Open main menu

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies

WikiProject Companies (Rated Project-class)
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.


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!

link on hybris not working (wallet garden content)Edit


Suggested new content


I have a conflict of interest so will not edit the page directly but wanted to point the editor of this page to some recent updates from the company in order to keep the page recent and correct.

Please see below a recent article from the FT covering the companies return to profit and turnaround since the restructuring:

This is also reflected on the companies own website where they have published the results.

In addition, the company has also appointed a new chairman, while its CEO is Steve Graf and not Julian Verden as the page states:


The Jewelry ExchangeEdit

Hello! I was wondering if WikiProject Companies would mind taking a look at my page and assessing it. I have multiple issues that need to be resolved, but I don't know how to have them resolved.

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page: This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. This article relies too much on references to primary sources.


I recently added a Requested Article for Honey Coupons[1]. Because I work for the company, there is an obvious conflict of interest. However, I do believe it's notable with reliable, independent, third party sources. Would an editor be able to write a new article for the company or provide any feedback? Dnguye10 (talk) 00:18, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Company "alumni"Edit

Hello, sorry to bother again about this aspect, but it would be great if editors interested in company articles could chime in at Talk:McKinsey & Company and/or Talk:Bain & Company about the "alumni" lists in these articles. These lists were unsourced, didn't have clear inclusion criteria and primarily served as PR tool to polish the company's prestige (unfortunately there is a significant amount of undisclosed COI-editing in consultancy-related articles). I'd argue, that this kind of listcruft violates list guidelines and probably WP:NOTDIRECTORY. To be clear: noteworthy alumni with a significant connection to the company (based on independent sources) could of course be added as prose anytime. Any feedback on the article talkpages to clarify/form a consensus would be appreciated. On the other hand, a broader discussion and clear guidance about company alumni in general might also be useful, independent from these 2 specific cases - just a thought. GermanJoe (talk) 11:17, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Featured quality source review RFCEdit

Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

FiiO Electronics TechnologyEdit

Could someone from this WikiProject assess this for notability per WP:NCORP? The only citation provided is to the company's own website, but that does nothing per WP:CORPDEPTH. The article's been around for a bit, but never seems to have gotten properly assessed because (1) it wasn't submitted to AfC and (2) nobody bothered to create a talk page for it and add WikiProject banners for it until I just did. There are a few stand-alone articles about some of the companies products; so, maybe the sources used in them can also be added to the main company article. I was considering WP:PROD, but figured I'd ask here first. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:50, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Marchjuly, this one is difficult as while there are not many references in English, there seems to be a lot in non-English sources. Would suggest to tag someone on a project that is familiar with the other languages so they can determine if those references are WP:RS and meet WP:SIGCOV. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks CNMall41 for the feedback. I did also post something at WT:CHINA#FiiO Electronics Technology; so, perhaps someone from that WikiProject will being to provide some help with the sourcing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:18, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Good luck. I will keep an eye on the page as well. Hopefully it can get resolved. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft article for FXCMEdit

On behalf of FXCM, I have created an updated draft of the current Wikipedia article for review. The draft is located in my sandbox. The draft clarifies previous and current ownership issues and neutral point of view concerns (such as the first sentence of the article overall). It also uses better and more recent references. If someone is able to assist in the process I would appreciate it. --Formilds (talk) 23:32, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Formilds, I suggest that you reach out directly to @Spintendo: on their talk page. I pinged them so you may get a response here, but I would still reach out on their talk page. It looks like they are the one involved with most of the recent discussion. Give it some time for a response. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:14, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. I did receive a response from another editor who says they will look at this next week. I appreciate your response. --Formilds (talk) 02:33, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
The last message left for me by Formilds on my talk page failed to indicate any issues or problems on their end:

I know that it is a burden to go through my edits requests. I am sorry and wish I knew an easier way for both of us. I also understand there are issues with the company that must be documented to have a neutral article. I am just tasked with making sure everything is done correctly and isn't promotional for the company or written in a way that makes the company seem like the devil. Thanks for your help with these. Hopefully we can get through them all.
— User:Formilds 8:14 pm, 15 October 2018, Monday (1 month, 5 days ago) (UTC−7)

What was actually left unresolved with this request were the issues that I raised in my review which I saw as problematic, namely:
  1. In a request which is asking for text to be moved, the failure of the COI editor to identify which references are to be moved along with the text
  2. The failure to explain why it is—according to the COI editor—unnecessary for the lead section to summarize information found in the body of text. Having the lead section summarize text is a generally widespread practice which requires more than "it's not necessary" as the reason to remove it (i.e., "the structure of the company is explained in the body of the article so not necessary to have all of the previous company names in the first paragraph."
  3. Unclear directions (i.e., "The current second paragraph would be eliminated based on the moves and changes above." and "The current second sentence of the third paragraph remains from a move above.")
Unfortunately, instead of addressing these concerns, the COI editor has chosen to WP:FORUMSHOP find other avenues of review.[a] As far as I am concerned they are more than welcome to do so, and I truly hope that those issues might be resolved better with whomever agrees to assist them. Regards,  Spintendo  01:12, 24 November 2018 (UTC)


