Talk:Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition

Retitle to Klappan Coalbed Methane Project
non-caps, would be "Klappan coalbed methane proposal" or the like. If this article is only about the coalbed methan project and the politics around it, there is no reason for it to be titled about only one of the groups combatting it; the group article can still exist, but should cover other issues instead of only this one; the coalbed project on ht Tahltan pages and related pages including Sacred Headwaters shoudl also be migrated out of those into a proper article on the proposal. This article serves currently to further a particular agenda/account (for example, has Royal Dutch Shell contributed to it in the way that the WAtershed Coalition people clearly have?). Wikipedia shoudl not be used as a campaign platform see WP:Soapbox.Skookum1 (talk) 02:32, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Whether moved/renamed or a new standalone article is written, any article with this kind of content on it should have WP:Energy, WP:Mining and WP:Companies, probably also WP:Engineering.....Skookum1 (talk) 02:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Everything in the article except the lead was covered in Sacred Headwaters or Klappan Coalbed Methane Project, which I have revamped to make more NPOV. I have removed the redundant content and cited the page with the only reliable source that I could find that could be used to establish notability, the Prince George Citizen.--kelapstick (talk) 17:43, 27 March 2009 (UTC)