Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Business/Archive 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6


Stock History

Wikipedia:Companies, corporations and economic information notes that "For publicly-held companies, a long term stock history (ideally a total shareholder return line including dividends), possibly shown relative to the industry benchmark appropriate to the company's line of business, would not be out of place." However, the guideline doesn't offer any guidance on formatting this type of information? And if its included, would it reduce the chances of an article being GA or FA level if information isn't available for every year? I've overhauled Hershey Creamery Company, greatly expanding it, and am working on taking it up to GA or FA. I can get the stock history information for 1936-1964 at the least, but not sure how to put it in the article, and whether I should make the effort if information after 1964 is more spotty? -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 06:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)


Hi, I think this might be the best place to ask if someone could look at the Durvexity article. I may well be wrong, but the word seems only to be in use on Wikipedia in the article itself, articles on Lehman Brothers and the financial crisis of 2008. Appearances outside Wikipedia are either Wikipedia mirrors or articles that quote Wikipedia articles. Just looking for a second opinion. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 22:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Cost externalization aka unearned profits

The current definition in Wikipedia is so corporate friendly that it is incorrect. The current definition in its one line is fairly correct but poorly worded while the breakdown of definitions for marketplace, B2B and B2C are very misleading and biased to better coverage for a terrible corporate practice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:01, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Lost in translation

Tornel is labored with atrocious translation, such as,

"When these enterpises closed, put it beards to soak and still the bussines together specialization in the niche sales to retail to vehicles and trucks. This movement it allows still force in the market."

I'd fix it, if I had more than the vaguest notion of what it's supposed to mean. I'm cross posting this hoping somebody with Spanish & decent sources can address it. TREKphiler hit me ♠ 12:05, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

I've just fixed that paragraph -- it was badly translated and a really old colloquialistic phrase - beards to soak, indeed! I also cleaned up the overall article, although it still needs citations and likely more material deleted or replaced to improve neutral POV. WmLawson (talk) 16:58, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Digital Realty Trust - Company Article

FULL DISCLOSURE: I am an employee of the company mentioned in this article. I believe that the company should have a Wikipedia page based upon its notability, therefore, I am trying to follow all guidelines including those involving conflict of interest, notability and the processes set up for when conflict of interest may be an issue. The guidelines I am following are outlined here: I am looking for feedback on the draft article to make certain that it conforms to all policies. The draft article is located here in one of my user sub pages: I'd appreciate your review so that a neutral point of view is truly expressed. Thanks in advance. Dlrwebmaster (talk) 19:26, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Could you identify for us which of your footnotes show significant coverage from reliable sources? Some are only background info, and the Barrons link I tried is dead, so I am afraid that reviewers (including me) won't click all 12 hoping to find some good news. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 08:30, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you brought that up. You're right, most of the coverage I included in the reference list were just that: references. I have the articles listed below that I think are our most significant coverage, but I wasn't certain how to work them into the article as 'significant coverage' AND remain neutral point of view at the same time.

Of the 15 references in the article already, here are three that I would consider 'coverage' rather than just a reference:

Other mentions and coverage I have (worth viewing) are listed here:

Please let me know if I can assist further. Dlrwebmaster (talk) 14:18, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I wish other employees and service providers were so thoughtful when they feel that Wikipedia deserves an article about their company.
I am afraid not familiar with a couple of those publishers, but that is probably my own weakness. As far as researching them is concerned, perhaps others will beat me to it, but I did want to jump in today and thank you for paying attention to the concern this worldwide volunteer community has for the integrity of the encyclopedia.

