Jump to content

Talk:Kronospan: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Neutrality check: reply on talk page
Line 10: Line 10:


:How and where would you like me to send the next draft?[[User:Urbanchirk|Urbanchirk]] ([[User talk:Urbanchirk|talk]]) 10:45, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
:How and where would you like me to send the next draft?[[User:Urbanchirk|Urbanchirk]] ([[User talk:Urbanchirk|talk]]) 10:45, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

::Replied on your talk page. <span style="background-color:lightblue">'''''&nbsp;[[User:Velella|Velella]]&nbsp;'''''</span><span style="background-color:lightblue">&nbsp;<sup>''[[User talk:Velella|Velella]] Talk ''</sup>&nbsp;</span> 10:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)


== Copyright problem removed ==
== Copyright problem removed ==

Revision as of 10:56, 5 September 2011

Neutrality check

The article in its present state does seem to focus almost entirely on "health, safety and environmental incidents". Is this a balanced approach to covering information on this company? I'm not suggesting such issues shouldn't be covered at all, but we must be careful not to give undue weight to this aspect of the company's history. --88.104.46.22 (talk) 11:02, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree that the article is very unbalanced, mostly the result of a single editor who may (or may not) have had a grudge against the company. However he/she did manage to establish good references for all the edits. What it needs now is someone else to provide the balance using well researched references and avoiding any copyright violations etc. For anyone with a genuine interest in Kronospan this shouldn't be a big problem.  Velella  Velella Talk   12:10, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The article is certainly unbalanced and I understand why my ammends have been removed. Even though all information I provided was NOT promotional, but instead strictley factual. I will, as already discused with Velella source a draft version of information in order to update the article. Once the aforementioned draft has been produced I will liaise with Velella in order to resolve this dispute.Urbanchirk (talk) 14:31, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is that the version that I have just had to significantly edit down to remove copyright violations and non-encyclopaedic material ? I don't recall any consultation.  Velella  Velella Talk   12:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
How and where would you like me to send the next draft?Urbanchirk (talk) 10:45, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Replied on your talk page.  Velella  Velella Talk   10:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.kronospan.co.uk/pages/view/about-us/health-and-safety. Infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Velella  Velella Talk