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 [1] 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?
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 [5] (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. This is 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 .
| “ | 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.— Diderot [1] | ” |
Rpisarenko ( talk) 15:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
A recent post has thanked me for my "note" here. I don't know the author and have had no previous contacts with him/her, so I don't know why I have received a personal communication. Here are some comments in response to this editor's note.
"...neutrality has nothing to do with notability."
Actually, both neutrality and notability are affected when the primary source of information is press releases.
"The first one (Bloomberg) is an entry in a business directory. You can most probably pay to get your firm listed in there."
The owner of Bloomberg is the mayor of New York City and his Fortune 500 company is worth over $20 billion from selling investment data, here is a CNN News article about Bloomberg. I don't know if you can pay to get listed or not, is this relevant to a company whose value rests in its reputation for reliable data?
"The second one (Canadian Biomass) is a press release which does not seem to be independent from the subject. Anyone can submit press releases for free there, see [14]."
I take your point. This CBM page states, "All submissions will be reviewed before posting", so there is at least one level of independent editorial oversight. I couldn't find out one way or the other how much, if any, CBM edits news submissions.
"The third and fourth ones only contain passing references to the company, and do not amount to substantial coverage necessary to establish notability."
This is clearly incorrect. Let's just focus on the Penza Oblast official government press release, the points for KUC are similar but of lesser light. Just because the only relevant company content is the name of the company does not make this citation less than substantial and notable. This is because this press release would not exist without MHG and its partner. This official press release is a regional media report of international interest. The guideline WP:CORP provides that, "Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability."
This Finnish company with 11 employees somehow has connections with Africa, EU, Canada, Russia, China, a Finnish government agency, and Finnish universities. I think everyone with the possible exception of the initial author agrees that this article is primarily based on press releases or is otherwise not sourced, and that this is not acceptable. Again, I don't think I can make a good decision one way or another currently about notability. Unscintillating ( talk) 23:09, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
In a previous statement I said, "The first paragraph of this CBM page appears to be a secondary-source description of MHG Systems." An editor replied that the news report, "is a press release which does not seem to be independent from the subject. Anyone can submit press releases for free there..."
I have found the actual press release here and a version on the MHG website here. Comparing these versions with the Canadian Biomass news report shows that Canadian Biomass retains independent editorial control.
I am therefore upgrading my previous statement that the "The first paragraph...appears to be a secondary-source description", to the assertion that the CBM page meets WP:RS for a secondary source. Since Canadian Biomass is a national media, using WP:CORP, this page "is evidence of attention" by a national media and "is a strong indication of notability." Unscintillating ( talk) 16:55, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- Here is another copy of the press release from the way back machine. Unscintillating ( talk) 12:06, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Renewable and Sustainable Energy is available on the "PDF" icon here. The publication has a one-page article written by Joanna Bawa about MHG Systems.
I haven't been able to verify any of the claims made by the publisher, Platinum Media Consulting, which appears to be located in England.
The document appears to be a sophisticated advertising publication targeting the [United Nations Climate Change Conference] in Copenhagen in December 2009. The publisher claims to be supported by the [OECD]; by three UN agencies, the [UNDP], the [UNEP], and the [UNGC]; the [European Commission]; and the [ Denmark Ministry of Climate and Change]. The publisher reports a related "campaign" of "adverts" on CNN.
The publisher claims on this page that as a 64-page insert the document was published on November 4, 2009, in the "Wall Street Journal worldwide".
[ This page] shows that the "Global Wall Street Journal" has a print circulation of 1,833,934. Unscintillating ( talk) 01:26, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
I found out a little more about ABREF [ here].
The ECOWAS countries are: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Togo. [ ref] Unscintillating ( talk) 09:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
This comment is a continuation of the discussion at [Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MHG Systems#Continuation_of_discussionBackLink].
rpisarenko, I have looked at here as you suggested, and all I see is an announcement that MHG retained a marketing agent in Spain. For the next link, the information posted by Mikkeli University has already been taken down (I saw it earlier). Regarding Finnvera, they are an investor in MHG and are not independent. I found a way to use Google to translate the Finnvera document "a PDF in Finnish language", and about the only metric is EU800,000 and a lot of talk about the promise of the investment. In short I continue to see little from MHG but press releases, a marketing network, two notable letters of intent, and a notable image as a green new-technology company. You mentioned local Finnish newspapers, is there a record there of what MHG has accomplished? All of the universities that are involved, do they ever document a successful project that involved MHG? Unscintillating ( talk) 04:51, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Reply to last comment by hydrox
I find it ironic that, while criticizing Hrafn's behaviour as "counterproductive" because of " name calling", you start your comment with "The deletionists...", suggesting that anyone who had recommended deleting the article would have some sort of deletionist bias.
