Talk:Business ethics

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Business (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors
WikiProject icon A version of this article was copy edited by lfstevens, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on March 12, 2011. The Guild welcomes all editors with a good grasp of English and Wikipedia's policies and guidelines to help in the drive to improve articles. Visit our project page if you're interested in joining! If you have questions, please direct them to our talk page.

Copyedits and beyond[edit]

I've hammered this thing pretty hard. Still working, but the copy is down by about 20%. I have a question about references. This thing has more than I've ever seen before. One sentence has 10(!) I propose deleting all but two refs for any given point. I'd appreciate your thoughts on what rule to use when removing them. Possibilities:

  • First 2
  • Maximize number of distinct sources (many sources are heavily cited)
  • Minimize number of distinct sources (perhaps more heavily-cited sources are better sources)

Many of the refs also include extensive quotes and/or commentary. Should I keep it?

I must say that the article still seems like a jargon-laden, thinly-disguised attack on business, e.g., the fairly random and poorly formed attacks on neoliberalism. I have tried to restate the attacks in clearer language rather than removing them. Make sense?


Lfstevens (talk) 08:07, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


  • I left the excess references in for an expert to sort through. I recommend shrinking to at most 2 refs per assertion.
  • The article has long treatises on what seems mostly about political economy and are at best only tangentially related to the topic, which properly should concern itself with the behavior of individual firms and their stakeholders. I recommend removing these portions and focusing on the specific issues of the behavior of corporations and their employees.
  • I changed the tone of many passages from attacks by "scholars" on "neoliberal ideologues" to a neutral presentation. Encyclopedia articles present subject overviews rather than making an argument. This article is still far from the former.
  • I left a bunch of comments in the text for others to address.
  • My changes were so extensive (I reduced the word count by 2k and the byte count by 25k) that I'd highly recommend recruiting a subject matter expert to vet the result.

Enjoy. Lfstevens (talk) 02:55, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

-It is not ‘neutral’ to hide the dominion nature of an economic system. Neo-liberalism is a dominion economic ideology that favours the top crust of an artificial hierarchy. Hiding this is a non-neutral stand. (talk) 10:50, 20 April 2011 (UTC)


Why are there large chunks of text included in many of the references? I don't know the exact policy on that but I haven't seen it on other articles and it doesn't seem necessary. If a quote was taken from a reference, then shouldn't the content of the reference just have the standard info on author, title, page# etc and not have to quote the entire piece of text that it came from? GrainyMagazine (talk) 22:44, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Possible merge[edit]

Should Ethics in management, be merged into this article? GrainyMagazine (talk) 22:45, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

It's a good idea, GrainyMagazine. That article could be merged into this section Business_ethics#Functional_business_areas. Best, New worl (talk) 04:54, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Support That article is rather scrappy, while this, though perhaps not of very high quality is better established and organised. Moreover “Business ethics” sounds to me more like standard terminology than “Ethics in management”. I am less convinced about merging it into the section Functional business areas – maybe Management strategy is closer. PJTraill (talk) 21:47, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Who knows more about the Ethisphere Institute?[edit]

The Ethisphere Institute is a rather curious organisation, in that it apparently takes money from companies to which it gives “Most Ethical Company” awards ( Perhaps some of those interested in business ethics can also make a useful contribution to that article, which now and then suffers from a splurge of Ethisphere publicity, for which it has been deleted; it seems to make more sense to ensure that that article gives a neutral description. PJTraill (talk) 21:47, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Business ethics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

N Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:07, 25 August 2015 (UTC)