Talk:LED cover

Does this page seem to be promoting LightDims? Where there may not be a lot of competitors to talk about on the page, there seems to be a lot of sales pitches passed on as data, especially in the "Variations" section.

Blatant Advertising for LightDims

This page attempts to represent itself as a discussion of a category of products aimed at decreasing the intensity of LEDs present on many modern electronic devices. As best I have been able to tell, personally, this is a category of one, namely LightDims, a brand heavily promoted on this page which has, conspicuously, been edited primarily by a single user. Further, a quick look into this matter reveals that the company in question, LightDims, has linked this page as their one, and only, post on Twitter citing it as a "wiki link to my(their) product". It is my contention that they have created this product in an attempt to misuse Wikipedia to promote their product unabashedly, and this was also observed on 16 October 2013 by a guest at IP address 66.234.252.194

Further, the majority of references on this page are, in my opinion, not quality sources. While the (broken) first reference is linking to a site administered by the American Institute of Physics, the remaining four are, in my opinion, poor sources. Reference two cites a UPI.com article which, while not horrible, is in my opinion inferior to referencing the report published by the actual research study that was done. The remaining three references are all referencing the same page on the website of the manufacturer. In all, at the very least this page needs a major cleanup to provide a less biased and more encyclopedic look at this matter, that said I have been unable to find any competing products for LightDims and suspect that this is a product category of one and therefore a poor candidate for an encyclopedic entry.

I have tagged this page for Speedy Deletion under CSD G11.

JBartus (talk) 00:38, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

On further reading, I discovered the following about the Variations section of the article:

• Sentences one through three of the first paragraph appear to have been written to attempt to give the article a neutral tone, though the third is of dubious quality as it stands.
• Sentences four and five of the first paragraph are taken almost verbatim from the source material, with over 90% of the content matching word for word.
• Paragraph two has evolved over time, seeing the history, but it started essentially as a verbatim copy of the source material and was modified and expanded in scope as the company diversified their offerings.

Another nod, in my opinion, to the fact that this page is shameless advertising is that it is consistently updated when new product lines are introduced.

When I posted about tagging this page for speedy deletion on the author's talk page I noted that they had previously attempted to introduce an article to Wikipedia for their product itself and were rejected. I suspect that this page was created as a happy medium whereby they were able to introduce enough information to get it through the approval process before filling it with their blatant advertising.

JBartus (talk) 01:25, 16 May 2015 (UTC)