Freshbaked

Hello Freshbaked,

it seems that you insist on keeping this press articles on the Avanade page. I didn't delete them, but corrected a typo in your ref tag, so the rest of the page now shows up again.

But I don't think, this press articles should stay on this page. If you start adding press articles, the page will be growing to giant size, because there are so many articles, positive and negative. And if you want to add this press articles, why don't you add this articles not also to the accenture and eds wiki sites? I think that would be to much.

I think, in a criticism section you can add storrys about unsuccessful projects. But there it should also give a general overview about success rates, customer satisfaction or dissatisfaction. Of course you can add examples like that, but not only the example.

Maybe you can change this things a little bit.

Cheers

Cheerbro

Avanade

Hello Freshbaked,

first thanks, that you answered me. I agree that wikipedia should be an objective information source and anyone should contribute and articles shouldn't be somehow advertisments. The only thing I want, is that wikipedia articles should keep a kind of structure. The structure should be generall information, history and so on. Of course a criticism section should be also part of this structure.

So I appologize for deleting your contributions. I added a critsicm section and added your contributions to it. I just had a look at the accenture wiki entry, and it is the same there. You'll find even a huge criticism section at the microsoft wiki entry.

I hope you agree with me.

Thanks again for this conversation.

Cheers Cheerbro —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheerbro (talk • contribs) 09:51, 29 October 2007 (UTC)