Template talk:EWS CORP
Could someone remove all the locations and crap from this template so it is more readable? --CFIF 23:32, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
Keeping The Template
I would like to see this template stay, does anyone know how hard I worked on it.
And, I'm not an experienced user...
I apologize for any inconvenience and I'm sure we can work this out in ways that both sides will consider to be comfortable... --User:WIKISCRIPPS2005 UTC 11:32 | EST 18:32 FRI FEB 03 2006
The Quality of the Template
Please leave the template as it is...
I would really appreciate it!!!
Thank you for your cooperation!!!
SAT MAR 04 2006 9:15 PM EST / SUN MAR 05 2006 2:15 AM UTC
Hi, I've no objection to the template in general but redlinked employee roll-calls are not really suitable for articles or templates. Removed accordingly. Any notable (WP:BIO) staff who have a separate wikipedia article could be added. Deizio 02:22, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
- Please check out WP:CONTEXT for a guideline to redlinks. If these people are notable then by all means create articles about them. Bluelinked, notable personnel are absolutely fine, however an entirely redlinked list of people of unknown position and importance is entirely unencyclopedic. You clearly have an interest in this topic, and are likely an employee of the company, which is a particularly clear reason why you should be keen not to give the impression that you "own" the template. Template:News Corporation gets away with a much shorter list of staff with a few redlinked employees, however Scripps is not News corp, ditto the template for General Electric Co. I'm aware that several media and other companies have lists of mainly redlinked staff on their template, however it's very unusual not to see at least the CEO and a couple of others with articles. I've also been unable to find a policy or guideline which backs up your previous edit summary, I will of course have no objections if you could point it out to me. Thanks, Deizio 02:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)