Talk:SunPower

message: There are a great many sources which suggest that the appropriate description is "all-black", rather than "all-back" -- Johnfos 00:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, they are all black.  That's because of the all-back-contact design (no silver wiring on the front); . Dicklyon 04:02, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: All-black

message: This article strikes me as being highly promotional. Two of its four paragraphs read more as marketing-style project announcements than an encyclopedia article, and one of those--saying, "SunPower will invest over $4.4 billion in its Philippines plant..."--has a contradictory reference link that currently says, "SunPower to invest $570M in Philippine facility" (that was the headline presented to me today without my signing up for access to the full article). All of the External links seem entirely self-promotional--so much so, that eight of the nine links are to articles at the RenewableEnergyAccess.com domain, where each article page states that SunPower Corporation is "A RenewableEnergyAccess.com Marketing Partner". The ninth link is merely another corporate announcement that was apparently provided to--and then repackaged by--a news organization; every statement in the article is attributed to SunPower or one of its employees. 
Consequently, I am removing the paragraph about the $4.4 billion investment and am removing the entire External links section. The References section already has a link to the company's website, so no separate External links section is needed.
Someone else could well review the remainder of the article, which seems to me to be supported only by statements that appear to come directly from SunPower or its representatives, according to the reference links.
--rich<Rich Janis 03:18, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just reveted another such anon peacock edit.  Sorry, I said "remove" instead of "revert" in my edit summary. Dicklyon 17:14, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Promotional statements 

message: It is still promotional, and I added an "advertisement" tag. 
There is also a major problem with statements about the company's products having higher efficiency are sourced only to the company site.  This is not acceptable. Similarly, the information about the projects that use their product is mostly sourced also to the company.  DGG ( talk ) 06:54, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: still promotional 

message: My name is Sanah and I work for SunPower. As shown in my annotations here almost the entire page is cited to personal blogs, broken links, SunPower.com, or nothing at all. I want to suggest this is a WP:TNT situation and ask that we stub the page. My hope is that - once the current page is stubbed - that will pave the way for new content to help rebuild it with proper sources. Because I have a WP:COI, I'm asking that an objective editor consider my request to stub the page. Please let me know if there is any way I can be of further assistance. Best regards. Sanahsue (talk) 18:22, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You may want to mark this request as an edit request and add the relevant edit request template so that editors who perform such work are alerted to your suggestion. -- Longhair\talk 18:29, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

text: Hi! Thanks for declaring your COI and being cautious with your editing. A Wikipedia article about a NASDAQ-traded company founded in the 80s, like yours, can be expected to contain more notable and properly cited material than the length of a stub. And indeed, at least one of your draft removals seems excessive. Are you   paid for your edits? Learning Wikipedia policies and guidelines (WP:RULES) takes some time and I have no time to teach you. I only looked at the first three sentences in your draft. The ones without citation are OK to remove under WP:BURDEN (but only if it isn't sourced in the article body either, see WP:LEADCITE). The first sentence, however, should be kept under WP:ABOUTSELF (part of WP:V), which states that self-published material is OK for credible claims. I suggest you read all of WP:V and amend your draft accordingly. Also, a sentence being sourced with a dead link is no reason for its removal. Broken links are no problem. Information sourced with dead links can almost always be saved from an online archive, e.g. by checking the following website: www.web.archive.org/*/INSERTDEADLINKHERE/; see H:AAS and WP:404. Only delete information that is entirely unsourced (and requires an inline source - don't cite that the sky is blue). I suggest you not only remove text from the article but also expand it with some info and pictures. Keeping in mind the WP:MOS including MOS:PUFFERY.‎⠀Trimton⠀‎‎ 19:37, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I think there is a misunderstanding. I do not want the page to be a stub long-term. I want to remove poorly-sourced or un-cited content in order to replace it with properly-cited content. I did check each of the broken links on Archive.org, but each produced an error message. I know a primary source from the founder may be ok for basic information, but I think citing to independent secondary sources - as is done in the proposed replacement - would be better. Sanahsue (talk) 15:07, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

text: OK I have done the easy bit - that is the delete. But I am going to leave it to someone else to look at your proposed new content. But if you have an interesting factory pic on Wikimedia Commons ping me. Have a nice day.Chidgk1 (talk) 17:42, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Review of SunPower page 

message: In compliance with WP:COI, I'd like to request an impartial editor consider adding the following to the end of the "Recent History" section to update the page with a recent spin-off of a substantial portion of SunPower's business: 
In February 2022, SunPower investor TotalEnergies purchased SunPower's commercial and industrial divisions for $250 million, as part of SunPower's transition to focusing on residential installations.
Pinging  and , who responded to my prior, larger request. FYI - I went ahead and updated the infobox data as well, as a non-controversial edit. Jillianhailey (talk) 18:14, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Please don't ping me any more as I am no longer involved with this article.Chidgk1 (talk) 06:05, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll do it. It seems an appropriate inclusion. MartinezMD (talk) 17:38, 19 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request to Add Spin-off 

message: Hi. My name is Jillian and I work for SunPower. The following criticism was recently added without a citation:
"Sunpower uses Enphase microinverters in all AC module products, with a custom communications protocol not compatible with standard Enphase systems."
This is factually accurate, but it's the kind of detailed product specification that I wouldn't expect to see in an encyclopedia. I suggest it either be deleted, or have a "citation needed" tag added for an inevitable deletion later on after giving editors a chance to cite it.
Pinging  and  who participated last time I chimed in a year ago. Jillianhailey (talk) 16:11, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure I would label the entry a criticism. I do wonder where the information came from given it's an anon editor. I'll label it as needing a cite. MartinezMD (talk) 18:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent Edits 

message: In October of 2021, Sunpower purchased Blue Raven Solar.
https://newsroom.sunpower.com/2021-10-05-SunPower-Acquires-Blue-Raven-Solar,-One-of-the-Fastest-Growing-Residential-Solar-Providers-in-the-U-S 71.70.171.146 (talk) 12:54, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sunpower purchased Blue Raven Solar