Anyway, to get to the substance, and even though the article has now been deleted, thank you for pointing out to two talk page's sections above. I'll reply, for the records. The Renewable and Sustainable Energy "briefing" "appears to be a sophisticated advertising publication" according to Unscintillating and I concur (as explained here "...Extending to 64 pages tabloid newspaper in style and printed in full colour this insert will play an essential part in meeting and exceeding readers’ goals with insight that fits into and supports Government and business agendas alike."). Furthermore, the page relating to MHG Systems is only a case study (as explained here "...Containing more than 20 case studies..."), and I don't think that the selection of that particular company for a case study makes it notable as such. Regarding the second talk page section (on the Canadian Biomass "adapted" press release), please see my response here (3rd paragraph). -- Edcolins ( talk) 19:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- Regarding your follow-up to #Renewable_and_Sustainable_Energy_.7C_A_Platinum_Media_Consulting_Publication, you state, "the selection of <MHG> for a case study <does not make> it notable as such." Yes, I agree, but I don't think that is a policy statement—under WP:CORP, the selection becomes "evidence of attention". Not only that but a fair amount of attention, because if Platinum Media made a bad choice, people at the [OECD], the [UNDP], the [UNEP], the [UNGC], the [European Commission], and the [ Denmark Ministry of Climate and Change] would be unhappy. Platinum Media is certainly "independent", "international", and "media". Whether we consider a PR firm, without qualification, as "international media" might be debatable. In this case any distinction is moot. renewable.pdf is reliable and verifiable for the narrow purpose of saying that Platinum Media selected MHG for a one-page slot. Under WP:CORP, "evidence of attention" by an international media "is a strong indication of notability." It is my opinion that renewable.pdf is a "strong indication of notability". Unscintillating ( talk) 23:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- Here is the press release: "The official portal of the Government of the Penza region, Information Press Center, Current news, 27.08.2010, Governor of the Penza region Vasily Bochkarev meets with President of the Society of Russian Biotechnologists Raif Vasilov". Google, Inc., Russian to English translation of www.penza.ru/press/chronicle/ah27082010da1510. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
In the Penza Oblast official government press release, we find that MHG and their partner signed a letter of intent with government officials. This notice would not exist without MHG and its partner, so in terms of notability policy, this is a substantial noticing.
This official press release is a regional media report of international interest and is evidence of attention. The guideline WP:CORP provides that, "Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability (emphasis added)." Unscintillating ( talk) 20:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- ^ Diderot, Denis and d'Alembert, Jean le Rond Encyclopédie. University of Michigan Library:Scholarly Publishing Office and DLXS. Retrieved on: November 17, 2007
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 [1] 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?
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 [5] (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. This is 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 .
| “ | 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.— Diderot [1] | ” |
Rpisarenko ( talk) 15:26, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
A recent post has thanked me for my "note" here. I don't know the author and have had no previous contacts with him/her, so I don't know why I have received a personal communication. Here are some comments in response to this editor's note.
"...neutrality has nothing to do with notability."
Actually, both neutrality and notability are affected when the primary source of information is press releases.
"The first one (Bloomberg) is an entry in a business directory. You can most probably pay to get your firm listed in there."
The owner of Bloomberg is the mayor of New York City and his Fortune 500 company is worth over $20 billion from selling investment data, here is a CNN News article about Bloomberg. I don't know if you can pay to get listed or not, is this relevant to a company whose value rests in its reputation for reliable data?
"The second one (Canadian Biomass) is a press release which does not seem to be independent from the subject. Anyone can submit press releases for free there, see [14]."
I take your point. This CBM page states, "All submissions will be reviewed before posting", so there is at least one level of independent editorial oversight. I couldn't find out one way or the other how much, if any, CBM edits news submissions.
"The third and fourth ones only contain passing references to the company, and do not amount to substantial coverage necessary to establish notability."
This is clearly incorrect. Let's just focus on the Penza Oblast official government press release, the points for KUC are similar but of lesser light. Just because the only relevant company content is the name of the company does not make this citation less than substantial and notable. This is because this press release would not exist without MHG and its partner. This official press release is a regional media report of international interest. The guideline WP:CORP provides that, "Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability."
This Finnish company with 11 employees somehow has connections with Africa, EU, Canada, Russia, China, a Finnish government agency, and Finnish universities. I think everyone with the possible exception of the initial author agrees that this article is primarily based on press releases or is otherwise not sourced, and that this is not acceptable. Again, I don't think I can make a good decision one way or another currently about notability. Unscintillating ( talk) 23:09, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
In a previous statement I said, "The first paragraph of this CBM page appears to be a secondary-source description of MHG Systems." An editor replied that the news report, "is a press release which does not seem to be independent from the subject. Anyone can submit press releases for free there..."
I have found the actual press release here and a version on the MHG website here. Comparing these versions with the Canadian Biomass news report shows that Canadian Biomass retains independent editorial control.
I am therefore upgrading my previous statement that the "The first paragraph...appears to be a secondary-source description", to the assertion that the CBM page meets WP:RS for a secondary source. Since Canadian Biomass is a national media, using WP:CORP, this page "is evidence of attention" by a national media and "is a strong indication of notability." Unscintillating ( talk) 16:55, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
- Here is another copy of the press release from the way back machine. Unscintillating ( talk) 12:06, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
Renewable and Sustainable Energy is available on the "PDF" icon here. The publication has a one-page article written by Joanna Bawa about MHG Systems.
