User talk:Energybase

Welcome!

Hello, Energybase, and

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

I have inserted the Sustainable Energy Finance Directory to UNEPs project section, because it is a UNEP project. I cannot see any problems with Guidelines. Please provide me with more details, if something is wrong.--Energybase 14:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to United Nations Environment Programme. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policy for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you.  · Energybase (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)--[email protected]. 14:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have inserted the Sustainable Energy Finance Initiative to UNEPs external links section, because it is a UNEP project. I cannot see any problems with Guidelines. Please provide me with more details, if something is wrong.--Energybase 14:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 06:11, 4 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Energybase, thanks for your contributions. Unfortunately, you seem to be unaware of two of Wikipedia's important content guidelines. Per Wikipedia:External links, you should not scatter links to tangentially related entities throughout articles. In the case of the BASE article, one link to the BASE homepage is absolutely sufficient. You may also be unaware of the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guideline, which discourages editors from editing on corporations, people or entities they are professionally or personally connected to. Please review these guidelines and make any response here, further inappropriate additions to the article without evidence you understand these guidelines could lead to restrictions on your ability to edit Wikipedia. Thanks again, Deiz talk 10:51, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Having reviewed the articles, I've proposed BASE - Basel Agency for Sustainable Energy and Sustainable Energy Finance Directory for deletion. Neither article appears to establish the notability of the subject. Deiz talk 11:10, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User: Energybase

Dear Deiz, My articles are very neutral. Yes I am part of building awarness for the issue climate change, and i was consultant for building awareness. Therefore i know institutions like BASE and UNEP.
Most articles which are written exist because there is a relation of interest. Else you would not know about it. The interest here is to provide information about institutions which provide support against the climate change issue. It is non-commercial.
The COI starts there where information is given that way that you put yourself into advantage. This is in non of my articles the case, but i try to write upon the structure which is provided worldwide of institutions which provide information and tools. This is a research work which i blend very neutral into wiki. I try to provide structural global and pure information. Nobody will write about this, because you cannot make money with it.
If you want to delete these 2 articles then you will not delete only hours of work but usefull information and support for people who have the initiative and will to tackle climate change (if it is man-made or not is another question and i do not talk about it). I appreciate very much the work of wikipedia and i really think that my articles equal the wiki quality as i gave all my respect to this encyclopedia.--Energybase 12:05, 15 August 2007 (UTC) To mention: For my sense of quality you have thousands of real COI whichs articles you really should make more neutral as wiki is abused for marketing purposes e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NyQuil (at least the low corner right).[reply]

Hi Energybase. The main issue with the 2 nominated articles is not the conflict of interest, it is the notability of the organisations. I appreciate the hours that go into editing and writing (10,000+ edits!) but there are also important criteria against which we have to measure our articles. The conflict of interest is a secondary indicator - the rule of thumb is that something is notable, then someone unconnected with the topic will write about it -

Hi Deiz, i think i didn't understand really what you mean with notable (my mother tongue is not english). But i try to give you an answer. UNEP, SEFI, Goldstandard, REEEP and BASE are "noteable", therefore i wrote about it. Furthermore i wrote about it, that it is more noteable that unexperienced people find these institutions faster. I myself had to gather all these informations within years and i try to provide the information about what which institute can support. As i think this work can help tackling the climadisaster which is comming (just an opinion) your directives would make me feel unconfortable (which is for you unrelevant but you could a good deed ;-))--Energybase 15:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They're not "my directives" -

