Open main menu

Wikipedia β

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies

WikiProject Companies (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Clyde cancer clusterEdit

Hello, people of WikiProject Companies. I've created this message to notify active members of the project, especially to those who know a lot about or are interested in the Whirlpool Corporation. If you are, I need help improving my article about the Clyde cancer cluster, an incident that Whirlpool was sued for; in other words, it was their fault (don't write those words on the article by the way, WP:NEUTRAL). It is definitely not a bad article. It just needs some small improvements. I'm not at all saying minor edits or improvements are bad, but I'm specifically looking for people who can help me long-term with a lot of co-research to improve the article to reach Good Article status. If you're interested in helping, the things needed to be improved are listed on Talk:Clyde cancer cluster#Improvements. In other words, more material needs to be added to improve the article, and I want more people to edit because I feel like I'm the sole editor. Regards, Philmonte101 (talk)

Taylor (Firm)Edit

Would someone from WP:WPCY mind taking a look at Taylor (Firm) and assessing it? It was just created and already has had most of its content WP:REVDELeted as a copyright violation. There might be some COI/Paid editing involved since the two accounts primarily editing it are also brand new WP:SPAs. Not sure if it meets WP:ORG since one of the sources seems to be some kind of Harvard Law School student project and the others might be problematic per WP:CORPDEPTH. -- Marchjuly (talk)

WikiProject InvestmentEdit

Was hoping to collaborate with this project!

I'd like to invite you to join the Investment WikiProject. There are a lot of Investment related articles on Wikipedia that could use a little attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help get this project off the ground and a few Investment pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks!

Move and Realtor.com draftsEdit

On behalf of Move, I am proposing expanded and updated Move (company) and Realtor.com articles. Given my conflict of interest, I will not edit either article directly and ask independent editors to review them for accuracy, neutrality, and verifiability. During this project, Move has provided feedback to ensure accuracy. I've saved my Move draft here and my Realtor.com draft here. Both articles have edit requests on their respective talk pages, which you're welcome to review if you're interested. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 16:30, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

I've had a hard time getting a volunteer to review the Realtor.com draft in its entirety, so I've split the edit request into separate, smaller requests. Currently, I am seeking help adding the "Overview" section seen at Talk:Realtor.com#"Overview", which has just six sentences. Is someone willing to review this section to help improve the (currently unsourced) Realtor.com article? I am still looking for assistance with the Move draft, too. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 20:26, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

link on hybris not working (wallet garden content)Edit

List of LocationsEdit

Hello everyone, I am relatively new here, but I do have a question. I am considering creating a list of locations for Dave & Buster's on Wikipedia, as the sports bar arcade has 103 locations at this moment (with more to come very soon). I don't care if it is part of the Dave & Buster's article or a separate place, I just had the idea in mind. However, since this is my first time doing something like this, I have a few questions:

  • Besides the location and the opening date, is there anything else specific I would need to add in a list like this?
  • Are there any articles of what I am trying to do for reference? I have not seen any myself.
  • Is a list of locations for a business like this allowed on Wikipedia?

JE98 (talk) 19:52, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

That is content for their website. Wikipedia is not a proxy for a company website, per WP:PROMO. Additionally, Wikipedia is not a directory, per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Jytdog (talk) 19:54, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Group SJREdit

On behalf of Group SJR, I've submitted draft articles for both the company and its CEO (see Draft:Alexander Jutkowitz) as part of my work at Beutler Ink. Given my conflict of interest, I will not publish either article to the main space and ask uninvolved editors to review both for accuracy, neutrality, and verifiability. Is there a WikiProject Companies member who is willing to take a look at Draft:Group SJR for possible move into the main space? I plan to upload the company's logo for the infobox once the article is live. Thanks for your consideration, Inkian Jason (talk) 19:09, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

More input needed at WP:Articles for deletion/Full Genomes CorporationEdit

The article's author is a good faith paid editor, the CEO of the company. Doug Weller talk 19:26, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiprojectEdit

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Companies

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod talk 14:32, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Jaeger Kahlen PartnerEdit

Is the company Jaeger Kahlen Partner notable? If so, the article needs fixing by those interested. George Ho (talk) 09:58, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of AiflcEdit

 

The article Aiflc has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No valid references, non-notable, and unverifiable. See Talk:Aiflc.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mathglot (talk) 01:44, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Help with Kona Grill UpdatesEdit

Hello, WikiProject Companies members. I've proposed an update request in the article for Kona Grill and am looking for interested editors to help. I have a COI with this company, so I do not intend to make any edits to the live article and am looking for an uninvolved editor (or editors) to review and make the changes they feel are appropriate. The article is currently a stub, so I'm proposing some additional information be added to make the article more informative to readers. Would anyone mind taking a look at this and lending a hand? Any and all help is appreciated, Deswans1 (talk) 22:37, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

General MotorsEdit

Need some help over at General Motors. Have and editor that has tagged the article with a neutral point of view tag....but I am not sure what the concern is. All they have metioned is they would like to see death rates and I think they are saying the article reads like an add. I will research the death rates....but not sure about the add thing as the article looks like other big 5 car articles.--Moxy (talk) 04:18, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Rolls-RoyceEdit

Rolls Royce is divided into a confusing set of articles based on changes in its corporate structure and ownership over time. Following a single product line, such as cars or aircraft engines, requires slogging through multiple articles. Would it make sense to build a single cohesive article about the company, similar to Chrysler? –dlthewave 22:41, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, but then it wouldn't be about companies, would it? Eddaido (talk) 00:02, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
It seems to be the norm to have one article that covers the entire history of a company, even if it has gone through multiple changes in name or ownership. I would say that Rolls-Royce is a single business that has existed since 1904 and Rolls-Royce Holdings, Rolls-Royce Group, etc. are merely non-notable holding companies that can be covered in the same article. Volvo Cars would be another example of a brand that has been bought and sold multiple times, yet is covered in a single article. –dlthewave 03:57, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
They are very far from being "non-notable" holding companies, the subject of what was then seen as a national disaster. If you wish to read it as a continuing business you very easily may. Eddaido (talk) 07:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
What do you mean by "a company" as identified in your second paragraph? i.e. "entire history of a company" Eddaido (talk) 07:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Draft:D+S communication center managementEdit

Hello, could somebody please have a look at my draft? The German Wikipedia confirmed the notability of this company already and as we all know they are much pickier than you guys. This is the English version of that German article on one of Germany's "Hidden Champion(s)". Enjoy.Don Aslan (talk) 18:35, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

RfC to raise NCORP standardsEdit

Please see Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#RfC:_Raising_NCORP_standards Jytdog (talk) 02:36, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

withdrew it - discussion is ongoing at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#RfC_discussion. Jytdog (talk) 16:35, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Appropriate to add mention of current and former CEOs in company article's prose?Edit

Hello. I submitted a request to add mention of the current and former CEOs to the Iteris article's prose. However, my edit request was rejected because the current CEO is already mentioned in the infobox. The reviewing editor used WP:NOTDIRECTORY as a reason for not adding mention of key leadership to the prose. I'm looking for more clarification on the type of information about key employees that is standard for company articles, since there's a variety of ways this is dealt with, even between FA and GA articles, and I've not been able to find any guidelines that give more information on specific content that company articles should contain. Can any WikiProject Companies members confirm what CEO / employee details should be included? To me, it seems like a basic addition, but I want to make sure I'm understanding what's current consensus. Thanks. Inkian Jason (talk) 16:43, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't think there's any guideline on it, but I agree with the reviewer who declined the edit request. A list of non-notable CEO's without any context is vacuous information, it doesn't contribute to an understanding of the article's topic. What would be valuable information would be something about how a particular CEO influenced the company, like "Jane Smith became CEO in 1995 and instituted a new strategy that led to...", or something about how that person fits into the company's history, like "As part of efforts to distance itself from the scandal, the company appointed John Jones, a former Eagle Scout, as CEO." Toohool (talk) 19:06, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
@Toohool: Thanks for your feedback. I do understand what you mean, and while I still understand infoboxes to be summaries of content detailed in the article's prose, I will definitely keep your explanation in mind when working on other company articles. Inkian Jason (talk) 17:25, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

McKinsey & Company - alumni-related info in leadEdit

Hello, I and another editor have a disagreement about the lead content of McKinsey & Company. It would be great, if other interested editors could have a look and offer additional feedback there (see article talk - I have already invited the disagreeing editor to join this discussion aswell). Thanks in advance. GermanJoe (talk) 15:52, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Feedback requested for the Teradata articleEdit

Hello! On behalf of my employer, Teradata, I've been submitting a series of requests to improve the company's Wikipedia article. I am familiar with COI rules and don't edit articles directly. I was pleased when my initial requests were accepted and answered by helpful editors, but my later requests (all answered by the same editor) were unsuccessful, and I've struggled to get them to reconsider my proposed improvements or offer further feedback. This has been disappointing and I am hoping some other editors from WikiProject Companies may be willing to take a look at the proposed updates.