  1. ^ I don't mean forum shopping as an intentional act to subvert the process, only that what appears to be forum shopping is merely the COI editor attempting to find a better avenue of communication. For whatever reason, we weren't able to communicate as efficiently as either of us had hoped, and all the COI editor wants now I believe is to find an editor with whom they communicate better, and I wish them the best in that endeavour.
Spintendo, I don't help forumshoppers so thanks for clearing up that this is not exactly what is happening. I also normally don't like to review COI edit requests but can assist if no one else does. I see that they reached out to Chetsford on their talk page. If they are unwilling, I can take a look when I get time (and the focus). --CNMall41 (talk) 20:02, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Sorry if I made it seem like I was looking for a more favorable response from someone else. My intention was just to make things easier for everyone. Please let me know what is needed for a review of the draft. I would be happy to receive any feedback that editors can provide. --Formilds (talk) 02:50, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Please be patient with your request. People here are volunteers so they have real world responsibilities and may not be as quick to respond as you hope. I will take a look in a few days if no one else gets to it. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:12, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
I have taken a look at the draft and the page itself and made some changes. I also posed a question on the talk page. Further communication about your requests can be made on the talk page instead of here. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Does the Johnson & Johnson credo merit its own article?Edit

I was looking over the article on Johnson & Johnson and noticed the section on the company's credo is rather lacking. I started conducting some additional research to see if there was anything that could give it more context, and in doing so started to wonder if it met notability guidelines for its own article. From what I can tell, there's enough coverage to suggest that it is, but I haven't seen any articles dedicated to a company's credo (or motto, or slogan). My initial thought was that it would be overly promotional, but after realizing how much it's been talked about in the media, adding more context to the existing article might make it unwieldy. Can anyone weigh in? I can see the rationale for it going either way.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 21:06, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Personally, I would not think this warranted ... but there are stranger things here that have survived challenge, and I would not go out of my way to propose it for deletion just because. There is nothing wrong with composing an article on pretty much anything that can pass notability measures, which is one of the beauties of the platform. Go for it. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:43, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
I wouldn't think that it would be substantive enough to warrant its own page, even if it received enough coverage to meet notability guidelines. My opinion is that the section within the J&J article can be cleaned up to incorporate the information. Just MHO. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:57, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
Just my two cents: depending on the amount of content you plan to add, it might be fine in the current section. If you plan to add a lot more on the subject, then a new article would probably be better. — AfroThundr (u · t · c) 19:08, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Business Services CompanyEdit

What is this (for Wikipedia)? Is there a description or definition anywhere within Wikipedia? Asking because WP has a specific category assigned to businesses ("companies") of this type. Eddaido (talk) 20:51, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Eddaido, if you are referring to the specific category "business services company", I think it should actually be a subpage of the category "Companies by industry" instead of a standalone category. I am not sure how to do category moves though. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:48, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
I am referring specifically to the specific category "Business Services Company" but I just want to know exactly what a Business Services Company is, in WP. (Of course I think I know but a disagreement has arisen which I hope to clarify). I thought this talkpage would be the place to go to find out the WP definition. Have I come to the wrong place? Thanks CNMall41 for your response. Eddaido (talk) 23:34, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
Eddaido, I have not seen the disagreement so I am unsure if you are in the right place. For Wikipedia, I am sure that different people have different opinions on what constitutes a "business services company." In the real world, this would be a business whose services are its primary offering. Banks, realtors, etc. offer a services, not a product. Companies like GE offer products and would not fall into such definition. Not sure if that helps or not. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:30, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

COI edit requests for StashEdit

Hi all, a few months ago Stash (company) had a lot of its content stripped out due to COI interference, and is currently a stub. Stash has hired me to work on fleshing out the article ethically and transparently with content that meets Wikipedia's standards for notability and neutrality. To that end, I've shared a few COI edit requests on the article's talk page. If anyone here would be willing to take a look and offer help or feedback, I'd tremendously appreciate it. Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 03:42, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

