Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Business/Archive 6

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

FAR

I have nominated €2 commemorative coins for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 04:11, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 04:09, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Category:Management journals

Should the newly-created Category:Management journals be merged to Category:Business and management journals?

Comments welcome at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 January 13#Category:Management_journals. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 05:47, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

The category has now been merged. --Gavin Collins (talk|contribs) 12:11, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {^ταλκ_{κοντριβς} – WP Physics} 09:52, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Volkswagen Group terminology

I'm involved in a long-running dispute with the user at IP address 78.32.143.113 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) over various issues regarding Volkswagen Group in a number of articles, including List of discontinued Volkswagen Group diesel engines, List of Volkswagen Group platforms, VR6 and Suction Diesel Injection.

The user insists on conflating "Volkswagen Group" with "Volkswagen AG" - as I have pointed out more than once, [1] [2] a brief perusal of Volkswagen AG's 2008 annual report [3] makes the distinction clear in the "Key Figures" page (near the front) and the "Structure and Business Activities" section (p.106). In short, Volkswagen Group (or Volkswagen Konzern in German) refers to the whole business group, including subsidiary companies, while Volkswagen AG is the name of the parent/holding company of the group, which is also responsible for producing Volkswagen-branded cars and commercial vehicles. I think it is important not to confuse the two in WP articles.
The user refers to Volkswagen Group either as a "conglomerate" or a "holding company" - I would disagree, based on the dictionary definition of "conglomerate" [4] - I don't believe VW Group's businesses are sufficiently diverse for it to be described as a conglomerate. It is also inaccurate to refer to the Group as a holding company - Volkswagen AG performs the role of the holding company for the Group, although it isn't a "pure" holding company as it is also involved in operational activities, eg. vehicle manufacture.
The user insists on referring to either Volkswagen Group or Volkswagen AG as "VWAG", even when there is no real need to abbreviate the name in the article. As has been pointed out by another editor, this particular abbreviation isn't particularly commonly used, either by the Group itself or in secondary sources, so I don't see how the use of it in WP articles really improves the clarity or accuracy of the article. In addition, referring to the Group as "VWAG" would lead to confusion between Group and parent company as described above.

As 78.32.143.113, disappointingly, seems to be refusing to discuss these issues with me, I would appreciate any comments from uninvolved third parties. Thanks, Letdorf (talk) 13:17, 1 February 2010 (UTC).

Petty Cash

Hello, I like to now where is a petty cash account located in a general ledger?

Thank you

Lynn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.26.237.69 (talk) 21:49, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Questions such as this belong at the Reference Desk. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:10, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

"uggs", or "UGG® boots"

A(n) RFC at Talk:Ugg boots has attracted comments from remarkably few people; perhaps some of you here would like to contribute. -- Hoary (talk) 05:18, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Rounding in examples

I am using examples of financial calculations in automated tests for a new programming library. Many examples round the result to a certain number of digits after the decimal point and my tests do the same. My tests round to the nearest even, but the last digit of my test results is sometimes different from that of the example results. I think the example results should be rounded to the nearest even too, and without objection I will make minor edits to correct rounding errors. --Peter du Marchie van Voorthuysen (talk) 08:43, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Infobox advice

I'm after some guidance. BMW Motorrad is a business unit within BMW's Corporate and Brand Development division.[5] As such I believe the best infobox to use is {{Infobox brand}}. However, another editor believes {{Infobox company}} should be used, despite Motorrad not being a subsidiary or division of BMW. The same logic has already been applied to another BMW brand - MINI. --Biker Biker (talk) 14:03, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm, tricky one. Isn't a "business unit" a kind of a division (albeit, in this case, a sub-division of a larger division)? However, I don't see anything in the documentation of either infobox template to indicate which is the most appropriate to use for internal divisions or business units of companies. {{Infobox company}} certainly has a lot of parameters that are only really appropriate to corporate entities, rather than divisions. Is there an existing consensus on this? Letdorf (talk) 15:10, 5 March 2010 (UTC).

Here is my suggestion: put a mockup of each approach at Talk:BMW Motorrad, in order to put the two options clearly in front of editors. To my mind, what is important is how it looks and is it useful to the reader, rather than a dry semantic debate about brand versus division. (The name of the template is not visible to readers.)

I don't know the brand template, but the company template silently omits almost every element that you choose not to fill out (in case it is not relevant.) I personally like the way the company template includes the product and the foundation date, but I dislike the 'type', in the case that there is no actual subsidiary. I am sure those who know the topic better will have some comments on the content of the infobox, rather than its name

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 19:22, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

Rolaids

Rolaids antiacid tablets-- We were wondering why the large bottles of Rolaids are not to readily available in our area. We are located in north central Pa. (````)Sandy Wooster —Preceding unsigned comment added by Snavone (talk • contribs) 19:20, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Reference Desk was designed for questions such as these. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I am quite depressed after reading this article on debits and credits. It is quite erroneous and needs a major update. I will have to do it myself I suppose since it appears no one else is willing. Will provide the update after a thorough review this week. Hopefully no one tries to use the current article to gain understanding since that will not occur. Rabarton (talk) 07:53, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

A great opportunity

Hi all.

The folks at Forbes would like to assist us in updating information on the wealthiest people in the world, most of whom have Wikipedia articles. The information currently held in most articles is out of date, and they are releasing their list of the thousand wealthiest today. We cannot copy and paste lists of longer than a hundred articles at this time, in order to respect their copyright of the list.