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:38, 16 October 2008 (UTC) Your comments are much appreciated. Is there anything I should be doing right now for you? Dlrwebmaster (talk) 14:04, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I've edited and added this article in. Note that most of your draft contained far too much promotional content that does not provide neutral POV - I removed that material and attempted to make it much more encyclopedic. From the reference citations, I believe the company is sufficiently notable to merit a Wikipedia article, but the article could still use additional citations and likely a bit more editing down to make it appropriately neutral. WmLawson (talk) 17:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Altium Limited - Company Article

FULL DISCLOSURE: I am an employee of the company mentioned in this article. I have recently come across the Altium Limited stub by the WikiProject Business group. This stub is a great introduction to Altium, however I was hoping to extend this article to include some of the organisation’s background and history. I would also like to update the 'links' section with new articles and to list more items in the 'products' section.
However, I am an employee of Altium and I fully understand my conflict of interest. Therefore I am trying comply to the following guidelines:
To make sure I comply with these policies and remain neutral, I would greatly appreciate if this group could review my article. The draft is located here:
I appreciate your help and I look forward to hearing your feedback.
Kind regards (WikiWriter2345 (talk) 04:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)).

Can someone remove the Biflation article please.

Can someone remove it immediately or tag it for references, etc. It has many mistakes. I may be original research which I applaud, but, it needs a lot of work before it can even be looked at as being maybe something in it. PennySeven (talk) 14:08, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Bad bank

I've been hearing this term thrown about a lot... I think it could use an article, but this is outside my area of expertise. Anyone wanna take a stab at it? Here are the Google news results for "bad bank": ... Swedish banking rescue could be used as an example. –xeno (talk) 15:57, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of all lists of businesses by geographic region

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of companies of the Bahamas. An AfD nominator proposes to delete all lists of businesses by geographic region because WP:NOTDIR. (talk) 11:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)


Hi, I just wanted to draw attention to this unimproved article. ~ R.T.G 14:54, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Bob Farrell (motivational speaker)

Please help deorphan this. Chris (クリス • フィッチュ) (talk) 05:32, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

How does this relate to WikiProject Companies?

In tagging railroad articles, I've seen the occasional tag for one of these projects. Which, if either, belongs? (My personal belief is that neither really does, since WikiProject Trains is de facto a subproject of both, but I'd like to hear what you think.) --NE2 00:53, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

If nobody responds, I will remove business and companies tags from railroad article talk pages. --NE2 10:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Requests for assessment

Where should one posta request to have an article's quality re-assessed? Trupial (talk) 21:50, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

This place is a good enough place. What is the article? I'll take a look. --Patrick (talk) 22:14, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
The article is "employer branding". Thanks for looking. Trupial (talk) 05:03, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I marked it as stub class. It certainly should not have been a b class article. --Patrick (talk) 05:54, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

I updated the stub on employer branding to reflect an academic rather than commercial defintion. HRprof (talk) 15:16, 24 February 2009 (UTC)hrprof

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Wikiproject Accounting

Is anyone interested in creating a wikiproject accounting?Smallman12q (talk) 14:33, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I have started Wikipedia:WikiProject Business and Economics/Accountancy task force, but the response so far has not been great. I will send you an invite. --Gavin Collins (talk) 14:05, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. — Delievered by §hepBot (Disable) on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 05:01, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

rate of return

The article rate of return has been assessed. The assessment template says I will see a discussion about that here. There is not one. The article has therefore been assessed unilaterally, without discussion, without public evaluation, and without constructive criticism. I have tagged the article's talk page appropriately. Paul Beardsell (talk) 08:23, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

holding period return

Similarly for this article. Paul Beardsell (talk) 08:49, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

This is plainly ridiculous. It's the artist vs the critic. except all we get here at WP is the number of stars, the critic is too lazy to even make a critique and does not even sign his name. Shame on him. Paul Beardsell (talk) 08:53, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

tax haven

And again. Paul Beardsell (talk) 09:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Don't take it personally. Have read of WP:Unsigned which shows how to insert the editor's signature which has been omitted. --Gavin Collins (talk) 13:51, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Stemilt Growers

I work for Stemilt Growers (tree fruit company in Washington) and would like to create a page about the company's history. Similar companies like Sunkist and Dole have been added on Wikipedia. Please consider this factual article about Stemilt User:BBrue/StemiltGrowers BBrue (talk) 00:50, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Henri Fayol and the Administrative theory

Hi, I have given a boost to this page. :-) But my fluency in English having some weaknesses, would any better English-reader mind to drop an eye at it please?

