User talk:Jep466

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

I'm new to WikiMedia; but I'll learn fast!

jep4 64.25.86.163 (talk) 20:51, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Green chemistry links

Thanks, Rifleman; I do understand where you're coming from, and the policies make sense.

That's why I didn't add a link to GC Founder John Warner's Business site (Warner Babcock Institute for Green Chemistry). There are, however, at least 4 or 5 sites in the Green Chemistry Information world that are highly appropriate; I'll pull their links up Monday. They are information/education organizations that are the heart of the Green Chemistry community in the US. As such, they are the most established places to go "for more information" that wouldn't be found in an encyclopedia. I believe that's an appropriate type of link...(?)

You should also note that the (US) Green Chemistry Institute, which was the first organization created to promote Green Chemistry, USED to be a part of the EPA. It is no longer. The Green Chemistry Institute is now under the umbrella of the American Chemical Society: http://portal.acs.org/portal/acs/corg/content?_nfpb=true&_pageLabel=PP_TRANSITIONMAIN&node_id=830&use_sec=false&sec_url_var=region1

Thank you for your help and advice! I really appreciate it! -jep4 Jep466 (talk) 14:56, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi there,

I got your email. Most wikipedians prefer to communicate here; the next time you need to talk to someone maybe you can leave a note on their talk page instead.

I saw your edit. Personally, I have nothing against the site you added. However, the "external links" sections in various articles tend to be spam magnets. The external link policy is here; there is a quick guide to what WP is not.

Anyway, I trimmed the section drastically. My criteria for inclusion was the EPA (they started out with the 12 principles of green chemistry), and the next most prominent chemical society site.

I would agree that it was a judgment call, but the main thing I was trying to avoid would be "me-too!" links. I hope you see my point of view. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 03:32, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I won't claim to be an expert in this field. If you can find a few (maybe 4-5 max) appropriate and representative sites, I (and in all likelihood anybody else) won't have any objections. Like I said, the main reason why I excised so many sites was what I interpreted to be the proliferation of "me-too!" sites. Hope this helps. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 18:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC)