Template talk:Solar power in the United States

Hi Johnfos, "that wikilinks to notable companies are allowed in See also" ? could you give a link to this new approval ? that would contradict with WP:NOTYELLOW and the current status is not to advertise at Wikipedia. thanks Mion (talk) 12:11, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mion. I have to admit that I am really surprised that you are pursuing this. Makes me wonder what you think of Portal:Companies and Portal:Companies/Index by industry/Sub/Energy.

Wikilinking notable companies is a lot different to advertising in the yellow pages. No contact details or address is provided, and no product details or logo is used. Johnfos (talk) 21:12, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

linking company names to products without reason is named branding, because of corporate_censorship there is no branding or advertising on Wikipedia. You don't need to provide contact details to act as yellow pages only providing company names on the productpage is in essence the same as yellow pages and i'm amazed that Portal:Companies is allowed on this project IMO similar as we have advertisements hiding as an article, this is advertising hiding as a portal, lists serve the same function to maintain the company categories, that should be enough. Mion (talk) 20:34, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose you will be wanting to delete templates like the one below too. Where will your foolishness end? Johnfos (talk) 22:47, 22 March 2009 (UTC) {{NASDAQ-100}}[reply]

The nasdaq is a company listing in itself, which explains the template, and you're bringing up other arguments but you're not answering my question, so where are your diffs that show support for company listings in see also ? Mion (talk) 23:58, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is some more company info for you to delete... advertising... advertising... advertising... [1] Johnfos (talk) 00:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Listing of category content is common on WP, i'm still waiting for your diffs for the see also. Mion (talk) 00:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a good one, which links companies and their area of activity... Leading firms by activity... more advertising, just like the yellow pages... Johnfos (talk) 00:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, its not a good a good one, besides thats its outdated its still a list, it has nothing to do with the see also section or this template, maybe I shouls ask something about the see also, as you like to use it as a reference , in First_Solar#See_also, BP solar is listed in the see also, could you explain to me why ?

You're getting incoherent now... "its not a good a good one"... just like you did here [2], when I decided to stop trying to answer your many questions. Maybe try the help desk. Johnfos (talk) 01:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When do we move them from one to the other? Many are going on-grid in stages, others are being expanded in phases? Is it current when first power goes on grid? Last panels of Phase 1 is installed? After testing? Ivanpah has tested one tower on grid, Topaz is on grid with only part of panels installed while California Valley Solar Ranch has all installed but isn't on grid yet? Rmhermen (talk) 16:06, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]