Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MHG Systems: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Rpisarenko (talk | contribs)
Added a response, to position presented by Edcollins
Line 16: Line 16:
::#This press release [http://bioforest.finbioenergy.fi/default.asp?sivuID=425&component=/modules/bbsView.asp&recID=18287] (Finnish Bioenergy association) is also self-published.
::#This press release [http://bioforest.finbioenergy.fi/default.asp?sivuID=425&component=/modules/bbsView.asp&recID=18287] (Finnish Bioenergy association) is also self-published.
::Thus, in my opinion, the company fails [[WP:CORP]]. Please take the time to read also [[WP:COI]] as this may apply to you. Thank you. --[[User:Edcolins|Edcolins]] ([[User talk:Edcolins|talk]]) 11:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
::Thus, in my opinion, the company fails [[WP:CORP]]. Please take the time to read also [[WP:COI]] as this may apply to you. Thank you. --[[User:Edcolins|Edcolins]] ([[User talk:Edcolins|talk]]) 11:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
==Reply regarding the quotes==
Dear Edcolins. I would disagree with you about "self published" nature of the references, as in none of the links you mentioned, there is an opportunity to self publish an article.
At least we have agreed that one page counts as a notable source:
::#This page [http://www.wtert.eu/Default.asp?Menue=18&NewsPPV=8118] on the Waste-to-Energy Research and Technology Council (WtERT).

Abref - an organization that unfortunately don't have a separate wikipedia page, is an fund, developed by African countries that are trying to solve the energy problems in the black continent. This is a first initiative of such level when African countries ''them-self'' form a fund to build their own future economy, instead of getting funds from EU countries. I think this kind of organization could be also displayed in the wikipedia, as many others, but I just see a strange attitude from the respected members - you nominate the article for deletion two weeks after it was published, without letting it to develop, or become of higher quality. In this situation, I will really think twice before adding anything to the wikipedia again!
So, do you really see this information as self published? Isn't the fund covering several African countries not a ''reliable/notable source''?
::#This press release [http://www.faber-abref.org/fichiers/Media%20release_MHG_FSO_ABREF_2010_24_11%28OK%29.pdf] on the African Biofuel and Renewable Energy Fund (ABREF) web site [http://www.faber-abref.org/] is also self-published. It also appears that this organisation or fund is not independent from MHG Systems (see [http://www.faber-abref.org/index_anglais.php]: "Partnership with MGH Systems").

I would totally disagree with you about the self published nature of report in Canadian Bioenergy Association! This organization is a powerful and non profit organization that promotes the Clean energy and supports efforts to reduce CO2 emissions in Canada. Canada is the 3rd largest country in the world in terms of total forest area, and this organization does has some influence worldwide. They are not an article publishing service, but an organization that is trying to make this world better by promotion of green technologies.

This page [http://www.erasmus-entrepreneurs.eu/page.php?cid=09&id=071] (Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs) The article covers both topics, the exchange program and the company. The company is well described there, that's why I added it as a reference. This is a respected international organization, funded by a EU.

I would continue. Doesn't Finnish Bioenergy association also count as a respected source? I think,that it would be wise to invite someone, who is familiar with bioenergy to this discussion, so we could hear his opinion about notability of sources. Bioenergy is a young industry, but it is growing quickly, addressing such problems as CO2 emissions, development and employment in rural areas etc. The a highly ''neutral'' and ''non-advertising'' article about a company that is operating in this '''socially responsible''' area. I do think that wikipedia users should promote such ideas, with any means they have. I think, with all the regulations that are pointed out, the main purpose of wikipedia is forgotten .

{{cquote|Indeed, the purpose of an encyclopedia is to collect knowledge disseminated around the globe; to set forth its general system to the men with whom we live, and transmit it to those who will come after us, so that the work of preceding centuries will not become useless to the centuries to come; and so that our offspring, becoming better instructed, will at the same time become more virtuous and happy, and that we should not die without having rendered a service to the human race.&mdash;[[Denis Diderot|Diderot]]<ref>Diderot, Denis and d'Alembert, Jean le Rond [http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=did;cc=did;idno=did2222.0000.004;rgn=main;view=text ''Encyclopédie.''] University of Michigan Library:Scholarly Publishing Office and DLXS. Retrieved on: [[November 17]], [[2007]]</ref>}}