What we're looking at is a system to adjust the Forbes references in these articles to update the business and wealth information. The folks at Forbes, some of whom have accounts, are willing to help and indeed they brought this issue to our attention.

Any takers before I set up a framework?

Happy editing, Keegan (talk) 05:58, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Sounds great, provided we don't violate their copyright. What kind of framework or system have you in mind? A script to help Forbes curators find and edit the appropriate articles? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:25, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest! At this point I'm not sure exactly how to set it up, I was looking for some feedback.

Here's an example of what we're talking about: Charles G. Koch still lists information referenced to Forbes, but it's from 2008. The 2010 list just came out, so it's now outdated by an additional year as far as wealth and standing is concerned.

So if we can devise a system, either by bot or hand, to update this information, Forbes is more than happy to work with us. Thoughts? Keegan (talk) 06:08, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I have no inspired ideas at the moment. I suggest you approach the bot, Twinkle, popups or Friendly communities for ideas. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 09:16, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Why don't you get something from the Forbes people that gives Wikipedia a license to use copyrighted info entered into Wikipedia by authorized Forbes users? Otherwise, just let the Forbes people enter the info and don't revert it. Obviously, the info will help them, and Forbes has the right to allow others to use copyrighted material. This is much like Wikipedia uses pictures of places taken by contributors as the contributor owns the copyright. The only person who can enforce copyright is the copyright owner, and the owner is asking Wikipedia to use copyrighted material. A violation would be an UNAUTHORIZED use, not an authorized one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.233.12.114 (talk) 21:53, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Marketing mix

I came across this article, Marketing mix, which really seems to need some help, but I'm not very familiar with this subject, so I thought I would mention it here in case anyone might be interested cleaning up and improving this article. Deli nk (talk) 15:24, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Park Grill AFD

Please come comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Park Grill.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:11, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Virtual Sales Pitch

Two of us have separately marked this article for speedy deletion but the creator of the article put up what appears to be a reasonable explanation, certainly enough to withdraw the CSD nomination, see Talk:Virtual Sales Pitch. Neither the other editor nor I are sure if this is a real topic and/or notable enough to maintain a separate arguement. All I could think was to merge it with Sales pitch but I am really unsure. NtheP (talk) 18:41, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

BuiltWith

Hello, I'd like to write an article about BuiltWith under the same guise as the Netcraft page. I was just wondering how you guys would feel about that and what I could do to prevent it getting deleted. I don't want it to come off as an advert but it does provide some statistics that are mentioned elsewhere on Wikipedia from http://trends.builtwith.com.

Thanks. --Garazy (talk) 00:57, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Great site, and a belated welcome to Wikipedia! This page is interesting: http://trends.builtwith.com/cms/MediaWiki

A quick search with Google News suggests to me that you won't yet be able to demonstrate notability of the firm or product, and so an article is likely to be deleted. I would suggest waiting (or drafting the article on your own computer) until the company gathers enough public attention. Guidelines are at WP:ORG.

Meanwhile, I suggest that as you run the business, please read WP's conflict of interest guidelines as it has some useful tips.

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 06:52, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the information! I will wait and carry on working on the site. Thanks

--Garazy (talk) 05:42, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Combined ratio article

Hi all,

Today I noticed that wikipedia does not have a specific article on Combined ratio, which is a ratio important in measuring an insurance company's underwriting performance. I created a redirect to the specific section in the insurance article that covers the topic, but I would like to get feedback from editors on whether or not there is enough information on the topic to justify it having its own article. I'm willing to write the article, but just wanted to get some input before I went ahead and did so. Thanks. --Aka042 (talk) 00:00, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Scope (project management)

The article Scope (project management) was recently cleaned of extensive copyright violations. What remains is a confused mess. I am unable to determine whether there is information on the page that should be kept in Wikipedia. I have added the talk page to this WikiProject, and marked the page as in need of immediate attention. Could some knowledgeable person or persons check the page out? Thank you, Cnilep (talk) 23:15, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Missing business topics

I've updated my list of missing business topics - Skysmith (talk)¨

Management information system

The article Management information system could really do with some work. This important article is pretty weak. I just removed a huge copyvio portion that has been there for some time.

Perhaps others could work on it? Chzz ► 14:47, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Internal Rate of Return

Somewhere the following simple sentence should be inserted: "The Internal Rate Return is the discount rate at which the cash outflows equal the cash inflows."

Michael Curley 4/23/10 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.3.213.46 (talk) 20:14, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes! Simplicity is good. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:24, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

yeah. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.124.211.189 (talk) 07:28, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

3 or 5 years in the US?

Regarding the US, the article explains "failure to use a trademark for this period of time": How much is this, 3 or 5 years? The previous paragraph speaks about both.

Asset Protection Page

This page has had very little useful content for many years. I am a law school professor and a practicing attorney in this area. I recently wrote some content for this page. I am open to any suggestions or improvements. In the paragraph on Alaska LLCs, I added a link to one of my websites that describes the asset protection features of an Alaska LLC in great detail. I thought this was an appropriate footnote because it is relevant to the topic and it is the only resource that I can find that provides a description of the asset protection advantages of an Alaska LLC. My footnote was deleted, but someone sent me a note that I should discuss it here in order to get it approved. The footnote provides a link to www.AlaskaLLC.net.

In the content I provided, I included other footnotes that were accepted. I assume that this footnote was rejected because it is a link to one of my own websites. I admit I am biased towards wanting to use my own content, but since there is no other information out there on the asset protection advantages of an Alaska LLC, I think the footnote is relevant and should be included.