There is something interesting about this page: The initial theory was written in French and quite "cheaply" translated into English in 1930 by John A. Coubrough. The 2nd translation in 1961 by Constance Storrs was much better.[1] But some French words translate hardly into English (état-major, prévoyance, dévouement, ...) some are ambiguous (commandement, contrôle, agent, entreprise) and, to add some fun, Fayol was happy to use metaphors (corps social, organs, ...) which is, trust me, not uncommon for self-made bosses of that time.
And possibly the worse is that nobody thought that French people may have a different culture than American people, possibly influencing their standards of management.
Therefore shall Wikipedia stick to the interpretations made by the Americans? Or to present the original Thoughts of Fayol like "any" French-reader[2] would understand them.

  1. ^ FYI: I own the 1st and read attentively the others + asked native English-readers for details + read Lyndall Urwick + have discussed management with several French bosses contemporary of Henri Fayol (and now dead for most of them, sob) + spent the last two years researching on this transposition problem with help of NZ Victoria University.
  2. ^ It is even more clear to understand when you are graduate of a French Grande École!

-- Silwilhith (talk) 19:29, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

What is Debenture and secured creditor?

Difference between debenture holder and secured creditor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:58, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

A debenture is a term for a loan that is usually issued by a company (e.g. a Corporate bond). A debenture can be secured against collateral such as property, or unsecured. A secured creditor can be a debenture holder, but could also include holders of some other form of debt, such as a bank loan or other credit facility. --Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 22:04, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

His Master's Voice trademark: Within the scope?

Hello, I am the guy that proposed the requested move of HMV --> His Master's Voice. Well, some guy who probably thought that the His Master's Voice trademark (you know, the dog listening to a phonograph) should be mostly associated with HMV Group, the music retailer that's one of the companies that use the trademark, added WikiProject Companies and WikiProject Business tags to the talk page of the article. I removed the Companies one, as the article is about the painting not the HMV Group music retail chain, I almost removed the Business tag, but I didn't and decided to bring it up here as I do not know if trademarks are within the scope of this WikiProject. Articles should ot be tagged for a WikiProject if the article isn't within the scope of that WikiProject, right?

--[|Retro00064 | (talk/contribs) |] 05:18, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, with no answer from anyone, I'm removing the tag from the article's talk page. [|Retro00064|☎talk|✍contribs|] 23:50, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Needing Re-Assessment

Hello there. I made some gigantic changes to the Chuck E. Cheese article, and I'm looking for someone to reassess it. I tried submitting it to the Food & Drink Project, but it seems they're either ignoring me or they're inactive/dead. I've been trying to get one for a while.

Thanks!  Dylanlip  (talk) 17:37, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

ePayments Testing and Simulation

There is an entire industry of companies that support banking institutions by providing testing and simulation products and services. While Wikipedia presently has topics on Banking technology, Electronic commerce, and Payment system, there is no mention of how these institutions provide reliable systems. The creation of software that tests and simulates financial transactions is a whole area that we could start creating pages for. I (Bill.albing) would like to help.