[[User:Rpisarenko|Rpisarenko]] ([[User talk:Rpisarenko|talk]]) 15:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 15:26, 7 January 2011

MHG Systems (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). The company has not been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. There is no significant coverage beyond routine announcements, press releases, self-published materials and the like. Delete. Edcolins (talk) 17:08, 5 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • The secondary sources that the article references are reliable and respected organizations, such as Canadian Bioenergy Association, ABREF(African Biofuel & Renewable Energy Fund), Erasmus Entrepreneurs(European Union Project), Waste-to-Energy Research and Technology Concil(European Union sponsored organization), Finnish Bioenergy association etc. This sources provide significant and independent coverage of this green ICT company.Keep Rpisarenko (talk) 07:28, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I had a look at the references provided, and I am still not convinced that they are sufficient for showing that the company is notable under WP:CORP (and in particular WP:PSTS). In particular:
  1. This document [1] on the Canadian Bioenergy Association web site [2] is self-published, i.e. not independent from the subject.
  2. This press release [3] on the African Biofuel and Renewable Energy Fund (ABREF) web site [4] is also self-published. It also appears that this organisation or fund is not independent from MHG Systems (see [5]: "Partnership with MGH Systems").
  3. This page [6] (Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs) primarily relates to a EU sponsored exchange, not to the company itself.
  4. This page [7] on the Waste-to-Energy Research and Technology Council (WtERT) web site is closer to what it is needed as evidence for notability, but this is only a single source, the depth of coverage is not substantial, and the media audience is rather limited.
  5. This press release [8] (Finnish Bioenergy association) is also self-published.
Thus, in my opinion, the company fails WP:CORP. Please take the time to read also WP:COI as this may apply to you. Thank you. --Edcolins (talk) 11:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reply regarding the quotes

Dear Edcolins. I would disagree with you about "self published" nature of the references, as in none of the links you mentioned, there is an opportunity to self publish an article. At least we have agreed that one page counts as a notable source:

  1. This page [9] on the Waste-to-Energy Research and Technology Council (WtERT).

Abref - an organization that unfortunately don't have a separate wikipedia page, is an fund, developed by African countries that are trying to solve the energy problems in the black continent. This is a first initiative of such level when African countries them-self form a fund to build their own future economy, instead of getting funds from EU countries. I think this kind of organization could be also displayed in the wikipedia, as many others, but I just see a strange attitude from the respected members - you nominate the article for deletion two weeks after it was published, without letting it to develop, or become of higher quality. In this situation, I will really think twice before adding anything to the wikipedia again! So, do you really see this information as self published? Isn't the fund covering several African countries not a reliable/notable source?

  1. This press release [10] on the African Biofuel and Renewable Energy Fund (ABREF) web site [11] is also self-published. It also appears that this organisation or fund is not independent from MHG Systems (see [12]: "Partnership with MGH Systems").

I would totally disagree with you about the self published nature of report in Canadian Bioenergy Association! This organization is a powerful and non profit organization that promotes the Clean energy and supports efforts to reduce CO2 emissions in Canada. Canada is the 3rd largest country in the world in terms of total forest area, and this organization does has some influence worldwide. They are not an article publishing service, but an organization that is trying to make this world better by promotion of green technologies.

This page [13] (Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs) The article covers both topics, the exchange program and the company. The company is well described there, that's why I added it as a reference. This is a respected international organization, funded by a EU.

I would continue. Doesn't Finnish Bioenergy association also count as a respected source? I think,that it would be wise to invite someone, who is familiar with bioenergy to this discussion, so we could hear his opinion about notability of sources. Bioenergy is a young industry, but it is growing quickly, addressing such problems as CO2 emissions, development and employment in rural areas etc. The a highly neutral and non-advertising article about a company that is operating in this socially responsible area. I do think that wikipedia users should promote such ideas, with any means they have. I think, with all the regulations that are pointed out, the main purpose of wikipedia is forgotten .


Rpisarenko (talk) 15:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Diderot, Denis and d'Alembert, Jean le Rond Encyclopédie. University of Michigan Library:Scholarly Publishing Office and DLXS. Retrieved on: November 17, 2007