Sam Rindlisbacher (talk) 14:22, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Lee S. McCullough, III lee@lsmlaw.net

I don't know Asset protection law. This may be seen as advertising, but it also may be seen as a reason to give a low credit score to a company filed in Alaska or Nevis.

I think you may be able to make a case to link those articles in an "external links" section, if experts judge them to be thorough, relevant and neutral. However they don't satisfy the reliable sources guideline so please don't cite them as sources in the footnotes. Better to cite statutes, case law or legal textbooks.

My 2 dinari. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 17:01, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

I've deleted it a couple of times, it's not a reliable source for our purposes and it would not be acceptable as an external link either - it's a commercial site selling a service and is most certainly not neutral in the sense that our policies need reference sto be. It could only really be used as an external link if on an article about that company - but we don't have one, so it can't be. --Cameron Scott (talk) 19:34, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Asset protection is, as you know, mostly a term of art, well, a phrase of art anyway. I assume the article is meant to be less about all the areas of law it is employed in than about defining a term -- is that your understanding too? As it stands, the article needs to be wikified, with more citations and wikilinks to other articles that cover the areas of concern, and so I put a {{Wikify}} tag on it (and put some wikilinks in there for you too). That will help structure the article and break it down into manageable parts that follow the Wikipedia format.

Also, since there are lots of firms that handle asset protection planning in the context of other areas of law, courts all over have ruled on the effects of such planning in all matters from bankruptcy to trusts and wealth management, and are so doing especially now, with all the scrutiny being given to asset managers and firms because of the banking and finance meltdown. Run some Lexis/Westlaw/Casemaker searches using the terms fraudulent conveyance, constructive trust, breach of fiduciary duty, asset protection scheme, etc.. You should get lots of hits. --Sctechlaw (talk) 10:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC) & again Sctechlaw (talk) 10:33, 9 May 2010 (UTC) & again Sctechlaw (talk) 10:51, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

consumer investigative reports as a way of filtering potential employees

The Wiki article on credit checks should be amended to cover the topic listed in the subject/headline. Thank God for the introduction of HR 3149, which is an attempt to stop the blatantly discriminatory practice of using "Consumer Investigative Reports" to screen employees. This credit bureau marketing scheme is costing American families their homes and lives, because they cannot find employment. This issue is the 800 pound elephant in the room of our new decade. In an American society in which every facet of our existence is increasingly more scrutinized and less personal, the barbaric practice of Consumer Investigative Reports is the vanguard. Mfwoodward (talk) 18:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons

The WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons (UBLPs) aims to reduce the number of unreferenced biographical articles to under 30,000 by June 1, primarily by enabling WikiProjects to easily identify UBLP articles in their project's scope. There were over 52,000 unreferenced BLPs in January 2010 and this has been reduced to 32,665 as of May 16. A bot is now running daily to compile a list of all articles that are in both Category:All unreferenced BLPs and have been tagged by a WikiProject. Note that the bot does NOT place unreferenced tags or assign articles to projects - this has been done by others previously - it just compiles a list.

Your Project's list can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Business/Unreferenced BLPs. As of May 17 you have approximately 52 articles to be referenced. The list of all other WikiProject UBLPs can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/WikiProjects.

Your assistance in reviewing and referencing these articles is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hestitate to ask either at WT:URBLP or at my talk page. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 17:22, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Direct Selling in MLM article

There is an error in this article. Direct selling is not part of MLM. It is a catalogue selling technique, nicer than cold calling but not as nice as mail order. This could be a translation error in USA/UK namings.

MLM Can abuse any retail technique, eg by cold calling, mail order, direct sales, internet sales, and any other means with low start-up costs.

It doesn't mean all double glazing firms (traditional cold callers) or milkmen (traditional doorstep sellers (that lead a charmed life)) are MLM. Then again it doesn't mean they're all paragons of virtue either.

Nobody's claiming direct sales will net you anything more than shelf-stacking wages, but it's a good entry point into the job market, and "a way of meeting cats", as by one alternate view.

I worked for a direct sales company a few times, doesn't work well if you don't have much freedom (think Royston Vasey) or there's a lot of violent street crime, DWP confused my employer with an MLM and I have to keep explaining that I wasn't self-employed, I was a part-time low-earner, they made life so difficult one time they forced me back onto the dole - but that's another story.

Another point of confusion is the high staff turnover. Legitimate ones have this because people join, earn a bit, and leave to go into traditional work (or are forced back on benefits by the DWP, or mugged, etc). Illegal ones have high staff turnover because they suck all the earnings out of their employees/victims.

I investigated most of the companies in the UK DSA, and 95% of them are rogues! The DSA say they've never received any complaints by email. This is because all their company names are marked as spam by email filters, which tells you something about how respectable they are.

The company I worked for had a 3-stage distribution network: One main warehouse, 12 regional managers, a few hundred local area coordinators, and thousands of bottom-end distributors. And that's just about the minimum for covering the UK on a weekly delivery basis, I think. Self-recruiting was not allowed, although you did get a (useless £5) referral fee if you introduced someone and they stayed long enough to pay for the cost of hiring them. I don't know of anyone who received this fee.

You couldn't join if there wasn't any work for you, and there was defined territory all divided up so nobody overlapped. You saw your manager regularly, and once a year "everyone" had the chance to get together for a day at a large sporting event (which I never went to), not a luxurious or indoor one, mind you.