Companies in this industry include Paragon Application Systems, Level Four, Lexcel, ACI Worldwide, Callis, Galitt, CFG, ICC, Iliad, Integri, and others. Bill.albing (talk) 18:45, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Joseph-Armand Bombardier

Joseph-Armand Bombardier was requested to be speedily deleted, then proposed for deletion. I have removed the PROD request. (talk) 04:46, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Third Culture Parents

I could not agree more regarding TCKs as I raised four of them overseas; two of them were born overseas and two were under the age of two when they moved out of the US. And, yes, they definitely had problems adjusting to life in their passport country. Today one of them teaches overseas in an American International School, one lives in Hawaii, another works out of the country and one is with the State Dept. Yes, TCKs have home counry cultural problems, but so do the parents! I found, and still do, that I have not much in common with a good many people I encountered when we moved back to the States after over 33 years out. Needless to say, I am a lot more tolerant, much better read, more up on current affairs and open to new ideas than most of my neighbors. It is hard not to look like a know-it-all and basically, they just don't want to hear about your life out of the country. If I can help in any way in any studies being done on this subject, either for ATCKs or TCPs (Third Culture Parents) I should love to help.

I have been back in the US for 23 years and still miss southeast asia.

Nonya besar. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nonya besar (talkcontribs) 19:44, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Article template creates duplicate discussion page?

I think there may a problem with the template

WikiProject Business (Rated Project-class)
WikiProject icon This page 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.
 Project  This page does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

On Talk:Hedge_fund this template shows a link to a not-yet-defined discussion subpage Talk:Hedge_fund/Comments

This may just be a bug. If not it suggests having a discussion pages for project business editors that is separate from the one for all other editors. Is this a good idea? Servalo (talk) 10:22, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

It's supposed to work that way, see: Category:WikiProject Business articles with comments. --Funandtrvl (talk) 18:54, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Poor management succeeding!

Good management, as taught to me 30 years ago requuired that equal concern for people and mission was critical to long term success. I have been involved in a 5 year experiment where there is no concern for the people and total concern for the mission. The result has been significant improvement in the organization's performance. Is 5 years too short a time period to expect a drop off, as the theory suggests, or is the theory just wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:26, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

IMHO a LOT of overlap on outsourcing and offshoring

We have what I would call a LOT of separate articles on outsourcing ( ) and offshoring ( ).

  • As far as I can tell, most of them aren't templated as part of WikiProject Business. We need to do this.
  • There seems to be a lot of overlap. We really should go through these and merge them as appropriate.

I won't be doing this myself. Thanks. -- (talk) 14:43, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I would merge into "Outsourcing" - offshoring is a less common term, and before I read the Wiki article I would have assumed it was related to moving domicile to tax havens such as the Cayman Islands, Bermuda etc - when I used the term "offshore" in business, that is what I mean. (talk) 10:45, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Category Industrialist

I am thinking of reviving Category:American industrialists. The reason is because currently there is only one business category called Category:American businesspeople and I think that is just too broad. There are thousands of entries in this cat already, surely a few subcategories would be helpful here? Gatoclass (talk) 22:17, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

"Headquarters" correction.

Dear all,

I would like to suggest the following correction to the "Headquarters" article:

It begins saying: "Headquarters (HQ) denotes the location where most, if not all, of the important functions of an organization are coordinated." However, in every organization (especially business-oriented organizations) all functions are important! I have been in business for about 10 years and had never met unimportant business functions. Some functions benefit more some stakeholders than others, but all remain important and essential for business success. So, saying that the headquarters is where "most, if not all, of the important functions of an organization are coordinated" is a fallacy. Instead of using the words “important functions” I would use “management functions” or “administrative functions”.

Best regards,

Luis R. Villegas H. Mexico. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:34, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


Please add in the DYK portion for the article BoardEx. --Maverx (talk) 02:00, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.

We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.

If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 05:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Articles for Deletion

