Talk:Context-Based Sustainability

Regarding Potential Conflict of Interest

Hello everyone.

This is user Mwmcelroy writing. I am the originating author of this article and also the creator (Mark McElroy) of the concept it describes (Context-Based Sustainability, or CBS). I am also the founder and Executive Director of the Center for Sustainable Organizations (CSO), in whose name and through which the CBS method is made available to the world. CSO is a public, non-profit charity in the U.S. -- a registered 501(c)(3). Everything we produce is produced for the public good.

Thus, far from having a conflict of interest of any kind on this matter, I/we (CSO) are legally-bound to disclose our ideas for the public good, which is what the publication of this article on Wikipedia is intended to do. Many others will no doubt contribute to it, too, I'm sure.

I am also a partner in Thomas & McElroy LLC, whose MultiCapital Scorecard method is also an extended and open-source implementation of CBS.

As stated in the article, both the CBS and MultiCapital Scorecard methods are freely available at no cost for end-user application by organizations anywhere in the world who want to use them, on an open-source, royalty- and license-free basis.

Happy to answer any further questions about this.

Regards, Mwmcelroy Mwmcelroy (talk) 22:59, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't think this article belongs on wikipedia.

Hi mwmcelroy,

As per Wikipedia:COI (conflict of interest) you shouldn't be editing this page so much - regardless of the quality of the article and your contributions to it. You should stop and try to find some other users who can contribute to this article. (but thank you for making your COI known, it's actually helpful and a good precedent to set.)

Somewhat relatedly, I'm not convinced that this article should exist. I'm not convinced it's notable (Wikipedia is only for notable topics), and I can't find reputable sources that can discuss this - please prove me wrong if you can?. It slightly reads like a guide (Wikipedia is not a guide) and that's another problem this article faces. Unless you can convince me that this article is notable and worth keeping, in a few days (since you deleted the PROD tag I put - which is a valid response so don't feel bad for doing that) I'm gonna put this into Articles for Deletion. Please understand.

@Mwmcelroy: Thanks, QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 17:00, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi QueensanditsCrazy, I am just wondering where we stand with this now? I came to this page because of a paragraph about this topic that the same author had added to sustainability and which I now plan to remove. EMsmile (talk) 00:29, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

@EMSmile:

Hi, I can't remember if I put this onto AfD. Feel free to delete if you'd like!. QueensanditsCrazy (talk) 15:10, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm not really familiar with the deletion process and also would feel a bit bad for the main author (who admittedly mostly cited their own publications). Perhaps the article could be refocused or the content moved and become part of sustainability measurement? Where is the best place to discuss this? The WP:AfD sounds a bit radical, not sure. EMsmile (talk) 15:57, 15 December 2021 (UTC)