Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Royal Dutch Shell initiatives


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 17:02, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Royal Dutch Shell initiatives

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This is an arbitrary collection of business ventures by Royal Dutch Shell. They range from things that are already well covered on a more primary article (Shell Foundation, Environment of Hawaii, Eco-marathon, Scenario planning) to bog-standard business activities. None of the entries explain why they are specifically relevant or notable under the article heading, nor do the sources suggest that they should be. It seems unlikely that there ought to be an article under this title at all, but if it did it would almost certainly require a full rewrite. Bigbluefish (talk) 13:12, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete Agree with the nom. In addition this is clearly a POV fork and according to the article's creator at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard intended from the outset to be an article positive to RDS, and that is unacceptable in an encyclopedia. Despite the creator's agenda against Shell, this is clearly promotional in tone, blowing Shell's green trumpet, another reason for deletion. ukexpat (talk) 14:02, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep There are multiple Wikipedia articles relating to Shell, all containing varying degrees of negative content – even within the Shell Foundation article. I could therefore see genuine merit in the arguments made on the “controversies” talk page for a Wikipedia article focused on RDS positives. Hence my origination of the Wikipedia RDS initiatives article after I had collected sufficient content from various reputable independent publishing sources. Once the article was published, I accepted the criticism about adding some balancing content. This was easy to do in respect of environmental initiatives and provides a clear rebuttal to the notion of the article being Shell’s “green trumpet”. Finding any information to counter balance Shell’s generous donations to worthy causes is a rather more difficult, if not impossible task. The RDS initiatives article is based on source articles factually reporting true events in exactly the same fashion as other RDS related Wikipedia articles. Provided there are prominently displayed cross-links, anyone deeply interested in RDS is likely to glance through all of the RDS Wikipedia articles. Those who did would end up with a better informed overall view of the company. If the article is deemed deficient in its current guise, why not be constructive and remedy the deficiencies rather than deleting in its entirety a collection of well sourced factual information. Johnadonovan (talk) 16:27, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per ukexpat. Fin©™ 16:45, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per all of the reasons in the nom and paticularly those given by ukexpat. However, as Johnadonovan has stated, the article is well-sourced and while some of the information may not be significant (employees packing groceries for MLK day or whatever) any information that is relevant that is not included in another article should be moved and preserved.Drawn Some (talk) 16:59, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.