| Revision as of 18:28, 19 June 2012 editJbhunley (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers22,645 edits Comment← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:55, 20 June 2012 edit undoJbhunley (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers22,645 edits Justification for NPOV tagNext edit → | ||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| I placed citation-needed taggs in places I think are examples of things that require ]. Also, lines like "It is a rather interesting concept that many users are beginning to realize – spend a little more now, save a lot more later." are not appropriate to an enclycopedia page. Keep up the good work and do not get discouraged. ] (]) 18:28, 19 June 2012 (UTC) | I placed citation-needed taggs in places I think are examples of things that require ]. Also, lines like "It is a rather interesting concept that many users are beginning to realize – spend a little more now, save a lot more later." are not appropriate to an enclycopedia page. Keep up the good work and do not get discouraged. ] (]) 18:28, 19 June 2012 (UTC) | ||
| Specific NPOV issues."outstanding advancement", "rather interesting concept". Avon Lighting is not a WP:RS and may violate WP:SPAM. BG HYdro is not a WP:RS and may violate WP:SPAM. This is obviously a topic you are interested in, can you not find references that are not from manufacturers or industry advocates? Try some of the articles from this link to Google Scholar. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,47&q=digital+ballasts. ] (]) 16:55, 20 June 2012 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 16:55, 20 June 2012
What you have here could be a good start. I did a quick run through to wikify the article, you might want to remove the red links or see if there are articles that they should point to under a different name. Jbhunley (talk) 18:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
The issue is that right now it reads like an advertisement for digital ballasts. Claims for monitary savings, effecency etc all need to be documented by specific neutral studies done by third parties. Please see Misplaced Pages WP:NPOV WP:RS and WP:SPAM. Also, in my opinion, there should be more of what a digital balast IS rather than how new, good, different etc they are. Think of what you would expect to see in a Britinaca article rather than what you would see in something written by/for the industry. Jbhunley (talk) 18:08, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
I placed citation-needed taggs in places I think are examples of things that require WP:RS. Also, lines like "It is a rather interesting concept that many users are beginning to realize – spend a little more now, save a lot more later." are not appropriate to an enclycopedia page. Keep up the good work and do not get discouraged. Jbhunley (talk) 18:28, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
Specific NPOV issues."outstanding advancement", "rather interesting concept". Avon Lighting is not a WP:RS and may violate WP:SPAM. BG HYdro is not a WP:RS and may violate WP:SPAM. This is obviously a topic you are interested in, can you not find references that are not from manufacturers or industry advocates? Try some of the articles from this link to Google Scholar. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0,47&q=digital+ballasts. Jbhunley (talk) 16:55, 20 June 2012 (UTC)