Talk:All Power Labs

Reinstatement of speedily deleted image
I received a notice of speedy deletion of the image I created and had inserted in this page. I don't know how or why Drewmutt should contest an image I created and have it deleted from a page I wrote, nor why that deletion does not appear here on the talk page, but I have re-uploaded the image and re-included it in this page.

I will note as well that I am no longer employed by APL, but will continue to monitor and edit this page. Nesdon (talk) 19:30, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Editor's Disclosure
I have written this article about All Power Labs (APL), a company where I was employed full-time until 2016, and who still occasionally request that I do remote design work (though since I am not paid regularly, maybe I should say volunteer).

Having read and strived to meet Wikipedia's COI and style guidelines and standards in the creation of this article, I understand users with COI are discouraged from creating articles, but my interest in being a wikipedia user is only to improve the depth and quality the information in Wikipedia. While I am a connected contributor with regard to this article, I sometimes make edits to other articles where I find errors, and do not at all consider my role as a user to be exclusively for the purpose of creating or editing this article or material related to this company.

I have created this article because, despite my connection, I find the implementation of biomass gasification as a carbon-negative energy strategy to be significantly important as part of green house gas emission management, and so believe that, given APL's notability in that technology space, it should be included in wikipedia.

The second feature of the subject of this article that I feel is significantly important is the tension between open-source work done in the commons and proprietary commercial work. The transition and ongoing ambiguity of these processes, which both continue to be at play within this company, are also a central topic in the media coverage of APL.

What interested me and drew me to the company was the way a diffuse community and open volunteer culture (in which I and a number of other current employees participated) evolved through an open-source mode and into a standard sort of industrial enterprise, all based on community members' devotion to the technology. It is these important dynamics and not any sort of financial interest I have in the company that motivate my submission.

I have worked on this article for over a year. I has been rejected a number of times and an earlier draft was deleted last year. Despite this frustrating process, I continue to believe in the mission and editorial policies of wikipedia and am very grateful that it exists in the world. Nesdon (talk) 02:07, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

User:DGG I noticed you flagged this page recently. I found some questionable edits and citations which I removed and replaced.

I appreciate the work you and other administrators and editors do to assure content on WP is accurate and in keeping with WP guidelines. As I have written elsewhere here, I believe strongly in the mission of WP, and try very hard to write and edit in accordance with these standards.

Being a former employee and ongoing friend of APL principals, I do have significant COI, which I have disclosed and which had been enough to allow the page to remain unflagged for over a year. I did find some new content re: biochar which I felt did not meet WP standards, and which I have tried to fix. I hope my very amatuer efforts are satisfactory, and if so, ask that you remove the flag.

Thank you for your work, keep it up!Nesdon (talk) 19:40, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Nesdon, I appreciate your continuing efforts, and full disclosure. But it is extremely difficult for any with great involvement in a project to actually write a fully NPOV article. There remain some problems: I fixed one, that you had already partially fixed, making it clearer that the prize project was one where the APL device supplied to the power only. Some of the refs you use are less than reliable: HuffPost was by a "contributor" -- we no longer consider it a RS, because it has about the same meaning as contributor to WP.; reason.com is an interesting, but ideological publication; the gigaohm ref is a PR-style interview; so is Biomass, but its of higher quality at least; I fixed the link for Ref. 16 . Carbon180 does not seem to be working.

Origin stories are a staple of coi about companies. This at least is an interesting and unusual one. Checking the actual refs, it wasn't the zoming, but the building-code, which makes more sense.

I removed some model names, and similar. There may be some more of that sort. to consdense, it would need another round of editing. What is really needed now is some updated statistics. Just go ahead and add it.  DGG ( talk ) 07:29, 9 January 2021 (UTC)