User talk:Chenevert

Speedy deletion of Energy Source Inc.

A tag has been placed on Energy Source Inc., requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. DiverseMentality^(Boo!) 17:33, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Energy Source

(Copied from User talk:KieferSkunk#Energy Source)

Could I get a better idea from you as to why you felt speedy deletion was warranted? I note you say "attack page intented to disparage its subject. using TW" . What does that mean exactly?

Thank yo for your consideration, chenevert

Chenevert (talk) 19:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I used that particular criterion in my speedy-delete because the page appeared to be full of propaganda against the indicated company. The page was entirely one-sided and did not appear to contain the sort of context that we'd expect from even a stub-class encyclopedia article - instead, it appeared to be entirely about pointing out claims of fraud against the company. The large number of sources and citations to promote this point of view followed the format of political-extremist promotions, so in my view, it was close enough to being an attack page to warrant speedy deletion under that criterion. You may request a Deletion Review if you feel this was an incorrect action to take.

Please note that I am not defending the company in question. I'm simply following the guidelines given in WP:CSD. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 19:17, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. Can't say I understand your point of view, as I am a shareholder in the company in question, and no attack on the company was intended, rather it an outline of fraudulent activities against the company and the search for justice. Our shares have been held hostage by the DTC for three years now. What they are doing constitutes an illegal act. I wish to publically document the case, which I see as no different then the Enron article. This is my first article, so I shouldn't be surpised it didn't go smoothly....

Thanks again,

chenevert Chenevert (talk) 19:31, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Be careful in creating articles to "publicly document" things such as fraud. While I don't doubt that fraudulent activity may have occurred, the article needs to be carefully written to adhere to a neutral point of view. The Enron article accomplishes this by balancing coverage of its fraudulent activity with more neutral information about the company itself. Please read WP:NPOV and the related pages linked from it. This will give you a better idea than I can describe here as to what we're looking for. As that page states, this doesn't mean that an article on Adolf Hitler should try to make him look like an ordinary businessman, but it shouldn't look like an opinion piece either. Wikipedia is not a soapbox, a place for furthering agendas of any sort, etc.

That said, if you can address these points, you are welcome to recreate the article. Please don't be overly discouraged by having your first article deleted - this is not a statement against you or your editing abilities. It's only meant to keep Wikipedia clean. :)

Check out Wikipedia:Writing your first article for more information. Hope that helps! — KieferSkunk (talk) — 19:39, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]