I am the Deputy Director of Sustainability and Stakeholder Engagement at Asia Pulp & Paper (APP). I am new to the Wikipedia editing process and I recognize that there exists an inherent COI with me making any edits to the page about the company I work for. If I have made any procedural errors I apologize in advance and ask that someone direct to the proper venue for this complaint. In an effort to approach this in an honest and upfront manner, I have not made any edits to the page. I recently came across the Wikipedia entry on APP and I believe it meets the Wikipedia description of an “Attack page.” I recommend that the article be reduced to a neutral “stub” immediately and a more appropriate, neutral and encyclopedic article be created over time and added. I would like to submit some suggested material for consideration in the article to the WikiProject Business and allow for it to be reviewed and edited by neutral editors with no COI. I believe that a simple reading of the article will show that it is clearly meant to disparage the company it is about. I recognize that there is a high level of controversy regarding APP and certain issues, including the environment and financial issues. I respect the rights of any and all to express their opinions on these subjects freely, but as I understand it, Wikipedia is to be a source of neutral and encyclopedic information and not a soapbox for the views of individuals or organizations. An article on APP should certainly include mention of the controversy and the issues, but in a more balanced and accurate way. Additionally, a more encyclopedic article might include more information on the history of the company and the area in which it operates. I would also, like to make clear my specific concerns with the article, the following are quotes from the article and my specific concern with them and a suggested neutral change:

• “their record of consistent breaches of environmental laws and agreements has lead many companies to terminate contracts with them[2].” – Even in the article quoted “consistent breaches of environmental laws and agreements” is not mentioned. The article says, “large paper sellers in the U.S., Europe and Asia, including Office Depot Inc., stopped buying from APP in recent years because of alleged environmental misdeeds.” The entry should use the wording from the quote which would be an acceptably neutral phrasing, “alleged environmental misdeeds.” In fact, APP does not have a record of consistent breaches of environmental laws and agreements.
• “has been convicted of being involved in Illegal Logging in Cambodia, Yunnan province in China, and in Indonesia, and has breached agreements with three major environmental organizations.” – First, there is no citation for this sentence and claim (though similar claims later in the entry quote sources). Second, APP has never been convicted of Illegal Logging anywhere. There have been allegations and even investigations into Illegal Logging, but never has the company been convicted of Illegal Logging. I believe that stating that APP has been convicted of such a crime could be considered libel. Finally, none of the articles quoted in the entry claim that APP has ever been convicted of Illegal Logging, they discuss investigations or allegations of Illegal Logging, but none say that these allegations or investigations have resulted in any kind of conviction. An appropriate phrasing would be to say that “APP has been investigated for Illegal Logging,” or “there have been allegations of Illegal Logging by APP.”
• “The company is also well known for defaulting on debt repayments in 2001, leading to a collapse in confidence of South Asian assets.” – The company is well known for defaulting on debt repayments in 2001. However, it is difficult to make the claim that this lead “to a collapse in confidence of South Asian assets.” Again, the source quoted to back this claim does not say or imply this. I would recommend removing or at the least attributing the claim that the default lead to such a collapse in confidence.
• In a broader context the “Environmental Issues and Illegal Logging” section presents the views and opinions of environmental NGOs and groups with a long record and history of attacking APP without contextualizing it, or presenting other views on the subject. The entry seems to present these views as fact and uses Wikipedia as an outlet to promote these opinions. A more balanced article would note the controversy and contextualize it appropriately, possibly presenting the APP view on the subject.

I have other more specific complaints with language and tone, but prefer to limit this initial post on the topic to the major issues. I believe a neutral party would agree that this article meets the “Attack page” requirements as described by Wikipedia and should be reduced to a neutral stub while an appropriate, encyclopedic article is developed. I am posting this on the entry’s “Discussion” page and the WikiProject Business “Talk” page. I have also alerted the editor who added this information to the entry to alert him/her of my concerns. If more experienced Wikipedia editors and users believe there is another, more appropriate venue or method for this discussion or I have in any way breached standard procedure please let me know. As mentioned earlier, I am new to this aspect of Wikipedia and would appreciate any guidance. My goal in this is not to use Wikipedia as venue for promotion but simply to ensure that a balanced, neutral and high quality encyclopedia article is created for APP.
Dewi bramono (talk) 10:56, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


Over at the Academic Journals project, I have created two lists of 43 high importance journals. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Academic_Journals#Two_business_journal_lists