Don't take that wrong. Your = Wikipedias, as you are part of Wikipedia. --Energybase 15:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So by that logic, "our directives". No? Deiz talk 13:26, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If i'm part of Wikipedia too then yes! But i got the impression that my articles won't be part of wikipedia longer ;-)--Energybase 13:30, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Deiz, i read the article closely about notability. I do not see that the criterion “notability” does not match SEFI or BASE. If you look with Google you find articles on the Worldbank and UNEP page or other webpages e.g. http://www.geothermie.de/kurzmeldungen/17_05_01_base.htm (secondary source, Press releases). I have several links if you want to know more. The article does fully apply also with the „Non-commercial Organization Section“. SEFI and BASE are known worldwide (international scope) in it’s specific framework. To mention, that i didn’t find the time to describe the very differential workprojects of BASE i implemented the separat, sadly parallel, links, to provide the information about the variouse countrydependent mechanisms and frameworks you can use for manipulating a market to the good. If you tell me that i should include these as summaries into the article then i will do so. If you say you will delete it anyway, then inform me. I cannot do more to help for no money .--Energybase 13:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• I really appreciate the effort you're making to understand Wikipedia. If you can find online sources which give substantial coverage to these organisations, please put the links up here and I'll be happy to help you format them into the articles. Note: the sources must be reliable, ideally nationally / internationally recognized media outlets (BBC, CNN, quality newspapers etc.), as opposed to specific industry sources, press releases, message boards, personal homepages, activist sites etc. Even if the pages are deleted, they can be recreated in the future if additional sources become available. Deiz talk 13:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--Energybase 14:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is for sure a definition question and i'm sure that you know more about the directives, but to be mentioned at CNN and BBC would mean "popular" to me and not "notable". Furthermore i haven't found anything about that. In the directive "notability" they ask for pressreleases. When Wikipedia would be narrowed down to "popularity" then this would give me another impression about the quality of Wikipedia. But there are articles in the biggest Swiss Newspaper and in Germany http://www.berlinews.de/artikel.php?10056 or by the german government http://www.bmu.de/files/klimaschutz/kyoto-mechanismen/application/pdf/jiko_info0305.pdf (because BASE founded the Goldstandard together with WWF, Worldwatch and Greeenpeace). You find BASE with SUN21 http://www-x.nzz.ch/format/articles/272.html (btw: NZZ = the biggest Swiss newspaper), and the Solarboat crossing the Atlantic, or with WM 2006 in Germany: http://www.berlin.de/fifawm2006/news/artikel/20050906.php. But at the end i have to say: BASE is really more recognized by governments e.g. http://www.bafu.admin.ch/swissflex/00563/00568/index.html?lang=de and Funds/Banks (incl Worlbank) or International Institutions (GEF, UN), than by the common folk. Because BASE works in this interface and tries to bridge gaps there. I really think it is very interesting to know about. The same applies for SEFI, I would say (e.g. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0OXD/is_2005_Sept_7/ai_n15377012 or http://www.govnet.co.uk/heading.php?magazine=5&ID=567). If that disqualifies, then i agree with your deletion request. If these links provide what you want, then please instruct me how to work together. Thanks for offering.--Energybase 14:34, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I invite you to have a look on your own because articles are countless and very internationally in the internet:

http://www.google.ch/search?q=%22basel+agency%22+sustainable+&btnG=Suche&hl=de&client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Ade%3Aofficial

The notability criteria state that press releases are not appropriate when establishing notability. The usefulness of BBC, CNN etc. is not really related to "popularity", it's related to "newsworthiness"... Given the spread of information on the internet it's really important to demand independent, fact-checked sources which means many sources do not qualify. It's late and I suspect my German skills are going to be tested so I'll take a look at the other references when I'm more energetic. But as I said, even if the articles are deleted this time around, they can be recreated. Deiz talk 14:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Btw. i realized that i haven't written about SEFI till now (SEFD is just a part of it). This would be my next article about: http://sefi.unep.org. I think this information is especially needed now. As these organzations want to bridge the problem that there is no knowledge about this new energy markets as nobody believed in climate change. They try to accelerate the market changes and the awareness. To delete this information would be forever. In 10 years nobody needs to know about it anymore.
I'm sorry, but not BBC (did you here about the scandal because they faked facts?) and especially not CNN can provide quality news!!!!

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sef-directory.png)

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 01:39, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Base logo.gif)

You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 05:47, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Sef-directory.kl.jpg

Thanks for uploading

claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Cloudbound (talk) 22:14, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]