User talk:CelticWonder/Archives/2006/04
Latest comment: 18 years ago by CelticWonder in topic PC Club
 | This page is a chronological archive of past discussions from the current talk page for the period April 2006.
In order to preserve the record of past discussions, the contents of this page should be preserved in their current form. Please do NOT make new edits to this page. If you wish to make new comments or re-open an old discussion thread, please do so on the current talk page. If necessary, copy the relevant discussion thread to the current talk page page and then add your comments there. |
By common consent the editing of articles on companies by their employees can be problematic. I suggest you take a step back.
--Just zis Guy you know? 11:47, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
| Thank you for watching over the PC Club page... But if Wikipedia can have pages like TravelMate 2300 that is a verbatim copy of an advertisement, or the likes of Emachines can link to reviews, I see no reason why system reviews cannot be posted for PC Club. If you would please notice, only one of them is mentioned on their website anyway -- and the last one of the three is NOT favorable (note the tech support score at the preceding link to HardOCP), which is why all THREE are added to the wiki page. I really should note on the Wiki article that PC Club HQ representatives were eager to supply true excuses for such a poor score (instead of gloss over the issue like so many other companies do) and that HardOCP gave "kudos to PC Club for giving [them] some explanations as to what is going on with their company." I'll leave that addition to your discretion. |
| And if an article about any company was created by a person who wasn't associated with it in some way, why in the world would they do it? Wouldn't someone who is involved with a company be better equipped to make an informative (and less biased) page than someone who is not or even has animosity toward it? Your comment "By common consent the editing of articles on companies by their employees can be problematic. I suggest you take a step back." makes no sense. Apple may as well have third parties like Microsoft or Dell write their website for them by that logic, and leave Apple out of contribution to their own website. |
| --CelticWonder 05:27, 11 April 2006 (UTC) |