We do not have articles about some of these journals, and the ones we do have need a lot of work. If there are any other notable lists of business journals, we would love to hear about those as well. John Vandenberg (chat) 08:03, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

My name is Eraldo and I live in Brazil.Actually I don´t have a topic for discussion but a doubt. In 1995 I aquired a computer with an edition of The Grolier Multimedia Enciclopedia from Mindscape Inc.Since I changed my computer I can´t use this softwear because it shows mistakes on the program that I don´t know how to fix. I need a contact in Brazil of Mindscape Inc. or from The Grolier Eletronic Publishing, Inc. to solve this problem but in my country I don´t find because there´s no register of companies with this names in the phone lists services books.I tried internet but nothing I found too. I´d like to know if Wikiproject Business can provide me a telephone number here in Brazil for I solve this problem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:27, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Cross-selling versus Up-selling.

I would like to discuss the content of two Wikipedia articles: "Cross-selling" and "Up-selling":

In my experience, up-selling is when a company tries to sell a more expensive product to the client. For example, the client wants a drink, and the restaurant employee tries to sell a hamburger. The hamburger is more expensive than the drink.

Now, cross-selling is when a company tries to sell a product that is as expensive or less expensive than the product the client is actually buying. For example, the client wants a drink, and the restaurant employee tries to sell a fried potatoes supply. The fried potatoes supply is less expensive than the drink.

Finally, companies combine cross-selling and up-selling in the following manner: First they try to up-sell, offering a more expensive product to the client. If the client refuses this offer then the company tries to cross-sell, offering a product with a similar price or a smaller price. This combined technique allows companies to greatly increase their sales.

This approach of cross-selling and up-selling is not included in the Wikipedia articles:

It should be included!

Best regards,

Luis R. Villegas H. Mexico. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LuisVillegas (talkcontribs) 04:06, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Good day, Luis....

Great points. However, I would like to add a couple more examples.

Up-selling -> Let's say that you walk in to a fast food restaurant and order a combo. The clerk asks, "Would you like to supersize that for an extra 39 cents?" That would also be an up-sell.

Cross-selling -> Cross-selling is huge in the electronics industry. If you buy a Blue Ray player, a good salesperson would also try to sell you some Blue Ray DVDs and high quality HDMI cables. The idea behind a cross-sell is that you try to add on accessories that go with the product.

Thanks for your points - they are much needed! Greg-RSM (talk) 16:32, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Shalom Weiss

This is an article on one of the few white collar criminals to get a sentence longer than Madoff, and it is an unspeakable mess. Please help.--JohnnyB256 (talk) 17:41, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Wikimedia market research survey

There is a quantitative market research survey about to get underway, now being discussed at Meta Wikimedia. Personally, I consider the effort thus far to be scattered and amateur, and I am trying to lend a hand with re-design of the drafted plan. If there are any Wikipedians here with experience in the design and execution of population research studies, please come help me try to get this on a right and steady course. -- Thekohser 19:10, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps Reassessment of Single Audit

Single Audit has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:29, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Easterns Automotive

I do believe as an ex-customer who was scammed by this company that they are trying to advertise thier business through here. Look under the one section where it discusses that they do accept trade in's,(which is a hidden advertisment) and that there sales people have been committed of being unprofessional. This is just Easterns way of trying to make it look better on themselves. I think that they should be deleted off of here and should have to pay for thier advertising. Missy12009 (talk) 17:12, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Expert attention needed at Netnography

The page Netnography defines its subject as, "the branch of Ethnography that analyses the free behaviour of individuals on the internet." It's contents primarily treat marketing and brand research. I am therefore addressing this call for expert attention to both WikiProject Anthropology and WikiProject Business. If it is more appropriate to some sub-group (such as ethnographic methods or market research), please help me attract attention from the appropriate group.

