Talk:Texas Precious Metals

I am still unfamiliar with many of Wikipedia's best practices. Please let me know what I can do to keep this article up to standard.

Some notes

Hello, Chriskaspar. I'm Seraphimblade, one of the admins here. I declined the speedy deletion nomination in this case, as the article was not blatantly promotional to the point it needs to be gotten rid of right away, and it appears that a good article on this company may be feasible. You indicated in your dispute to the speedy that you were interested in learning some of the best practices we use, so I hoped to give you a few pointers the right direction.

The first thing would be to take a look through the links on the welcome template you got at the top of this page, if you've not had the chance to do that yet. They give a good idea as to what we're looking for in articles. The primary principle is that articles must be written from a neutral point of view, incorporating relevant information in a neutral tone without being unduly promotional or derogatory. Toward that end, we look for content to be verifiable through a published source. Currently, the article's citations are written mainly to the company's own published information. While that's fine for certain uncontroversial facts, such as location, years in business, number of employees, and such, an article should mainly be written from reliable sources that are not published by the subject or someone having a reason to promote them. Using a variety of sources that aren't connected to the subject helps ensure that neutrality.

From the username you've selected, it appears you may have a close connection to the article's subject. That does not bar you from participating if so, and we welcome your input. However, since it's very easy for unconscious bias to occur in cases like that, we recommend as a best practice that editors with such a connection suggest edits and sources on the article's talk page, and bring them to the attention of other editors by placing the {{editrequested}} template with them. That allows another editor to review them, and make them with any necessary changes.

Editing here can be a good bit to take in. If you have any questions, please feel free to leave a note on my talk page (link will be in my signature at the end of this message), and I'll try to point you the right direction. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 18:07, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade,

Thank you for your response and declining the nomination. I agree that a good article appears to be feasible and I would love to see this become a legitimate Wikipedia friendly and approved article and would like to play by the rules etc. I can't tell you how much I appreciate your help with doing so.

Thank you for the pointers. I agree with your edits, including the removal of the section which could have it's own article. I want to have a NPOV and as you mentioned there is some COI so I am going to go ahead and limit my edits and use the {{editrequested}} instead. I am also aware of the lack of 2nd and 3rd party links to incorporate other reliable sources other than company sources.

Again, thank you for the help. Chriskaspar (talk) 19:05, 13 November 2013 (UTC)Chriskaspar

Requests for Edits

Per the conversation above, I am removing the three tags at the top of the page concerning the message above, and after a single edit myself to make the article as neutral as I can from my perspective, I am stepping out of the picture as a major contributor of this page. Please feel free to modify this article by doing any of the following:
1) Giving it a more NPOV
2) Adding more links (external specifically)
3) Adding appropriate images.

Thank you Chriskaspar (talk) 19:12, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Ive re-tagged the article. It was written by someone with an obvious WP:COI and needs some major work. Do not remove those tags as you are involved with the subject. Werieth (talk) 15:36, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Talking a look at the history of the article the all the actual content was written by you. You are the director of marketing, that is a clear WP:COI. Ill detail the rest of the tags in a minute. Werieth (talk) 15:49, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Unsupported and Prediscussed Tagging by Werieth

Werieth,

This article has been made in a good faith effort to produce quality content for Wikipedia. I am open for improvements making the article more encyclopedic and neutral...please help in this process. There are a handful of other editors who have added and deleted significant amounts of content, all of which I agree with and endorse. If you read the article as is, there are nothing but facts about the company which gives is a strong NPOV. As more and more people contribute, the article with further flesh itself out. If you have issues with the article, please create productive edits and contribute rather than brashly tagging it with multiple unsupported tags. Every single one of the tags you posted has been discussed on the article talk page and rectified by myself as well as a Wikipedia administrator (the same administrator who denied your speedy deletion request). The issues with the article have been confronted and have been discussed in detail on the talk page, if you would like to be a positive par of the discussion, please read and take part in that conversation.

Thank you, Chriskaspar (talk) 15:44, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

I took a look at the article history, which shows every change made to the article. Other than very very minor changes the entirity of the article was written by you. The only exception was a large removal and tags added by an admin which you removed. here. Werieth (talk) 15:52, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

First, I am the great-great grandson of the founder of the manufacturing conglomerate Kaspar Companies and live out of state. I realize that being a great-great-grandson does present a minor amount COI which I have acknowledged multiple times, but I feel as if it is near negligible and can easily be corrected (as it has) by other editors willing to take my edit requests. I also recognize I have written about 80% of the article, but I have requested for other editors to help establish a NPOV without COI. I feel as if the article at this point does not require much work at all to establish a NPOV (I feel as if it does already) and does not deserve tags but am open to any contributions (not unjustified tags like the one you have placed) of people that feel otherwise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chriskaspar (talk • contribs) 16:14, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

The tags are 100% justified. Take a look at the edit history other than very minor category, or template edits the only contributions have been by you, me, and Seraphimblade. Seraphimblade added several tags while declining the deletion request which you removed without addressing the issue. As for actual content all of it was added by you, so please stop trying to minimize your COI. Once the issues that the tags identify are resolved they will be removed by someone without a COI. Werieth (talk) 16:21, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

I'm having a lot of difficulty in finding sources for this, but they may not be quite as easy to find as usual. Chriskaspar, can you suggest any good third-party references that have written about the company? I also noticed there was a proposal to roll it into an article about the parent company, which also may be a viable solution if more sources exist about it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 17:33, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Hi Seraphimblade. First, thank you for your contributions to this page...your edits have been fair, justified and logical and I've learned alot from you. Specifically concerning sources, I went ahead and posted quite a few to help the process. Thank youChriskaspar (talk) 23:07, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

In an attempt to improve this article, I have added a significant number of secondary sources, carefully preserving and taking note of edits by other editors.

Specifically concerning the notability of TPM, they are one of the top 5 precious metals dealers in America and there are significantly more sources determining notability than their competitors APMEX and United States Gold Bureau both of which articles post almost no sources. If there is any concern with the notability of Texas Precious Metals, I recommend that these companies which are fractionally the size should be looked at a little more carefully. Chriskaspar (talk) 23:56, 20 November 2013 (UTC)