I haven't been able to verify any of the claims made by the publisher, Platinum Media Consulting, which appears to be located in England.
The document appears to be a sophisticated advertising publication targeting the [United Nations Climate Change Conference] in Copenhagen in December 2009. The publisher claims to be supported by the [OECD]; by three UN agencies, the [UNDP], the [UNEP], and the [UNGC]; the [European Commission]; and the [ Denmark Ministry of Climate and Change]. The publisher reports a related "campaign" of "adverts" on CNN.
The publisher claims on this page that as a 64-page insert the document was published on November 4, 2009, in the "Wall Street Journal worldwide".
[ This page] shows that the "Global Wall Street Journal" has a print circulation of 1,833,934. Unscintillating ( talk) 01:26, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
I found out a little more about ABREF [ here].
The ECOWAS countries are: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Côte d’Ivoire, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Togo. [ ref] Unscintillating ( talk) 09:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
This comment is a continuation of the discussion at [Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MHG Systems#Continuation_of_discussionBackLink].
rpisarenko, I have looked at here as you suggested, and all I see is an announcement that MHG retained a marketing agent in Spain. For the next link, the information posted by Mikkeli University has already been taken down (I saw it earlier). Regarding Finnvera, they are an investor in MHG and are not independent. I found a way to use Google to translate the Finnvera document "a PDF in Finnish language", and about the only metric is EU800,000 and a lot of talk about the promise of the investment. In short I continue to see little from MHG but press releases, a marketing network, two notable letters of intent, and a notable image as a green new-technology company. You mentioned local Finnish newspapers, is there a record there of what MHG has accomplished? All of the universities that are involved, do they ever document a successful project that involved MHG? Unscintillating ( talk) 04:51, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
Reply to last comment by hydrox
I find it ironic that, while criticizing Hrafn's behaviour as "counterproductive" because of " name calling", you start your comment with "The deletionists...", suggesting that anyone who had recommended deleting the article would have some sort of deletionist bias.
Anyway, to get to the substance, and even though the article has now been deleted, thank you for pointing out to two talk page's sections above. I'll reply, for the records. The Renewable and Sustainable Energy "briefing" "appears to be a sophisticated advertising publication" according to Unscintillating and I concur (as explained here "...Extending to 64 pages tabloid newspaper in style and printed in full colour this insert will play an essential part in meeting and exceeding readers’ goals with insight that fits into and supports Government and business agendas alike."). Furthermore, the page relating to MHG Systems is only a case study (as explained here "...Containing more than 20 case studies..."), and I don't think that the selection of that particular company for a case study makes it notable as such. Regarding the second talk page section (on the Canadian Biomass "adapted" press release), please see my response here (3rd paragraph). -- Edcolins ( talk) 19:25, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- Regarding your follow-up to #Renewable_and_Sustainable_Energy_.7C_A_Platinum_Media_Consulting_Publication, you state, "the selection of <MHG> for a case study <does not make> it notable as such." Yes, I agree, but I don't think that is a policy statement—under WP:CORP, the selection becomes "evidence of attention". Not only that but a fair amount of attention, because if Platinum Media made a bad choice, people at the [OECD], the [UNDP], the [UNEP], the [UNGC], the [European Commission], and the [ Denmark Ministry of Climate and Change] would be unhappy. Platinum Media is certainly "independent", "international", and "media". Whether we consider a PR firm, without qualification, as "international media" might be debatable. In this case any distinction is moot. renewable.pdf is reliable and verifiable for the narrow purpose of saying that Platinum Media selected MHG for a one-page slot. Under WP:CORP, "evidence of attention" by an international media "is a strong indication of notability." It is my opinion that renewable.pdf is a "strong indication of notability". Unscintillating ( talk) 23:53, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- Here is the press release: "The official portal of the Government of the Penza region, Information Press Center, Current news, 27.08.2010, Governor of the Penza region Vasily Bochkarev meets with President of the Society of Russian Biotechnologists Raif Vasilov". Google, Inc., Russian to English translation of www.penza.ru/press/chronicle/ah27082010da1510. Retrieved 14 January 2011.
In the Penza Oblast official government press release, we find that MHG and their partner signed a letter of intent with government officials. This notice would not exist without MHG and its partner, so in terms of notability policy, this is a substantial noticing.
This official press release is a regional media report of international interest and is evidence of attention. The guideline WP:CORP provides that, "Evidence of attention by international or national, or at least regional, media is a strong indication of notability (emphasis added)." Unscintillating ( talk) 20:44, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
- ^ Diderot, Denis and d'Alembert, Jean le Rond Encyclopédie. University of Michigan Library:Scholarly Publishing Office and DLXS. Retrieved on: November 17, 2007