 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Expanding this entry edit
Hi. I would like to update this page to use the same company format as the other organisations in this industry (Big 4, GT, BDO) and add basic service information. Does anyone mind? Zimrow 08:48, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
- Further to my proposal above to update this page, I would like to suggest removing most of the external links at the bottom, since they can be obtained or accessed via the main RSM website. Also, I would like to suggest removing the information about Robson Rhodes leaving the network. This is because all networks are continuously changing as member firms join or leave and so the details about the Robson Rhodes change, while largely correct, are no more or less important than other changes in the membership of RSM International. If anyone disagrees, perhaps we can amend this section and add information about all other recent member firm changes to make the page more neutral overall. Zimrow 14:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Done. Zimrow 12:57, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
I've re-added the RSM RR merger details. Given the 2 founding members decided to merge and it fell apart then RSM RR goes to Grant Thornton, I think this is significant. It is all sourced and correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.172.114 (talk) 15:34, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
Janet, why did you delete information on the French founding firm leaving RSM International to join KPMG? Could it be you work for RSM International and are removing negative information about this network? 81.102.44.226 (talk) 14:15, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Updating this entry 2013 edit
I have updated the text for the RSM page so that it is now current and accurate and more comprehensive factual information about RSM International. I think the last time any edits were made was in 2009. I will review for Neutral Point of View and would appreciate a second opinion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RSM123 (talk • contribs) 17:09, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
I have reviewed the text for Neutral Point of View. I would appreciate a review and further pointers if necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RSM123 (talk • contribs) 17:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
I have reviewed this article and removed several sections that did not appear to be independently verifiable or appeared promotional. I think the article now more closely meets the Wikipedia rules and requirements. Zimrow (talk) 15:41, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
- No offense to all the work, but start over from some independent, reliable sources. As is, it looks like a pr piece written by RSM employees. --Ronz (talk) 17:34, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
RSM edit
From what I know about RSM this seems like an accurate factual description of the network. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itiscdc (talk • contribs) 07:52, 7 June 2013 (UTC)