I am seeking additional feedback on two edit requests. For the first, I proposed a simple 3-sentence update to the "Technology and products" section. I was told the first source was advertorial, and additional paraphrasing was needed. I've suggested different sourcing, and provided alternative wording for consideration. However, the editor declined to reply, despite my ping for further feedback.

For this request, I proposed simply moving content related to acquisitions and divestitures to an "Acquisitions and divestitures" subsection. I proposed no major content changes, just grouping related content together. The reviewing editor replied and said they "implemented" my request, but actually they did not. Instead, they changed the entire history section into bullet points. I never see Wikipedia articles written in the form of bulleted lists, so I have to assume this does not comply with guidelines, and I'm afraid the article looks worse than before. I replied to the editor, noting that they had not separated out content as requested, and asking for the bullet point to be converted into prose, but I did not receive any reply.

There was even another declined edit request in between these two, but I'm trying to pick my battles. I am hoping to get additional feedback from other Wikipedia volunteers. Are there any WikiProject Companies participants who are willing to take a look at the edit requests and article history? You might consider looking at the pre-bullet point version of the article, for context. Thanks for reviewing in advance. Dodds_Writer (Talk · Disclosure: Employee of Teradata) 16:27, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Company histories + ForbesEdit

In working on updates to Broadridge Financial Solutions, a few questions came up that I hope to clarify with editors experienced in editing company articles. As a disclosed COI editor, I requested edits to develop the article's History, however there are a couple places where the reviewing editor and I do not see eye-to-eye (see the discussion here), and I would value additional input.

History of companies that were once divisions of other companies
  • What is now Broadridge Financial Solutions was once a division of ADP. The reviewing editor declined to include historical moves they said were "effected by ADP and had nothing outwardly to do with Broadridge Financial Services". In my opinion, important moves by ADP that created the foundation for what Broadridge is are important details that should be included. Specifically, these are details that have been ascribed to Broadridge in sourcing but took place at the time that it was part of ADP. My question: For companies that were once part of other companies, how much historical information is acceptable to include?
Referencing Forbes
  • The reviewing editor says that "Forbes exists as a brand-building platform for journalists, participatory readers and marketers, all existing under the Forbes publication umbrella. Thus, it is not my practice to use them alone as a source". It's true that articles and blogs from Forbes' contributors network are not considered reliable sources for Wikipedia, but the Forbes piece I referenced is written by a staff writer that was published in the November 18, 2013, issue of the magazine, which focuses on the financial industry. My question: Are Forbes articles written by staffers for the magazine reliable sources or no?

I'm interested in how WikiProject Companies editors think about these questions. Thanks in advance, Danilo Two (talk) 17:43, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Pinging a few active WikiProject Companies editors. @AmericanAir88, WikiEditCrunch, and Whoisjohngalt: I'm interested to see what you think of the following questions: 1. For companies that were once part of other companies, how much historical information is acceptable to include in company histories? 2. Are Forbes articles written by staffers for the magazine reliable sources or no? I appreciate feedback from any editors! Thanks, Danilo Two (talk) 21:45, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

In regard to the question about historical information, I tend to put enough information to provide the reader with a good level of background. Keep historical information brief and succinct. In regards to Forbes articles I would give more weight to articles that have been published in the magazine. I've used Forbes many times in the past and I've not known Forbes to be an unreliable source. As usual, if you can find another source, use it. Whoisjohngalt (talk) 22:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Helping out AmericanAir88 (talk) 02:50, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Whoisjohngalt: Thanks for the tips! Danilo Two (talk) 18:48, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

NoticeEdit

Be advised that, on the Smith & Wesson company talk page, there is currently a debate on whether or not to include notation of a firearm illegally used in a recent mass-shooting that was manufactured by the company which is the subject of the article. Should this item be included, then it goes to stand that all of these types of incidents will be included on numerous company articles, in some cases outweighing the total content of the remainder of the article. As this potentially affects multiple company articles, I thought this wiki-project should be aware of the issue. - theWOLFchild 14:22, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

FYIEdit

I have posted a proposal regarding this issue at the Project:Firearms talk page that could potentially affect multiple articles under Project:Companies. Please have a look and consider participating. Thank you - theWOLFchild 21:51, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Return to the project page "WikiProject Companies".