Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies/Assessment

Companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Project This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Is anyone here?[edit]

Just wondering if anyone is actively assessing in this wikiproject? XOttawahitech (talk) 04:42, 21 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, my bot. It actively added approx. 800 stubs to yours project. It's adding more. Hehe. --Ankit Maity ^Talk _Contribs 07:21, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Roku Assessment[edit]

Wanted to see if I could if this article could get reassessed for quality. I would also like to see it could be reassessed for impotance as it is neither a minor subsidiary or local small business.Serialjoepsycho (talk) 15:16, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove Motion Industries from this Project[edit]

We continue to try to correct our company page with updated and correct information and each time our edits are reverted. Our information is highly incorrect and whomever is editing our content, please be advised to cease and desist immediately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mimktg (talk • contribs) 19:35, 19 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Two "top" priority stubs[edit]

Do Avianca Holdings and Unilever Bangladesh Limited really deserve that importance rating? Both look quite small and unimportant to me, and the small number of articles in other language versions supports that. --mfb (talk) 14:42, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Set both to "mid". --mfb (talk) 12:10, 15 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hallmark[edit]

Removed this entry as an example on the quality scale, as the current article does not represent a company so it is not useful for comparison. - Indefensible (talk) 02:28, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]