Talk:Sempra
(Redirected from Talk:Sempra Energy)
Latest comment: 8 years ago by Antandrus in topic NPOV concerns
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
Copyright violations
editThe entire text of this article was either copied verbatim or close paraphrasing from the following pages verbatim:
- http://www.sempra.com/about/
- http://www.sempra.com/about/our-companies/SDGE.shtml
- http://www.semprainternational.com/
- http://www.sempra.com/about/our-companies/southern-california-gas-co.shtml
- http://www.sempra.com/about/our-companies/semprausgp.shtml
I have removed the offending content. I restored content from revision 551181331 by MZMcBride (talk · contribs) at 20:02, 19 April 2013 and updated it with information on the reorganization of the subsidiaries. --Ahecht (talk) 23:33, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
NPOV concerns
editLooks like a single-purpose account is attempting to whitewash sourced material and insert a bland corporate propaganda piece in place of this article. While that obviously cannot stand, I think the current "History" section is also written in an inappropriate tone. Wikipedia should be, in general, presenting sourced facts, not leaping to conclusions. Someone with more knowledge than I on this subject should take a look at how this can be approached. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:10, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
- Seems to be two separate single-purpose accounts, one inserting bland corporate-speak and another that wrote the POV abomination about Santa Teresa II that I just deleted. That project is still in the feasilibity study phase -- only Santa Teresa I has been built -- and can be mentioned without WP:UNDUE problems as long as it is in the context of Sempra International's many other current and proposed projects. As it was, it was almost the whole article. Antandrus (talk) 04:05, 23 December 2015 (UTC)