Talk:Mocana: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:14, 18 June 2013

California: San Francisco Bay Area Start‑class Low‑importance

	California portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	San Francisco Bay Area portal This article is supported by San Francisco Bay Area task force (assessed as Low-importance).

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Wurtis65 (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection. (COI declared [1].)

Who Created the Article

I am Kurt Stammberger, CISSP, a Vice President at Mocana Corporation. I have worked in computer security and cryptography for 25 years. I respect that Wikipedia is a place for neutral and well-cited information, and I will follow those guidelines in any articles I author or edit.--Wurtis65 (talk) 19:50, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notability and content

Shortly after I posted this article, Way2veers nominated it for deletion (since retracted) and placed banners questioning its notability and neutrality. While I understand the general cause for concern, I want to emphasize that prior to posting here, I sought out input on these matters, and the version currently posted already reflects my effort to establish notability and keep the article neutral. This is not to say it is perfect, but if there are problems, I would hope they are few, and that they can be pointed out specifically so I can help to address them.

I believe the notability is clear: 8 of the 24 citations I included have the name "Mocana" in the headline, and those include well established general and trade publications like the Wall Street Journal and Computerworld. Many of the other citations treat Mocana and its expertise as a central element of the story even though the name is not in the headline. I believe this far exceeds the notability standard. On that basis, and in the absence of any specific comments calling the company’s notability into question, I am now removing that banner.

The other banner legitimately raises the question of whether I can neutrally write about my own company. While I believe that I have done so -- and specifically declined to include several points that I believe to be accurate, but that I can't source adequately -- I know these are matters of judgment, and others may disagree. Way2veers, or anybody else -- are there specific statements or sections that you think need work to bring them into compliance with the neutral point of view policy? If so, what are they? (I previously asked for input from WP:SOFTWARE and will now also seek input from WP:SFBAY.) -Wurtis65 (talk) 22:14, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 ==Who Created the Article==
 I am Kurt Stammberger, CISSP, a Vice President at Mocana Corporation. I have worked in computer security and cryptography for 25 years. I respect that Wikipedia is a place for neutral and well-cited information, and I will follow those guidelines in any articles I author or edit.--[[User:Wurtis65|Wurtis65]] ([[User talk:Wurtis65|talk]]) 19:50, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
+== Notability and content ==
+Shortly after I posted this article, [[User:Way2veers|Way2veers]] nominated it for deletion (since retracted) and placed banners questioning its notability and neutrality. While I understand the general cause for concern, I want to emphasize that prior to posting here, I sought out input on these matters, and the version currently posted already reflects my effort to establish notability and keep the article neutral. This is not to say it is perfect, but if there are problems, I would hope they are few, and that they can be pointed out specifically so I can help to address them.
+I believe the notability is clear: 8 of the 24 citations I included have the name "Mocana" in the headline, and those include well established general and trade publications like the [[Wall Street Journal]] and [[Computerworld]]. Many of the other citations treat Mocana and its expertise as a central element of the story even though the name is not in the headline. I believe this far exceeds the [[WP:GNG|notability standard]]. On that basis, and in the absence of any specific comments calling the company’s notability into question, I am now removing that banner.
+The other banner legitimately raises the question of whether I can neutrally write about my own company. While I believe that I have done so -- and specifically declined to include several points that I believe to be accurate, but that I can't source adequately -- I know these are matters of judgment, and others may disagree. Way2veers, or anybody else -- are there specific statements or sections that you think need work to bring them into compliance with the [[WP:NPOV|neutral point of view]] policy? If so, what are they? (I previously asked for input from [[WP:SOFTWARE]] and will now also seek input from [[WP:SFBAY]].) -[[User:Wurtis65|Wurtis65]] ([[User talk:Wurtis65|talk]]) 22:14, 18 June 2013 (UTC)