Talk:Cory Riverside Energy

Neutral point of view

Please respect the wikipedia guidelines to present a neutral point of view. This article has recently been rewritten to make it appear that only the conservative party is against the incinerator. I understand that a broad spectrum of local opinion is against the plan, and the article should represent that broad opinion rather than trying to push one political party.

Acceptable references for an article are comments appearing in the local and national press, not solely statements from one political party. The article should be balanced for both political content and where it can be found, the case for the incinerator should be presented. The idea is to allow the reader to draw their own conclusions from a neutral presentation of the case. Where the views of political representatives are put forward, the views of other parties should be represented where possible. Wikipedia is not a soapbox.

If these guidelines are followed the reader will be drawn to a better understanding of the issues involved, and reach the conclusion that the plan is a bad idea for themselves. Attempting to push a single point of view against guidelines, may lead to editors being blocked without further warning. Kbthompson (talk) 15:04, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

neutral point of view

Dear Kbthompson,

in being neutral, contributors must still also present the facts about what has happened and the details of the events concerned. the broad opinion is covered in edits. it is important as well to note the campaigning of local opposition group badair, as it is important to note the work done by conservative councillors in this matter. happy to discuss more detail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.60.38.10 (talk) 15:54, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

The POV tag has been placed here because of apparent promotion of a party political interest by an anonymous user with an IP address registered to 'Information Systems, Parliament of the United Kingdom', viz replacement of the local MP's summary of evidence to a public enquiry with 6 links to the website of a political party. The dispute is not about the need to present the fact that local opinion is opposed to the incinerator, but (1) the need for an encyclopedia to present both sides of the argument and (2) the need to reflect the fact that local opposition would appear to be cross-party, not limited to one particular councillor and his party. Anyone with a local interest in this scheme, a local political party, campaign group etc should consult Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before editing. Pterre (talk) 16:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

POV tag

I'm happy that this can go now. Any dissent? Pterre (talk) 09:24, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Article Name

Since it is always refered to as the Belvedere Energy from Waste facility in press etc. Should the article be renamed to reflect this?--195.92.247.216 (talk) 08:51, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Belvedere Incinerator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120303170744/http://www.coryenvironmental.co.uk:80/page/riversideresourcerecovery.htm to http://www.coryenvironmental.co.uk/page/riversideresourcerecovery.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927225252/http://www.letsrecycle.com/news/news.jsp?story=6406 to http://www.letsrecycle.com/news/news.jsp?story=6406

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:17, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Belvedere Incinerator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20061015122731/http://www.letsrecycle.com/news/archive/news.jsp?story=5724 to http://www.letsrecycle.com/news/archive/news.jsp?story=5724
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927225444/http://www.letsrecycle.com/legislation/news.jsp?story=6403 to http://www.letsrecycle.com/legislation/news.jsp?story=6403
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927225415/http://www.letsrecycle.com/info/localauth/news.jsp?story=6558 to http://www.letsrecycle.com/info/localauth/news.jsp?story=6558

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:46, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Change name of 'Cory Riverside Energy' article to 'Cory Group'

• What I think should be changed: Name of 'Cory Riverside Energy' article should be changed to 'Cory Group'
• Why it should be changed: Company name has been changed
• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

Ross.Brown.Cory (talk) 17:45, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

References

 Not done: You must cite a source. Quetstar (talk) 18:13, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Source for name change from Cory Riverside Energy to Cory Group is included here in the footer of the company website: https://www.corygroup.co.uk/ Ross.Brown.Cory (talk) 09:18, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Merger proposal

@Ross.Brown.Cory, The Huhsz, and Crookesmoor: Consideration should be given to merging this article with Cory (Company). This article was initially focused on the Belvedere incinerator (now Riverside 1), but has since morphed into a more general description of the business that overlaps with that of the company article. Paul W (talk) 09:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Paul - I agree. There are a couple of Cory pages and a lot of the information is redundant. Either way, the Belvedere incinerator page is incorrectly named - 'Cory Riverside Energy' was only ever a trading name for a company that included the incinerator and various other assets. Ross.Brown.Cory (talk) 12:45, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Ross.Brown.Cory. Please add your agreement to the merger in the Merge discussion page. Thanks. Paul W (talk) 07:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)