Talk:Alvarez and Marsal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contested deletion[edit]

This page is not unambiguously promotional, because... .

Alvarez and Marsal have played a critical role (been the protagonists) in multiple massive scale, US and international out of court (and in court) restructurings of household name companies, including Lehman brothers (largest bankruptcy by multiple measures - assets affected, number of interconnected companies, fees charged by advisors etc) one of the most controversial and largest scale bankruptcies in history. They also managed the fall-out from Enron at Arthur Andersen and following the massive fraud at HealthSouth as well as being key in a number of big scale corporate re-organisations like AllState bakeries etc. etc.

The impact that they have had in preserving jobs (often and controversially through large scale lay off's to make companies sustainable), and the significant growth in their influence on corporate America (and internationally) as they have offered up their services to Private Equity Funds and to Corporates has been significant. While they don't necessarily make a lot of noise about what they do - and are less publicity seeking than a lot of consulting firms (perhaps because some of what they do is controversial) doesn't make the impact and importance of recording these 'shadow' roles in the reorganization, restructuring and re-constitution of massive international scale businesses unworthy of comment.

I don't read the page as promotional, simply factual - but if you don't like the tone and factual content level - then edit the page - don't simply seek to expunge the data from the site.

~mark — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.2.73.171 (talk) 13:57, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

How to go about editing/cleaning up the Alvarez & Marsal page[edit]

Hi, Tazerdadog,

I work in the marketing dept. for Alvarez & Marsal New York, and I am tasked with the job of editing/cleaning up this page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvarez_and_Marsal). Since you are one of the editors who reviewed the draft, I figured you might be a good place to start the conversation. I would like to do things properly so as to avoid any COIs that might arise. Any help you could provide would be appreciated. Thanks, Eric EricArthurA&M (talk) 17:09, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello! Fifst of all, sorry for the delay, and [i]thank you[/i] for being open about your COI. If you follow The bright line rule, which says that you do not edit the article directly, but rather make comments or suggestions on the talk page, it is relatively hard to get into trouble. First of all, if there is any particular pressing point that your employers want addressed, let me know. We will not whitewash the article or make it less than strictly neutral and objective, but we are just as interested in making sure it is clean, error-free and informative as you are. I would recommend moving this conversation to the talk page of the article now, also. I have put it on my watchlist, so I will see anything that you post there. Cheers, and thanks for doing things the right way. Tazerdadog (talk) 17:24, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
You aalso may want to read this, and make an appropriate statement on your user page. Also pinging CorporateM, in case I've forgotten anything.
Thank you, Tazerdadog. I have mentioned my affiliation with A&M on my Talk Page, and I will follow the bright line rule. I will move this conversation to the Talk page as you suggested. Thanks for all, Eric. EricArthurA&M (talk) 19:27, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Criticism[edit]

The crit section is weak; that competitors don't like it seems uninteresting; and the Lehman 500 m, though written as though it was crit, isn't actually William M. Connolley (talk) 20:07, 26 November 2017 (UTC)