on how to establish that a company meets Wikipedia's content guidelines on notability. Related to that, please see WP:RS for an explanation of what constitutes a "reliable source" in Wikipedia terms. A company existing and having a website are not enough in themselves. To meet the WP:CORP guideline, you'll need references to reliable, published, third-party sources. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:09, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Of course I understand that simply being a company and having a website is not enough. You are quite right. Thank you Barek for your contribution. Please refer to sites below for more information on Foster: http://www.lexisnexis.com/academic/1univ/envir/3newssource.asp (LexisNexis (who I believe we have all heard of and know as a good company, uses and promotes it) http://www.natgasamerica.com/s1115/ (here you can find Foster as part of the North America Gas summit) http://www.energycentral.com/reference/directories/publications/660/Foster-s-Natural-Gas-Report (this reputable site in the natural gas/oil industry is promoting Foster) There are others but I think there is no need to continue. We now all understand the importance of Foster after looking at such reputable sites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Katya Foster (talk • contribs) 16:21, 3 November 2011‎

Note: A notification has been made at WT:ENERGY regarding this AfD discussion. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:43, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment Please review the guidelines of WP:RS. The citations provided are merely indications that this report exists; not that it is notable. They amount to directory listings at best. The single possible exception is the inclusion as a source for the LexisNexis Environmental Report, but even this inclusion is only marginally notable. Evidence of citations to this report in other documents and / or news reports would be needed. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:02, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Did you even bother to look at the links? The North America Gas summit is not a directory listing. It is an important event that only the top players in the industry get invited to. On top of that, now you are saying that LexisNexis is not an important database. I don’t know what you have against Foster, but please end your hostilities and allow an important page to be published. Katya_Foster

• "Foster Natural Gas Report" gets some results. I'm tagging this article for rescue and seeing what others can find. Dream Focus 19:24, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
• Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. Dream Focus 19:25, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I greatly appreciate all the help and support that i am getting from users on saving the Foster Natural Gas/Oil Report Page User:Katya Foster

Please save Foster Natural Gas/Oil Report

Please keep this article. The Foster Natural Gas/Oil report is not a company. It is a publication. This publication makes the most thorough review of activities at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and National Energy Board of Canada of any publication in North America. It is a widely acknowledged and important resource. I did not write this in the article, because I was trying to comply with wikipedia’s rules and I was not making it an advertisement. I am simply trying to contribute to wikipedia and create an educational page for an important resource. Katya_Foster

• Conditional keep, if rewritten. By my understanding the correct title of this article should be Foster Natural Gas Report, which is notable journal for the oil and gas industry. Its LexisNexis overview page is here. It is in the Factiva's Major Publication List under energy section (Factiva's page for Foster Natural Gas Journal is here). However, in its current form the article does not satisfy different criteria and for keeping the current article should be totally rewritten. I hope that the rescue action will resolve this. Beagel (talk) 05:43, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

• Keep If the report is cited by various sources in the industry, then its clearly notable. Dream Focus 08:09, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

Yes you are correct the report used to be called the Foster Natural Gas Report. However, in august Foster entered the oil industry. The report has now been renamed the Foster Natural Gas/Oil Report. But it is still the same report. Thank you for all of your help. --Katya Foster (talk) 14:23, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

KEEP. I have added citations from various sources in the industry. The report is clearly notable.--Katya Foster (talk) 14:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.