By contrast, with MLM you never see your manager; they just give you a starter pack and bugger off. You are encouraged to recruit, even if there's no more work. You are freely given territory, but it overlaps with others', so punters get a stream of identical catalogues through their doors.

If you corner someone midway up a MLM scheme, they announce that they're going to sue you, and then run away and hide.

Particular MLM scheme do give away luxury cars, holidays, etc, but you have to "earn" twenty times their values before they'll give you one, they come with strings attached, and you won't get that far on the bottom of the pyramid.

Legal disincentives for running an MLM network are very low, and largely have not kept pace with the growth of these schemes. Prosecutions for fraud may work better, but take longer.

REH2 (talk) 15:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Template:Customer loyalty programs

FYI, there is controversy over a recent move and rewrite of this template, see Template talk:Customer loyalty programs.

76.66.195.196 (talk) 20:50, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

CfD discussion that needs additional input

Help is needed in reorganizing Category:Markets at this discussion. If you can help, please place any comments there. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:33, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Relevant AFD - Daryl Wine Bar and Restaurant

Daryl Wine Bar and Restaurant

This article has been sent to AFD, discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daryl Wine Bar and Restaurant. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 21:08, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

FPR

Business and economics has been nominated for a featured portal review. Portals are typically reviewed for one week. During this review, editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the portal from featured status. Please leave your comments and help us to return the portal to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, portals may lose its status as featured portals. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. GamerPro64 (talk) 18:43, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Max Weber - Featured article review

I have nominated Max Weber for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tom B (talk) 18:41, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Deeper Rekords

The article Deeper Rekords has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references found 3 very minor mentions in published works, that are not sufficient to support the content of this very short stub article. Fails WP:N and WPV

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 17:48, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Worlds of Wonder help

I have added alot of third person info regarding this company Worlds of Wonder (toy company) but it needs a serious rewrite. Dwanyewest (talk) 19:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

How busy is this Wikiproject?

Hi... Im teaching a Business English class at the ITESM in Mexico City. I've had students work on WP before, about 3 years ago. I am going to have my students contribute again. The last time I did this, I tried to find mentors for students through WP:Mexico but it is not a busy Wikiproject. Are there a number of editors doing business-related articles? I sure wouldn't mind the help, especially with tasks such as wikifying, categorizing and the like... It's my job to make sure their English is good, but I have only a limited amount of time to teach them Wiki skills. I will have them work on more general interest articles first but I'm thinking of their final project being a B grade (minimum) article related to business and Mexico.Thelmadatter (talk) 20:50, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Deeper Rekords

The article Deeper Rekords has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references found 3 very minor mentions in published works, that are not sufficient to support the content of this very short stub article. Fails WP:N and WPV

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 17:48, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Worlds of Wonder help

I have added alot of third person info regarding this company Worlds of Wonder (toy company) but it needs a serious rewrite. Dwanyewest (talk) 19:23, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

How busy is this Wikiproject?

Hi... Im teaching a Business English class at the ITESM in Mexico City. I've had students work on WP before, about 3 years ago. I am going to have my students contribute again. The last time I did this, I tried to find mentors for students through WP:Mexico but it is not a busy Wikiproject. Are there a number of editors doing business-related articles? I sure wouldn't mind the help, especially with tasks such as wikifying, categorizing and the like... It's my job to make sure their English is good, but I have only a limited amount of time to teach them Wiki skills. I will have them work on more general interest articles first but I'm thinking of their final project being a B grade (minimum) article related to business and Mexico.Thelmadatter (talk) 20:50, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Strategic Thinking article - possible addition

The difference in strategic planning vs strategic thinking referred to in the article is even more real for those in organisations who do not do the planning eg front-line and middle managers, professionals and technical experts, but are being asked to demonstrate the competency of strategic thinking.

I have personally been doing a lot of work in this area as a practitioner and am willing to share this on wikipedia if appropriate. I write regularly on the topic for a variety of professional publications but I am however, very aware of the guidelines around self-interest and conflict of interest.

The model I have developed has been tested in the 'real-world' with clients and I am currently working with Saville Holdsworth to define test criteria that can be validated.

Does it seem reasonable to offer an update based on this, or does it seem too 'commercial'? Would value any advice or thoughts other editors can offer.

Jennimurphyscanlon (talk) 23:22, 21 September 2010 (UTC)Jenni Murphy-Scanlon

Please Contact us (wrong information on insiderpages.com)

We have an account on insider pages: http://www.insiderpages.com/doctors/Svetlana-Kadyrova-MD-Philadelphia . There is wrong address of our business. There is no way to contact technical support, no telephone number, no answer on my emails. Could you please contact us ASAP: 888-666-1639 ext 118 or email to seo@pinkorchidspa.com

Thank you, Lora Takher, IT-department Pink Orchid Med SPA —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pinkorchidspa (talk • contribs) 14:20, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello Lora. I am not sure how you think Wikipedia can help you, so I don't think anyone will phone or e-mail you. The article Pink Orchid Med SPA was recently deleted from Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is not connected with Insider Pages as far as I know. Anyway, I am glad to see that the address and phone number at Insider Pages now matches the one at http://www.pinkorchidspa.com/ (except for the ZIP code.)
I notice that your mail address is 'seo' which often stands for Search Engine Optimization. Wikipedia pages are not helpful for search engine rankings as links are tagged rel="nofollow".

