This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
Indeed. I notice their official company profile also mentions "incinerators", but anyway we need to use understandable terms and not just company jargon. --
Nemo04:29, 21 June 2018 (UTC)reply
Emission standards
The article has some financial data and some stories about emission problems, but no data on emissions. Isn't there an official source for emission data (or other technical standards) of USA incinerators? It would be useful to get a sense of what kind of plants the company runs. --
Nemo04:29, 21 June 2018 (UTC)reply
Proposed rewrite
I am the Communications Manager at Covanta. I would like to share a
proposed rewrite of the current page, so that independent, impartial editors have an opportunity to review the draft and provide any feedback in accordance with best practices.
The current pages has very little encyclopedic information about our history and focuses almost exclusively on a one-sided description of the debate around environmental issues. While I am not the best person to improve the page due to my conflict of interest, I believe the draft represents a vastly superior page that is more well-rounded, complete, and summarizes competing views.
Hopefully the draft will be a launching point to a more encyclopedic page that will continue to improve with the help of disinterested editors. Pinging @
Guy Macon: who I saw listed on WikiProject Cooperation as someone interested in engineering articles.
NKR2009 (
talk)
18:22, 4 February 2020 (UTC)reply
I will try to take a look at it this evening.
In the meantime, could you please double check your citations? I took a quick look and noticed that the citation after "The press release also stated that the DEEP consulted with the Connecticut Department of Public Health and verified that despite the violation, the amount of emissions in the air in the vicinity of the facility was still within applicable health-based standards and did not pose a threat to public health." leads to a p[age that says "The requested article is no longer published." --
Guy Macon (
talk)
19:53, 4 February 2020 (UTC)reply
Hi @
Guy Macon:. Thanks for offering to take a look! I think you’ll find the proposed draft is much better cited than the current page. To clarify, the poorly-cited sentence you are referring to is from the current page, not the draft I shared. My understanding is that press releases generally aren’t allowed as references anyway.
NKR2009 (
talk)
21:09, 4 February 2020 (UTC)reply
Oops! put them side by side and got confused as to which was which. (Note to self: next time, smoke crack after editing Wikipedia...) --
Guy Macon (
talk)
22:10, 4 February 2020 (UTC)reply
Requested move 15 April 2020
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
@
Guy Macon: Most of the website just uses "Covanta", which seems to be the
WP:COMMONNAME elsewhere on the web as well (excluding stock-market-specific news sources, which I eliminate by searching "covanta -cva"). --
Ahecht (
TALK PAGE)
00:09, 15 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Except that it conflicts with:
Coventa Inc information technology & services: coventa.ca
Coventa refuse services in Pittsfield, MA
Coventa real estate in Belgium: www.coventa.be
Coventa financial advisory and management services in Switzerland
Normally I would be OK with naming it Coventa and creating a disambiguation page for the others, but none of the above have Wikipedia pages. --
Guy Macon (
talk) 00:29, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
Well, this is embarrassing. When I first posted the rename request I searched for Coventa, not realizing I had spelled it incorrectly, and decided to add "Holding Corporation" in case one of the others became notable. Then I made the same spelling error when I replied above. :( "Covanta" is fine. Nobody else seems to be using that word. (Note to self: next time, smoke crack AFTER editing Wikipedia...) --
Guy Macon (
talk)
12:52, 15 April 2020 (UTC)reply
Also, I think the Coventa you found in Pittsfield is just a misspelling of this company. Covanta Holding Corporation (which makes energy from refuse) does run a garbage incineration plant in Pittsfield, Massachusetts. --
Ahecht (
TALK PAGE)
20:15, 15 April 2020 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
New page title
The following is a closed discussion of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a
move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Covanta →
Reworld – Covanta was renamed to Reworld
back in April. Since then, most people have been using the new name. This is not a controversial move, but I'm using this tool to request a move on account of my COI - I work for the article-subject. I'd also like to suggest a redirect from Covanta to the new Reworld title, replacing "Covanta" with "Reworld" throughout, and adding a "(previously known as Covanta)" at the beginning.
NKR2009 (
talk) 16:06, 10 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.Safari ScribeEdits!Talk!23:20, 17 July 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.