MaryGaulke, the best thing to do is start with the talk page and request specific edits which it appears you already have. Then, you need to place {{request edit}} template on the talk page, or by posting a note at the COI noticeboard, so that they can be peer reviewed. I would suggest using the former and awaiting for a reply prior to going to the noticeboard. Give it time and if no one responds, please come back here and let someone know.
@CNMall41: Thanks for the reply! Previously on that same Talk page I did use the request edit template, but the request was rejected and I was asked to find consensus because my requests were controversial. I disagree that the requests were controversial, but that's not for me to decide, so I'm asking around here to try to get some consensus, rather than pinging the request edit queue a second time, which would likely get me the same result. Mary Gaulke (talk) 16:13, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
MaryGaulke, I am not sure what is controversial about the edits you are requesting. You should first reach out to the editor who declined the request and ask what the controversy is. It would be good to know the specific information you want added that is controversial in order for others to opine on whether is belongs in Wikipedia in or not. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:27, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
@CNMall41: Based on further discussion, my understanding is that Justlettersandnumbers takes issue with the fact that my edit request is coming from a non-neutral point of view. They also see the requests as in violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Again, I disagree—particularly in the case of the stripped-down, revised requests I posted, which I genuinely believe are neutral and make the article more useful and informative—but again, that's not for me to decide. If at all possible, I'd like to have additional feedback; even if it's a rejection of my suggestions, it will inform my future work. I'm grateful for any help from anyone here. Thank you. Mary Gaulke (talk) 23:46, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
MaryGaulke, it appears that you are in discussion on the talk page and that Justlettersandnumbers is actively discussing content with you. I normally don't like to get involved at all, but will do so if no one else is reviewing your request (which is not the case here). I would suggest continuing dialogue with JLAN and if you cannot reach a consensus, you have other options such as WP:3O and WP:RFC where you can elicit opinions from a broader audience in Wikipedia. You can also use WP:COIN if you feel necessary. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:21, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
@CNMall41: Thanks! My understanding is that Justlettersandnumbers is done engaging in the discussion, so I'll try WP:3O. Thanks again for your help! Mary Gaulke (talk) 19:13, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

───────────────────────── Hi all, this is a longshot but I've had an extremely challenging time getting a consistent response to these requests. Based on comparable articles (, Qapital, TransferWise, You Need a Budget and Robinhood (company)), I've revised my requests, here. (Please note the editor with whom I was previously conversing has declined to respond further.) I apologize for my persistence here – it's highly atypical of me – but I truly believe this article stub could benefit from the addition of some basic information. Thanks for your time. Mary Gaulke (talk) 15:47, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

Renaming Zodiac Seats U.S. to Safran SeatsEdit

Please visit Talk:Zodiac_Seats_U.S.#Requested_move_4_December_2018 to discuss moving Zodiac Seats U.S. to Safran Seats. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:48, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Draft Coty, Inc. articleEdit

Hello. Over the last few months, I've been working with Coty, Inc. to draft an updated and better-sourced Wikipedia article. I received some help from User:Fylbecatulous, but learned they are deceased, so I am hoping to get some help from another editor. I have disclosed my COI appropriately, and won't be editing the article directly. I'm looking for editors to review my proposed draft and update the live article. I'm working section by section, and so far I've submitted a request to update part of the "History" section. Are any project members willing to take a look?

Thanks for any feedback or assistance in advance. Inkian Jason (talk) 17:17, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Inkian Jason, are you just looking for feedback or someone to implement the edits? I normally only like to be involved after someone has exhausted other avenues (such as using the edit request template). If you are just looking for feedback please let me know and I will opine. --CNMall41 (talk) 01:23, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
I am looking for someone to review my proposed text and implement the edits. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 16:11, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for clarifying. I realize the editor who reviewed previous requests is no longer with us, but why have you not used the "request edit" template? --CNMall41 (talk) 01:53, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

BNY Mellon CFO RequestEdit

There is an edit request to update the CFO of The Bank of New York Mellon on the article talk page. Can editors update the article's Leadership section to reflect the correct CFO? I am an employee at BNY Mellon and refrain from direct edits. Thanks! Madelyn at BNY Mellon (talk) 16:45, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Spintendo: is this one you are addressing? If not, it is an easy change we can likely take care of. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:18, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Seeking Help for Consumer Bankers Association articleEdit

Hello, Wikipedia! I work for Consumer Bankers Association (CBA), and I'd like to suggest some improvements for the organization's article. I've posted a request on the article's talk page, but there hasn't been any movement yet. I've already sought help at WikiProject Finance & Investment and WikiProject Organizations.

The current article is quite short and hasn't been updated since 2008. I have suggested a draft to add more content to the existing sections and build off of those as sourcing allows. Please take a look at my proposed draft here - User:CBA NS/Consumer Bankers Association. I know about COI rules, and I've done my best to follow them.

Are there any WikiProject Companies editors who can take a look at the draft and copy over content or provide any feedback? Thank you! CBA NS (talk) 14:05, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, CBA NS. You need to use the {{request edit}} template on the talk page. Here is a simple how-to on making COI edit requests - Wikipedia:Simple conflict of interest edit request - --CNMall41 (talk) 22:10, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

proposal to split FoursquareEdit

Hi! I've been paid by Foursquare to propose splitting Foursquare into two articles: one focused on the Foursquare City Guide app, and one focused on Foursquare Labs the company, which for the past several years has focused on advertising technology and other enterprise products. Details and proposed drafts are on the current article's talk page, here. I tremendously appreciate any help or feedback. Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 21:12, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Return to the project page "WikiProject Companies".