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 13:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Interlocking Directorates and J. P. Morgan quote

The Wiki article "Interlocking directorates" has a strange sentence or reference that is ambiguous. "J.P Morgan often prescriped this to his many ailing customers, business's in trouble, in the mid to late 1800s. "The American Pagent" 11th edition, Bailey, Kennedy, Cohen" Does that mean Morgan prescribed (?) having one, or breaking them up where they exist? 168.150.240.143 (talk) 16:50, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Need help with House of Pies

House of Pies is a new article that covers this former restaurant chain. My recollection is that the corporation imploded in the mid-1980's allowing all franchise owners to just keep using the corporate branding - some are still in operation today. Does anyone have a handle on where I can get more verifiable information about this? Any online databases, etc.? Any help would be much appreciated. Lexlex (talk) 18:56, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Adding a business

Hi,

My company is nowhere to be found on Wikipedia, however, we have been established for 26 years and a leader in our niche (accounting association). If our publication department dcides to create a completely non-bias fact driven article, is that what we need to do? I see others on here but how do they get posted about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.251.133.66 (talk) 18:59, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi- Usually it's best not to write an article about your own company, see: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations. --Funandtrvl (talk) 19:05, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, but how easy is it for a friend, relative, associate etc. to publish/write for this person? I mean, given the fact that most contributors have funny names anyway, who cares? It is the quality of the contribution that matters. --ericmelse (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:03, 28 October 2010 (UTC).

If the article is good enough for Wikipedia, there should not be a problem finding an unrelated volunteer to post up prose written by the company or its friends: follow the guidance that Funandtry mentioned. It is never a good idea to use a pseudonym to hide a conflict of interest: there are people inside and outside Wikipedia who enjoy tracking down such conflicts, which can become a serious headache or embarrassment. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:58, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Business AfD

Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Corporate behaviour. Borock (talk) 15:58, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Kept, no consensus. Re-written, as a stub. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 11:38, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Please assist!

Hi,

I want to create a new topic under co-sourcing wiki page i.e. Outsourcing vs Co-sourcing. Please assist.

Thanks

--Wikitech001 (talk) 08:31, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Re-defining Competitive Advantage

Hi all,

I'm a business student and often resort to the internet to obtain some definitions on business topics. Wikipedia, as we all know, is a very useful medium for obtaining relevant information on various topics and, also for providing definitions.

I propose making some changes to the " Competitive Advantage" page on Wikipedia and adding additional information, that I feel is necessary, and relevant to the term " Competitive Advantage". I also intend to provide a new definition of the term competitive advantage. My rationale for undertaking this project, as such, is because I feel the term, in question, is extremely important in the business landscape & therefore needs to be explained and presented appropriately.

If you have any suggestions or comments or feelings towards this please let me know!

thank you in advance,

Gekko1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gekko1 (talk • contribs) 21:17, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

competitive advantage page

hi again,

Ive just made some adjustments to the "competitive advantage" page. Adjustments include a new definition, an external link and more "see also" options.

Please let me know what you think about the recent changes.

thank you,

gekko1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gekko1 (talk • contribs) 21:42, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi Gekko1,

Thanks for your contributions! May I make a few suggestions?

1. Putting a § in front of == Section Heading == will break the section heading. I removed the superfluous § from the article. Hope you don't mind.

2. Be bold. Feel free to make more improvements or add some stuff, as long as it's compatible with what reliable sources say. Adding some references would be really helpful; references make wikipedia happy, and the competitive advantage article is a bit lacking. If you're not sure how to add references, just ask - either here, or at the Wikipedia:Help desk.

3. When you comment on talk pages (like this one), it is polite to "sign" your comments so that people can keep track of who said what - just type ~~~~ at the end of your comment before you submit it. (However, if you forget, somebody might come along and put in a signature for you. It's not a big deal).

3 It can take a little time to get used to how wikipedia works, but it's worth it. I hope you'll stick around and improve some more articles.

bobrayner (talk) 23:38, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Business articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the WikiProject Business articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Sunday, November 14th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of November, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

If you have already provided feedback, we deeply appreciate it. For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 16:38, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Impact maximization

The article Impact maximization has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references found 38 published (gBooks) uses of these two words in this order, but failed to find support for the content of this article as written. Fails WP:N and WP:V

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 17:41, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion to rename assessment categories for this project

Greeting WikiProject Business, it was noticed recently that your project was one of 8 out of about 1660 WikiProjects that preceed the assessment categories with WikiProject. All the rest state only the subject (ex. Business vice WikiProject Business). In an effort to standardize the assessment categories and make it easier to identify the scope of articles we would like to change the assessment categories of your project from WikiProject Business to simply Business to be in-line with all the others. Before doing this we would like your input on this change to ensure that it meets the consensus of your project. --Kumioko (talk) 16:37, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Economy of India FAR

I have nominated Economy of India for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Dana boomer (talk) 17:02, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Updating companies

Hi there

I'm very new to Wikipedia so I hope I'm approaching this in the right way.

I've noticed that my company's page needs a fair amount of updating, particularly in it's services as a large consultancy. I understand that editing it myself is a conflict of interest, so I was wondering how do I ask someone else to update the page for us?

The page in question is RPS Group (currently a 'stub'), where arguably it could have another page for their largest division RPS Energy. The services described are a very limited reflection of what the company actually does and has done, including their expansion to South America, the Middle East and Australia.

If it helps to pass along information to an independent editor, how would I be able to do so?

Thanks, any comments would be appreciated. 195.171.4.131 (talk) 16:33, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Welcome! That sounds helpful.

In my opinion, the easiest way to pass on the information (and your first draft of the text) is to paste it at Talk:RPS Group. Mention here or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies that you have done so. You may have to wait a few weeks. It is very important to list sources that the independent editor can use to get some confidence in the accuracy and relevance of the material: sources that are independent of your company, such as major newspapers, are best.

Meanwhile, take a close look at some featured articles, such as Scene7, Oliver Typewriter Company and Odwalla (see Category:FA-Class Companies articles), to get an idea of the style you could aim for. (The article is very short so I suspect that you will need to write a lot of material before it would be worth splitting into two articles.)

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 09:20, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Trading room article style hard to follow

I've been reading wikipedia articles for a while; rarely have I made any changes or additions. I am struck by the fact that the Trading room article is written entirely in the present tense. This makes the discussion there of historical developments quite confusing and difficult to follow. Is this really an accepted standard for such articles? I don't recall seeing it elsewhere. In my opinion that is a very poor writing style and the article should be reviewed and edited for quality. 79.183.8.204 (talk) 18:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC) Louis

I agree that the tense should be changed. I added a banner, {{Cleanup-tense}}, to attract a capable editor such as yourself, Louis.
(For general standards, see WP:TPA, WP:MOS and WP:FACR.)

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 21:23, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Kendrick Amplifiers and Guitars

The article Kendrick Amplifiers and Guitars has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references found a few published (gBooks) minor mentions, fails WP:N and WP:V

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 18:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

micro business under 12k a year good idea?

For a small on the side income in hard times . why not . if big INC'S . would pardoner with people with idea to generate profit and commerce . like small goods to sell . ie...avon .pie bakes. flee markets , or cell phone air time cards , coupon books , ... well you get the idea ... so what do ya think?? ———∆∆∆∆∆∆∆∆joey —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.234.49.168 (talk) 21:48, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Monkey Fuzz Records

The article Monkey Fuzz Records has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for reference found no published (gBooks) WP:RS for this subject. And surprisingly few online mentions. Fails WP:V and WP:N

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jeepday (talk) 23:17, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Comment requested regarding merge at BDO International

There are stale merge tags on the articles for various national BDO subsidiaries. I'm not sure if these should be merged, so please comment at Talk:BDO International. I will do the merge if the consensus says to do so. Thank you, D O N D E groovily Talk to me 04:19, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:ExxonMobil sponsorships

Category:ExxonMobil sponsorships, has been nominated by another editor for deletion. I'm concered because, if passed, this is likely to lead to the deletion of all corporate sponsorship cats. Regardless of your opinion, your comments would be appreciated at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. RevelationDirect (talk) 02:44, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

New article: The Best American Magazine Writing 2007

New article, created, at The Best American Magazine Writing 2007. Additional assistance in research would be appreciated, feel free to help out at the article's talk page. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 00:20, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Third pair of eyes

Hi there. I ask that someone neutral have a look at a minor dispute in Talk:Fastenal over the inclusion of a survey result in the lead. Best regards. --Muhandes (talk) 06:42, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Automate stock information through RSS feeds

Wikipedia:Village_pump (proposals)#Automate stock information through RSS feeds - please see this proposal and voice your opinion. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 07:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

accounting

i need someone who can explain the meaning of accounting for me —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.106.240.66 (talk) 06:59, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Try Accountancy. Or get a private tutor. --Muhandes (talk) 08:29, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Ambiguous contents for "SG&A", "Cost of goods sold" and "Income statement" pages

The the SG&A page first states:

     ...Selling, General and Administrative Expenses, which is a major non-production costs...

Further down the same page, SG&A is split up into Selling, General and Administration categories and under Selling, it includes:

     ...all expenses and taxes directly related to producing and selling the product.

Meanwhile, the Cost of Sales page clearly states that:

     Costs of goods made by the business include material, labor and allocated overhead.

Clearly, these are direct and/or indirect production related costs.

However, the Income Statement page lists Cost of sales as being deducted from Revenue, to give Gross profit, in the DEXTERITY INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES example income statement, whereafter it then places SG&A under Operating expenses.

Putting it all together, this means the example would have deducted the production cost twice in it's Operating profit, by including them in both Cost of sales and in SGA expenses. I'm no expert, but this obviously couldn't be the correct interpretation of GAAP. The SG&A page obviously is self-conflicting, but also brings into question the other two pages, depending on which of it's two assertions vis-a-vis production costs is correct. --Zenmaster43 (talk) 19:27, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I think it is wrong to include production costs in SG&A (so the other 2 articles are better.) Would some with access to good textbooks please check. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 21:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

New Infobox Template for Accountancy bodies

I have created a new infobox template for accounting bodies at {{infobox accounting body}}. Its time that WikiProject_Business takes up the task of implementing the template in all accounting body articles. Some of these articles already have a infobox which needs to be replaced with this one. Category:Professional_accountancy_bodies is a good place to start with. R.Sivanesh ✆ 16:15, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Please peer review Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

I have recently nominated Institute of Chartered Accountants of India for peer review. I humbly request any interested volunteers to peer review the article. R.Sivanesh ✆ 09:02, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Npov editors for Vector Marketing

Vector Marketing is of need of assistance. The article has been plagued by POV problems, and now Vector has sent a PR representative ((User:Chicago2011)) to revise the article again. After discussion, I have placed his version here User:Chicago2011/sandbox and what we want to try to do is incorporate both Vector's article and the one we have now so that its shown from a NPOV. Thanks, Phearson (talk) 23:17, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Creation of an Institute of Wiki Accountants

