[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bay Valley Foods

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by BmikeSci (talk | contribs) at 15:45, 20 August 2007 (→‎[[Bay Valley Foods]]). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Bay Valley Foods

Bay Valley Foods (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

The purpose of the page appears to be only to advance original research arguments for the organization being a major polluter, based on primary sources. —Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont) 13:19, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user has a link from a pro-obama blog to his own blog: http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:ABdjlg8EHUsJ:dododreams.blogspot.com/2006/07/parsing-divisions.html+%22Duae+Quartunciae%22+obama&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us

He may have Obama sympathies. BmikeSci 15:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep (a) This article does describe the products manufactured. (b) It also supplies authoritative sources for the particulate matter the plant produces. If I lived in Pittsburgh, I would want to know about both (a) and (b). In short, this is a good example of the kind of thing that Wikipedia does well. Bellagio99 13:46, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This user works on the Obama page: http://www.google.com/search?source=ig&hl=en&q=mikeblas+obama&btnG=Google+Search

*Keep (repeat). I've just edited and reformatted the badly written article. You might want to read again.

I disagree with some of the above assertions. The article is very well referenced: more than almost any other WP articles I've read. It does describe the products. To be sure, it describes the company's pollution, but this appears to be fact-based and not slanted.
This article belongs in Wikipedia.
Please note: I don't live in Pittsburgh, and I don't belong to any organized anti-pollution groups.
Bellagio99 14:22, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The major issue here is not presentation. The material on pollution is a textbook example of original research. No notable secondary sources are cited: the page explicitly presents primary sources, and draws its own conclusions. (Look for sentence beginning "Therefore, this facility".) The source for visible smoke plumes is an email address. The guidelines advise that articles should be based mainly on secondary sources; this helps ensure notability and neutrality. This page is making an argument, not just presenting information. With OR material removed, there's nothing left but a list of products, which is an advertisement. The page fails WP:CORP. —Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont) 14:35, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as POV-pushing synthesis of primary sources. There are no citations from secondary sources to indicate whether this particular plant's emissions are significantly out of the norm or have caused independent third parties to be concerned. --Dhartung | Talk 16:08, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This commenter appears to be an electioneer. See: http://www.mydd.com/story/2004/10/20/192946/79

BmikeSci 15:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Classic example of a stealth attack page, complete with poor sourcing: From the article: "nsolic@achd.net can verify this." Readers should not have to email random people to verify content. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 18:53, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This user goes around deleting items related to Barak Obama :http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22Andrew+Lenahan%22+obama&btnG=Search BmikeSci 15:27, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The motive for this page's creation is probably revealed by a recent addition, since reverted. One of the directors has certain topical political connections. The information was placed by the original creator in a new section entitled "Notability"; I suspect this intended as a kind of argument for keeping the page. I have transferred the section to the talk page and explained the problem as I see it with this argument. —Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont) 20:07, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete - stealth attack page; original research that is not even supported by the citations given; unverifiable sources and no secondary reliable sources (or unreliable - not even a blog post) provided (or found in independent searching) to support claims; potentially libelous; does not meet WP:CORP - and all of the other comments I made into the wee hours last night on the talk page, and the comments made here by an array of editors. Further, based on several comments made by the only contributor to the page - both on its talk page and elsewhere around the encyclopedia - I believe this page was created with political motives as a dirty trick - perhaps to use a Wikipedia article as evidence of claims that seem not to have been reported anywhere else. I am not often in the "delete" camp on Afds, but this is an open-and-shut classic case for deletion and I wholeheartedly endorse the action. Tvoz |talk 02:46, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletions. --Gavin Collins 12:38, 20 August 2007 (UTC)--[reply]

Keep' (a) 'I have added a reference to the Pittsburgh Post Gazette that discusses this facility. One of the main objections is that there is no press for this facility. This article show that this facility is a top emitter from a coal fired furnace. As other documentation in the article show, this facility was owned by Heinz, then Del Monte, Then by Bay Valley Foods. 67.163.247.142 12:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (a) Keep (a) This article is similar to articles for Colgate Polmolive, Crest, Quacker Oats, tic tacs and other major multinational corporations. (b) It also supplies authoritative sources for the sections discussed. The main objection seems to be that Barak Obamas' wife is on the board of directors for the parent corporation, Treehouse Foods. I have striven to produce a good example of the kind of thing that Wikipedia does well. I wish to inform others about this company. Moreover, if you look through the discussion and history, I have been bending over backwards to accomodate the people who are insisting on deleting this article. This company is a major source of the toxins listed. This is not my opinion. It is taken directly from the permit. The permit is not online, but it can be obtained from me or the health department. Is it fair to require that all references be online? What did encyclopedias do before the internet? Other articles about manufacturers describe products and also negative aspects of a company. I had many other sections in this article, but those other sections have been deleted. Please view the history. Some of them can be put back into the article for completeness. The information on pollution is taken directly from the EPA's Toxic Release Information Database. These are not my numbers. The article does not judge the effects of this companies emissions. Instead, it merely quotes the EPA's Envirofact Warehouse's information on Hydrochloric Acid. Nowhere in the article does it mention visible plumes. I believe that there is a concerted effort here to keep this information from the american people. This article was here for months. Yesterday, I added a link from Mrs. Obamas' page to this article. Within an hour, the section on toxins in the Bay Valley article was deleted. An objection is that no notable sources are quoted. I quote the EPA, the permit authority for the county where the plant resides, and I quote the Lexdon Business Library. I never statte that the emissions are outside the norm. Many of these objections are to things that are not stated in the article. Many of these objections are slanderous. 67.163.247.142 02:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Please note: the above IP address, 67.163.247.142 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), is the same person as the creator of the article, BmikeSci (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) - he edits and comments on talk under both identities interchangeably. Tvoz |talk 02:58, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This user works frequently to delete info on Obama: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=tvoz+obama&btnG=Search

BmikeSci 15:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Please note that I use the pronoun I in my defense here. For example I state "I have been bending over backwards to accomodate the people" There is no attempt to hide my identity. I was logged out and did not realize it. The fact that I am attacked for any little issue goes a long way to show that I am not being treated fairly, and that there is some underlying agenda on the part of my attackers. BmikeSci 15:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bay_Valley_Foods&oldid=152484165"