Talk:Energy Matters

This article was nominated for deletion on 2 May 2010. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Magazines, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of magazines on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MagazinesWikipedia:WikiProject MagazinesTemplate:WikiProject Magazinesmagazine articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
See WikiProject Magazines' writing guide for tips on how to improve this article.

Fair use rationale for Image:Energy Matters 0482 p 31.jpg[edit]

Image:Energy Matters 0482 p 31.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Energy Matters 1180 cover.jpg[edit]

Image:Energy Matters 1180 cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:25, 26 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising in Energy Matters[edit]

User 193.201.135.244 clearly has stong views on the use of Energy Matters for advertising, and appears to know what he is talking about. The last edition that I have was published in Summer 1984 under Roger Tredre's editorship, and contains no advertising. Evidently the magazine was published later on with advertising, under the editors cited by 193.201.135.244 . In what period did this take place, an when did the magazine finally expire?

--Andrew Bud 01:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability and sources[edit]

Moonriddengirl notes that the article may not meet the notability criteria, and notes lack of sources. To address this, the article has been edited to define some of the issues that made Energy Matters important for its time. Some of these are based on beliefs held in good faith at the time on the basis of available information, and cannot be sourced today, which have therefore been qualified "possibly". Sourcing of references is difficult due to the lapse of time and the fact that events took place before the WWW. Nevertheless, the inclusion of this article is felt to be important as a grounded historical note, particularly in the light of references made to the magazine in another article. As a new contributor I'd welcome any suggestions on how to improve the article and make it more closely in line with policy.

--Andrew Bud 02:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that notability and sourcing concerns persist. "Beliefs held in good faith" constitute original research and are unfortunately inappropriate for Wikipedia articles. What cannot be substantiated should be removed. I have also responded to the note you left on my talk page at your talk page with some information I hope will clarify the notability policies for you. It seems that at the minimum this article requires substantial trimming to verifiable information (avoiding claims like "was possibly unprecedented at a British University", which in Wikipedia terminology are [[Wikipedia:Avoid weasel words|"weasel words") and the insertion of "reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy", as proscribed by the verifiability policy. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 03:04, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]