I have a small proposal from my side. Can an Institute of Wiki Accountants be established on similar lines like the Guild of Copy Editors (GOCE). It will be like a virtual professional accountancy body that exists only in Wikipedia. It can act as a autonomous association within the four walls of Wikipedia. We can make it democratic and call the members as Wiki Accountants. Since there is a serious lack of quality articles related to accountancy, it may be a good step forward and may attract more resourceful persons. If that is not possible can we at least rename Accountancy Task Force as Institute of Wiki Accountants. Please post your replies. Please inform me of any administrative approvals we may have to get. -- R.Sivanesh ^{✆ ©} 20:39, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

B-class review request: Karl Marx

I've finished major work on this article. Before a WP:GA nomination, I'd like to invite interested projects to do a B-class review. Please post any reviews on the article's talk page. I'd appreciate any assistance with prose copy-editing (I am not a native speaker of English). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:21, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Japanese tsunami and various industries

We have an article Impact of the 2011 Sendai earthquake and tsunami on the video game industry, should there also be some for other industries ? 184.144.160.156 (talk) 11:48, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea. Additionally, probably the automotive industry, microchip manufacturing, and steel industries. --Funandtrvl (talk) 05:52, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

New Media Strategies

I'm concerned about the info I removed here, which has been reinstated, and is now up for discussion on the talk page here.

I don't want to edit-war over it, so we really do need more, independent input into the discussion, if at all possible.

Thanks, Chzz ► 04:09, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

(I also asked on RSN Chzz ► 04:12, 19 March 2011 (UTC))

ACCPAC

ACCPAC has been nominated for deletion. 65.93.12.101 (talk) 05:15, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Hedge fund regulation

For anybody who may come across this, I have written a draft section for the Hedge fund page about regulations in the U.S. and abroad (that version here), with the aim of bringing the current section (the current one here) up to present day. Right now it's definitely out of date, in fact it doesn't even mention the Dodd-Frank rules going into effect. Because my day job involves me in the financial industry, I'd like to get someone else's view of it, before I consider moving it myself. And since the hedge fund article falls within the purview of this WikiProject, I figured I would ask here (as I will ask at others) in case anyone has thoughts to share on the subject. Please respond to my post on the Hedge fund Talk page, if you like. Thank you. --Bryant Park Fifth (talk) 21:02, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Clarification requested regarding article on Total Return Swap

The article explains that the the change in price of the underlying asset are to be transferred between the two parties (bank A pays to bank B if the asset price goes up, otherwise bank B pays to bank A). But when exactly? The price of an asset can change daily. Does that mean there are daily payments between the parties? Or is the price moves paid only on coupon dates? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.254.154.43 (talk) 11:54, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Could really use some business expertise at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback

Greetings, as of the last month or so I'm the main guy holding down the fort at Wikipedia:Requests for feedback, and I could really use some additional help. RfF has been an outstanding experience in providing editing help to new editors who really want help and, in the majority of cases, are quick to incorporate feedback and really add to the value of their articles. We've had a number of requests for feedback on business articles, and I'm not really familiar with that world or with that aspect of Wiki.

RfF doesn't require any fixed time commitment, and many feedbacks can be knocked out in literally five minutes or less, so even dropping by once or twice a week for five minutes would aid considerably in answering as many requests as possible, and consequently both encouraging new editors (who may become long-term serious editors) as well as maintaining high Wikipedia standards.

If anyone is willing to step up and drop by even a few times a week for just a few minutes, I would be profoundly grateful, as that would allow me to answer more requests for topics I specialise in (history, art, religion). Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 20:21, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Wall Street has been selected as the United States Wikipedians' Collaboration of the Month for May 2011

Wall Street, a page within the scope of this project, has been selected as the United States Wikipedians' Collaboration of the Month for May 2011. All editors interested in improving this article are encouraged to participate. You can also vote for next months article of the Month here. --Kumioko (talk) 20:43, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Merge proposal

Marvel Entertainment Group to Marvel Entertainment (discuss). --Tenebrae (talk) 02:55, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Retail Loss Prevention - Business

If anyone would like to help us word our retail loss prevention contribution - please take a look at our sandbox and give us some feedback on proper syntax and grammar for a Wiki. We are a part of the Loss Prevention Foundation and we would like to contribute more relevant data on the subject. Please contact us for suggestions. Our sandbox for this article is: User:Usgrant7/RLPSandBox. Any input that you think would help improve the article (and help USGrant7's writing abilities) that would be awesome. Thank you. (Usgrant7 (talk) 00:14, 9 May 2011 (UTC))

Request input from Wikiproject

A user has proposed changes at Talk:Rent-to-own#Minor reorganization, MOS cleanup suggested -- thoughts? and is seeking input from others. I'm posting here as a courtesy for them to get input from a related Wikiproject. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:42, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs - the final surge

Since early in 2010, many editors have assisted in the referencing or removal of over 90% of the Unreferenced Biographies of Living People, bringing the total down from over 50,000 to the current 4,862 (as of 16:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)). Thank you for all of the work you've done to date, but we are now asking for your help in finishing this task. There are two main projects which are devoted to removing UBLPs from en.Wikipedia:

WP:URBLP has set up a large number of topic based lists, which are updated each day by a WP:BOT. Your project's list is located at Wikipedia:WikiProject Business/Unreferenced BLPs and currently contains 71 articles.
WP:URBLPR is focusing on clearing out the backlog based on the month in which each article was tagged as being unreferenced. The current task is Category:Unreferenced BLPs from September 2009, and it is the last month remaining from 2009.
You can also reference a random article or make your own lists using one of the catscan tools, such as this search for British businesspeople.