The page needs considerable attention, both in terms of general clean-up and for the correction/addition of specific information on the practice. Your help is most appreciated. Cnilep (talk) 17:20, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

is there any substitute for semiconducter devices —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:22, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Article suggestion

Hi there,

My name is Alasdair Townsend and I work for Diffusion PR and Communications Ltd., a public relations company. I have read and am familiar Wikipedia's Conflict of Interest behavioural guidelines and the Suggestions for COI compliance and understand how these apply to me.

I appreciate that everyone in this project group is very busy but I wanted to start a new thread to ask for your feedback on an article that I believe would merit inclusion on Wikipedia. The article covers a UK based company called Coverzones which is a client of mine.

In consideration of Wikipedia’s COI compliance guide I have undertaken not to personally post, or edit articles about clients or their competitors (or their products or services). However, in light of the fact that Coverzones has been described by an independent industry magazine as the first company of its type in what I believe will be an emerging field, I wanted to propose the following text on the discussion page of my user profile for your consideration and ask – if you agree that it is relevant and impartial – if you might be prepared check and post the piece.

Any guidance you might be able to offer would be very gratefully received!

Many thanks for your help.

Best wishes, Alasdair

Alasdair Townsend (talk) 15:45, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

tetert‘ —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:43, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Please reassess the article Peter_Saville_(artist)

  1. Peter_Saville_(artist) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - I recently modified a bit of the Peter Saville article, and then noticed it was assessed as 'stub-class', which by comparison to some other random articles seemed undue. I therefore request a reassessment to 'start-class' or even 'C-class' (I can't place an internal LINK to the Wikipedia definition of each of the classes here, there seems to be none existing... So I refer to the more general page named Assessment).
I elected to place this very same text on a page of each of 5 projects (Graphic design, Visual arts, Albums, Biography, Business) that COULD be involved in the process of evaluating the article (it took me about an HOUR to find out about the relevant projects and their assessment particulars by process of going through the whole categories/portals/projects structure of Wikipedia). This in itself reflects on the poor inter-organization of WikiProjects: who SHOULD be responsible to assess the said article? HOW should I find out as a casual user? What if EACH of the 5 projects decide to assess it at the same time (I'm looking forward to THAT)? WHY are the Business and Visual Arts projects solely interested in 'Unassessed' articles but not in reassessment? By the way the Graphic design project does not seem to KNOW that it is part of the larger Visual arts project (at least it does not say so on its own web page)... I find it all a bit comical, to say the least. (Note- yes, you will ask: 'dumb ass', why don't YOU (me) assess the damn article if you are so intelligent and blabla...; well damzels and sirs, I won't in this case; I feel I don't know enough about the rating system yet, and besides I don't know enough about Peter Saville as a subject.) Thanks, --Alainr345 (talk) 23:29, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm replacing Albums (they don't WANT it) by England, Peter Saville is still English right? --Alainr345 (talk) 06:32, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Done. It's now start class. Ty 09:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)


gentliness scale. gentile- means not jew, I think you meana different spelling , gentle, maybe? (talk) 18:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)margaret johnston

Household income in the United States GAR notice

Household income in the United States has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:31, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Please update the article Implementation Maturity Model Assessment

The new version of the Capability Maturity Model Assessment (version 1.2) defines maturity levels differently. Thanks a lot. (talk) 14:25, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Broadway Video

Hey all. Just spent a good week or two taking the Broadway Video from a stub to a full-fledged article. Now I just need people to give it a once-over, mainly for grammar and punctuation. Thanks! Mainly.generic (talk) 12:50, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Pulsar (watch) Article

This business article reads like advertising copy. I am a gems and jewelry editor here and my interest is because of the fact that I once purchased one in the '70's. I am not, however, a watch expert. We need a historical horologist to re-write the article to Wikipedia standards. This product is notable and deserves a better treatment. T.E. Goodwin (talk) 09:14, 16 November 2009 (UTC)


