Misplaced Pages

talk:WikiProject Companies: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 14:32, 3 October 2007 editPeter Eisenburger (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,239 edits →Merged companies: + link← Previous edit Revision as of 19:36, 3 October 2007 edit undoPeter Eisenburger (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,239 edits →Proposal for deletions: new sectionNext edit →
Line 64: Line 64:


How are articles about merged companies managed? A user the content of the ] article since the company has merged with ] on Oct 1st. All other examples I can think of in the moment keep their own - updated articles - like ] or ]. I think there are plenty of reasons to keep the Web.com article. It was traded on NASDAQ as late as last week and they are still selling products over their website. Please advice. --] 14:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC) How are articles about merged companies managed? A user the content of the ] article since the company has merged with ] on Oct 1st. All other examples I can think of in the moment keep their own - updated articles - like ] or ]. I think there are plenty of reasons to keep the Web.com article. It was traded on NASDAQ as late as last week and they are still selling products over their website. Please advice. --] 14:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

== Proposal for deletions ==

Reading your project page I see you recommend major companies with a billion dollar revenue and nearly two thousand employees for deletion because of lacking notability or importance. I deleted one template and wrote sth. on the talk page. I won't go in any further but you should explain your guidelines. And why not first ask for sources before giving them only 5 days? In the case of ABRY a simple showed a lot of media coverage for this company.--] 19:36, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:36, 3 October 2007

WikiProject iconCompanies Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Misplaced Pages. 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
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
WikiProject Companies To-do:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
PLEASE READ
  • If you are looking for assistance from this project with an existing article, please see if you can add it to the relevant section of the to do list instead
  • If you are looking for assistance from this project with creating a new article, please instead list it at Misplaced Pages:Requested articles/Business and Economics/Businesses and Organizations along with any supporting information you may have
  • If you are notifying us of an AFD, please add that to the Articles for Deletion section below instead of creating a brand new section

Lists of Companies Discussion

This section is for a discussion on which Lists that currently exist in Misplaced Pages for companies should be supported by this project

Guidelines Discussion

This section is for discusing any proposed changes to the guidelines outlined on the project's main page

Articles for Deletion

This section is for notifying the project of any articles within our scope that have been nominated for deletion.

Proposed deletions

Rather than discussing PROD-nominees here, it is better to contribute to the talk page for the article nominated for deletion. If you agree with the proposed deletion, you don't have to do anything or you may second the nomination. If you think the article merits keeping, then remove the {{prod}} template and make an effort to improve the article so that it clearly meets the notability and verifiability criteria.

--User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:06, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Resolved

Industry focuses or task forces

I have a current proposal in the WikiProject Council for a health industry wikiproject. I'd be happy to fold that proposal into this project if there is a commitment to have some effort toward specific industry focuses or task forces. My issue with health-related companies is probably the same for all industries -- too many articles are written like brochures rather than proper encyclopedic articles. Further, I think it's important to cover both the positive and negative aspects of companies. Would a health industry focus be welcome here? Thanks. Stevie is the man! 06:20, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Stevie - I think task forces for specific industries are a great idea for attracting participants to this project, and would encourage their creation. I'll add a section to the main project page for listing related task forces and then please feel free to sign up for the main project and start a health industry task force. Please note this WikiProject is just starting so any other comments or suggestions for improvements are more than welcome!! Cheers! Richc80 05:50, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Banner for Project

Miranda 21:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)


Taskforce for credit agencies and data aggregation companies

I was wondering whether the WP Companies team thought it would be worth starting a taskforce specifically focused on credit agencies and similar companies? My thought is that these articles need special attention for the following reasons:

  • Highly noteworthy attracting much media and regulatory attention due to the nature of their businesses, especially due to data quality and privacy/big brother issues. (See for example ChoicePoint, Experian.)
  • Are often started as POV articles biased against the companies
  • Seem to be more often edited by the companies themselves than other industries. See for example ChoicePoint, Experian, Equifax and possibly TransUnion
  • Are complex organisations whose articles could benefit from having a variety of editors working on them. For example see the problematic Florida voter section of ChoicePoint
  • Seem yet to have a common article structure (contrast LexisNexis which is written about from a product perspective against TransUnion, which is almost at stub status despite its large size).

Any thoughts? CheersSaganaki- 04:46, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Project Proposal

I would like to propose a project, but I am not sure if I should propose it here on the Companies page or with the Wikiproject Council. Some advice would be greatly appreciated. Kpapadopoulos 15:26, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

If you are trying to see if others would be interested in joining your proposed project, my advice would be to propose it on the Wikiproject Council page first and then post a message on the talk page of related projects linking to that proposal and asking interested people to sign-up. Assuming that it is related to companies in some way, then one of those messages would be here. Alternatively if you are looking for feedback on whether your proposal will make a "good" project, feel free to tell us about it here and we can give you our thoughts. Either way, good luck! Richc80 13:52, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for you help!Kpapadopoulos 14:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Merged companies

How are articles about merged companies managed? A user keeps on deleting the content of the Web.com article since the company has merged with Website Pros on Oct 1st. All other examples I can think of in the moment keep their own - updated articles - like Macromedia or Ulead. I think there are plenty of reasons to keep the Web.com article. It was traded on NASDAQ as late as last week and they are still selling products over their website. Please advice. --Peter Eisenburger 14:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Proposal for deletions

Reading your project page I see you recommend major companies with a billion dollar revenue and nearly two thousand employees for deletion because of lacking notability or importance. I deleted one template and wrote sth. on the talk page. I won't go in any further but you should explain your guidelines. And why not first ask for sources before giving them only 5 days? In the case of ABRY a simple Google search showed a lot of media coverage for this company.--Peter Eisenburger 19:36, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Categories: