Talk:Spire Credit Union

This article was nominated for deletion on 27 October 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cooperatives, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CooperativesWikipedia:WikiProject CooperativesTemplate:WikiProject CooperativesCooperatives articles

Minnesota Mid‑importance

	Minnesota portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Minnesota, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Minnesota 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.MinnesotaWikipedia:WikiProject MinnesotaTemplate:WikiProject MinnesotaMinnesota articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
Their edits to this article were last checked for neutrality on April 2017.

Edgararcher (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. This user has declared a connection. (disclosure)

Contested deletion

This page is still unambiguously promotional, but I am currently rewriting it to be less "spammy". --HurricaneFan 25 15:25, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Be sure to remove the copyright violation (text copied from here). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:27, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done, as I rewrote the article. HurricaneFan 25 15:29, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alleged-acronym RfC

Resolved

– This is going to end in only one way and that is Spire is not an acronym.Winged Blades^Godric 16:54, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is a recent, self-published internal memo sufficient to treat this company name as an acronym?

The Spire-connected [1] editor Edgararcher (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) insists that Spire is SPIRE, an acronym. The only evidence of this is an internal document [2] that extolls some virtues the first letters of which spell out S-P-I-R-E: "solidarity", "perseverence", "innovation", "real", and "excellence". The meta-data in this PDF file indicates that it was created today from an MS Word document and posted to the company's website, specifically in response to my challenge [3] of Edgararcher's assertion that this is an acronym [4] and his reverting to capitalize "SPIRE" throughout the page. I've obtained this file via three different browsers and the timestamp inside it is always "Dec 13, 2017 12:48 PM" (time zone not specified).
In essence, the question is whether this is sufficient sourcing under WP:ABOUTSELF to override MOS:TM.
— SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ< 21:35, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I have to say no. This is really, really obviously a recent and forced backcronym being offered (probably of an actual internal motivational memo) as an excuse to force Wikipedia to employ the company's "marketing caps" style (exactly like "SONY" for Sony), against our WP:NCCAPS, MOS:TM, and MOS:CAPS guidelines. There are zero independent reliable sources that establish that this organization's name is actually an acronym. What little material is out there about SCU (formerly Spire Federal Credit Union, SFCU) often gives it as "Spire". Even some of Spire's own internal materials on their website do! I also think this editor is too close to the subject and should no longer be editing this article directly. I had moved the {{COI}} tag off the article and changed it to just a {{Connected contributor}} on the talk page, but this may have been premature. Despite being informed [5] of the WP:PAID disclosure requirement, User:Edgararcher remains a disclosure-free redlink; we know there's a WP:COI because the editor referred to SCU as "we" in a now-contested WP:RM/TR request and did his sig as [[User:Edgararcher|SPIRE Credit Union]] [6]. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ< 21:35, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We really aren't trying to cause an issue. We just wanted to have "Federal" taken out of the title of this page so that it appeared correctly on Google search. "SPIRE" has appeared in the history section of our page for many years so we aren't sure why it's an issue now. We always capitalize SPIRE in all of our publications and it isn't just for stylization-it is an acronym for our core beliefs and business practices. This is my first edit to Wikipedia and my intention as Digital Marketing Specialist is to just provide a clear message for our brand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Edgararcher (talk • contribs) 21:49, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:TM and MOS:CAPS are the applicable guidelines. WP:OFFICIALNAME is also highly relevant; it doesn't matter what the legal or declared name of something is, Wikipedia cares how the subject is treated in reliable sources. The problem with what you're saying is that about half the companies on the planet capitalize this way and feel just as strongly about their branding, but neither WP nor the average news or other publisher takes that stuff to heart, and will intead write the names in regular style. It's a neutrality matter. It's not Wikipedia's job to put a company's name in SCREAMING ALL-CAPS so it stands out from the competition. That's the company's job to do in their own ads and webpages and letterhead.

I opened this as an RfC because other editors could conceivably agree with you; maybe there's something special about this case. I don't see it, but I'm hardly infallible.
— SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ >^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ< 22:10, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose treating Spire as an acronym. A quick search[7] shows that the majority of reliable, independent sources on the topic use Spire and not SPIRE. This includes the Star Tribune,[8] Pioneer Press,[9] Forbes,[10] and the Woodbury Bulletin.[11] Counterexamples from the search results tend to come from press releases or in passing mentions of employees. Finding an independent, reliable source to substantiate the acronym claim seems unlikely to me. ebbillings (talk) 18:59, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose treating Spire as an acronym. This is a typical case where you need independent, reliable sourcing and not an internal document. The Banner talk 06:01, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as per MOS:CAPS. I think it relevant to state that the current article Spire Credit Union has removed the 'federal' from the title. That SPIRE is stylized all caps is a company branding decision and is independent of the MOS on wikipedia. Randomeditor1000 (talk) 01:17, 17 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose treating as an acronym. Summoned by bot. I don't see any evidence that the name SPIRE came from the words that the company claims. Nonetheless, if the company capitalizes its name, that should appear at least as a "stylized as..." note. Here's coverage showing the capitalization in an independent article: [[12]]. The first sentence needs to be changed - right now it's incorrect. It should be:

Spire Credit Union (stylized SPIRE Credit Union) is a not-for-profit financial cooperative that... TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 00:45, 19 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - (invited by a bot) This RFC is poorly formed which may make it difficult for the closer to determine consensus. I recommend reviewing WP:RFC and reposting this RFC with 1) a neutral question without the editorial comments/explanation, 2) a "Survey" section in which participants post their response without threaded discussion, and 3) a "Comment" section for discussion. I'll note that the Minnesota business database has only the registered trademark "Spire Credit Union." Jojalozzo (talk) 15:49, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]