Talk:Request for proposal/Archives/2012
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
External links
I've removed two external links again. The "e-consultancy" link is a blatant commercial link which provides zero content (the 'sample' downloads are nothing but empty ads for a paid subscription service). The "rfpdb" site is another commercial link (despite the "free" claim) which does nothing to expand on the topic of the article. Please limit external links to those which expand on the article, not those which provide "services" - this is not a link directory. Kuru talk 16:05, 10 November 2007 (UTC)
RFPs are difficult to quantify, examples do it best, this is why I restored links to directories of them. Examples work! 76.179.117.107 (talk) 15:26, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
- No, they're spam. The how to write RfP link is good though. Carl.bunderson (talk) 19:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
The RFP Database site keeps getting added because lots of non-profits, small municipalities and companies are continually looking for a place to post RFPs and garner competitive bids. The site IS free for posting RFPs and is free for users that contribute content to the site. When the link was on this site almost 20% of click-thrus went ahead and registered; the majority of those users were non-profits looking to post their RFP. This link is a valuable addition to the Request for Proposal article and fulfills the questions "where can I post my RFP", "where can I find RFPs" and "where can I find sample RFPs for free". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.92.60.100 (talk) 14:03, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Read what Kuru said above, as well as your talk page. Carl.bunderson (talk) 15:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- We're not here to promote your site. The next time that link is added to a procurement related article, it will be added to the blacklist. Kuru talk 00:24, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
I've removed the entire list. Granted, the article is poorly sourced so we might want to keep a few of the better ones until the article improves. Anyone want to make a case for any of them? --Ronz (talk) 16:22, 19 September 2012 (UTC)
I come to this page from time to time when I have to write one, I think the links to authorship information and samples we can use are very helpful. The subject is vast and really specific to each industry. Hard to tell, perhaps the ones without ads on them or payment to use them are good? --207.5.190.59 (talk) 01:15, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not an instruction manual. --Ronz (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2012 (UTC)