Hi. My name is Sean Wolfington and i was told to write on this page to ask people in the business section to determine if the article written about me was notworthy because it was recently submitted for speedy deletion and then deleted. Over a year ago i recieved a message that someone wanted to delete the article but other people decided to keep the article after making edits and adding references. Since i am not very familiar with Wikipedia I wanted to find out if 3 peoples oppinion was accurate or if the article was noteworthy and did not warrant being deleted. In addition to not being noteworthy they said i was self-promoting. This is not true. I discovered this wikipedia page when i googled my name for something else. A freind showed me how i could update it and i updated it so there was more accurate information and then i was told i should not do that. Since that time i never updated it again. After a few years of the article being online it became the #1 result on Google for my name and currently the page says i was deleted because i am not noteworthy. It is ok if i am not noteworthy compared to others but it would be great if the page could be deleted altogether from Google.

Since i don't know alot about Wikipedia i asked a freind and they suggested i provide information to the people on this page of Wikipedia to get your oppinion of wheter the article is noteworthy.

Here is a summary of my background so you can evaluate whether it is noteworthy. All of this information is available through major news outlets and was referenced in the article that was deleted. Is it possible to view the old article that was deleted? The article had all the references from alot of major media companies which i thought was the criteria for determining if something was noteworthy... but again i don't know how this site works. Below is my background information, please tell me if any of this is noteworthy. Some of the information was not in the original article and the additional information may also change the perspective of the people who deemed it unnoteworthy.

My Background: I am an Entreprenuer and a film maker. I founded and sold 2 technology companies by the age of 34. The first company, HAC Group which operated as Cyber Car and Automark, sold for $200 million (article with info can be viewed at: and the second for $125 million dollars of enterprise value (BZ Results article- - there are many articles about these companies but these are links i just found). My company was recognized as the "Innovative company of the year" from Auto Success Magazine along with SAP ( and I was a finalist for the Ernst & Young "Entreprenuer of the Year" when i was 34 years old and a few months ago was recognized by Haute Living Magazine as one of the top 100 most influential leaders in the Haute 100 (view at: After selling the second company, I started a film production company where i financed, produced and distributed the first film myself (Bella)and it was the #1 top grossing film in its category. (here is an article i wrote for the Huffington Post about it- and LA Times wrote an article about it - It also was the #1 rated movie on Yahoo, NY Times, Fandango and Rotten Tomatoes while in theaters and it is currently one of the top 50 Rated Films of All Time on Yahoo and it was the #1 Rated movie of 2007 by the users of the largest film review site in the world, After that i produced 2 other films including a new motion picture called Mighty Macks (you can view at IMDB and you can view my film history at In addition to the film production company i currently own 6 companies in the technology, real estate and entertainment industries.

I can provide more information but this is a summary of my background. Please let me know if you believe this is not noteworthy enough to warrant a speedy deletion. Thank you.Seanwolfington (talk) 06:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Confusing categories - investment co.s

Can someone please explain the difference between Category:Investment companies and Category:Investment management companies? What are the criteria that seperate them. And if there are none, why don't we merge them? --Kevlar (talkcontribs) 02:01, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Relevant AfD

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbados Group. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 04:31, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

The result was The result was merge to Werner Erhard#Related organizations. --Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 11:21, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

AfD of interest

The members of this wikiproject may be interested in the AfD discussion for this article. Cla68 (talk) 23:10, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

POV of Fair trade

We are having a discussion about the addition of a block of text and wondering if someone could give us a further opinion? Talk:Fair_trade#Segment_at_issue Thanks Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:46, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Robertson v. McGraw-Hill Co.

Pending a decision on the AfD noted above, it would be helpful to get assistance in the article talk space from members of this project. The discussion in Talk:Robertson v. McGraw-Hill Co. concerns the notability of the article, whether other related articles that may be created (there is no article on a much bigger and more significant defamation suit), and whether cuts to the article should be restored or retained. --JohnnyB256 (talk) 15:34, 26 December 2009 (UTC)