Talk:FirstEnergy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Ohio Portal FirstEnergy is part of WikiProject Ohio, which collaborates on Ohio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to current discussions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Suggested article edit guidelines: To help us prioritise our workload, and in readiness for Wikipedia:1.0, we need to assess our articles for Quality. If this article is Unassessed, please assess it. See the Article Classification for instructions. If you disagree with a rating, you can change it or discuss it at Article Classification. After assessing this article's quality, please make sure it to add it to the Lists at Article Classification, following the grading scheme detailed there.

	Energy Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, which collaborates on articles related to energy.
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article is on a subject of low importance within energy.
Help with this template This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] Somewhat Biased?

I understand that much of the information in this article comes from mainstream news and that FirstEnergy might not merit an article without its current scandals. However, it does not look well-written when the vast majority of the article focuses on negative aspects without giving any more information about the company and without including its response to the charges made. N Vale 06:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

I think you are taking NPV too far. I read the article a couple of time and its honestly sound neutral to me. See, when someone says an article is not neutral, it is mainly due to the tone or assertions that are not supported by facts. This articles tone is okay and he point out figure whenever necessary.

You have to accept its not always possble to present all side of the story. We are helping out and who ever wrote it presented what is public which happen to be negative. He/she can't go hunting for the owner to present the other side of the story. And some stories can never be balanced ever, because the entity involved was/were downright evil. Should that really warrant an article being labelled NPV? How do you write a biography of a mass killer in Rwanda and avoid this label? And trust me, I know of people who could say Mobutu was a good leader with a straight face, so such a claim/example is not far fetched.

It didn't seem to be an egregious violation and I attempted to find the most mild template possible. It would still be better to include whatever public statement the company may have made in these areas as any professional report would require. However, the rearranging of the information does much to alleviate my concern by making a definition of the company primary and its scandals secondary. Is there any official procedure or may I simply remove the POV banner? N Vale 20:41, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

It seemed safe to just go ahead and remove the POV banner seeing as this topic hadn't been touched in over 2 months. I agree with the anonymous editor in that this is about as neutral as it can get without being redundant and pedantic. Oncehour 10:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)