All you have to do is pick your articles and then add suitable references from reliable sources and remove the {{BLP unsourced}} template. There is no need to log your changes, register or remove the articles from the list. If you need any help, or have any comments, please ask at WP:URBLPR or WT:URBLP.

Thank you for any assistance you can provide. The-Pope (talk) 16:12, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Avon Products needs review

I have recently cleaned up Avon Products and I am requesting that any interested editors please have a look. The history section is in need of cited expansion. Phearson (talk) 22:45, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MARAIS

Hello. Some advice over there would be nice about:

the notability of that article
how to rewrite it better (see Cvergnolle's comment)

Thank you, Comte0 (talk) 12:20, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll try to provide some suggestions... bobrayner (talk) 13:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome ;). Thank you for the suggestions. Regards, Comte0 (talk) 20:17, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

GA reviewer needed for Economic globalization

Economic globalization is a subject of an educational assignment, that culminates in a Good Article review. The students will stop working on the article around June 20th, but so far no reviewer has volunteered to do a review. Perhaps a member of your project would be interested? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 17:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

EBX group

Could someone cast a critical eye over this edit and the next one? Unsourced, somewhat POV content was replaced by other unsourced, somewhat POV content. I don't know whether this constitutes POV warring or a genuine and useful attempt at improvement, and since the editor was an anonymous IP address, I can't easily ask. Cnilep (talk) 02:20, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Never mind; the content was copied from http://www.mpx.com.br/en/who-we-are/Paginas/default.aspx, so I reverted it as copyright violation. Cnilep (talk) 08:00, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

OpenCorporates

OpenCorporates is an open database of company information (see About OpenCorprates). A sort of "Internet Movie Database" for companies, but with open data. I recently met with Chris Taggart, one of OC's founders, and he asked about getting links from relevant Wikipedia articles to corporate group entries, which he felt would be useful. I agreed, not least as OC has information which Wikipedia does not and probably will not; and links on to further resources such as details of government contracts and trademark registrations.

I have created a template, {{OpenCorp}} (which needs more work) to simplify the process. This also adds the articles on which it is used to a hidden tracking category, OpenCorporates groupings. Via the category, you can see the handful of pages where I've already use the template.

It would also be good to get these links into DBPedia - how is that best achieved? Should the links be included in infoboxes? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 10:33, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

The link on the Tesco page doesn't work for me in IE :( --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:35, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

It was working for me, but there might have been capitalisation issue, so I've changed it. Can you try again, please (or get a better browser ;-) ). Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:31, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Works now, thanks. (I'm on a locked down company machine :(). I'm not quite sure what to make of the site, though. I like to company group information, but I'm seeing only small amounts of information scraped from wherever, pretty much amounting to addresses and SIC codes. For me, it's not adding a very great deal of value. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:29, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I feel your pain. It's the grouping pages we're discussing. The value comes in two ways; firstly just knowing which companies are part of a group (have a look at the entries for Stagecoach, or Capita; and in the ancillary information, for example the right-hand side of those pages. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 21:18, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Regrettably, I'm against including this. Unlike IMDB, this is difficult to navigate, very incomplete, and offers little useful information that could not easily be included in the Wikipedia articles of the same name. If we linked to every database or wikia on a given subject, External Links would be longer than the prose, so it has to come down to usefulness, and I'm just not seeing it here. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:44, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

There are currently 86 companies in the Stagecoach grouping. Would you like to try to include them in the relevant Wikipedia article? How would you include incidents like this one? No-one is proposing that we link "to every database or wikia on a given subject"; that's a slippery slope argument. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 13:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

I was trying to be tactful, but have it your way; I think you're pushing junk. I think that OpenCorporate is years away from being useful, and I think that the service you're claiming it offers is both of little interest and woefully inadequate at what its trying to do. As for my "to every database or wikia on a given subject" comment, I was subtly implying that OpenCoroprate isn't at all special, its one of hundreds of low quality low output sites that collects/sorts/displays information. You might have a case when this comes out of alpha and beta and is something that is both complete and can pass the "why do we care" test, but for now I remain opposed to this. Sven Manguard Wha? 09:32, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Really? Can you provide a link to another site which provides information of this kind, depth and provenance; and which is a prize-winner in an award comparable with the OpenDataChallenge awards, (judging panel including Sir Tim Berners Lee), or which has been singled out for praise by Neelie Kroes, Vice-President of the European Commission? I note also that you did not answer my questions. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 19:05, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Just because the idea won a bunch of awards for having potential dosen't mean that it at all lived up to that potential. Just because it is the only thing out there that offers a service does not at all mean that said service is worth having. Maybe it's because I'm not a businessperson, but I just don't see OpenCorporate as being at all valuable as an external link. You've made a bunch of strong cases as to why this would deserve a Wikipedia article, but your stagecoach example, the only thing you've offered up for why it should be an external link, isn't convincing. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:39, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Nothing was awarded for potential. The site won a prize for being useful. Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 11:01, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

If we were to add it to _every_ company article, then it would indeed be junk. However, if we selectively add it to articles like Stagecoach and Tesco where OpenCorporate has made a reasonable attempt to document a large complex group, then we are providing a useful jumping off point for a reader to research the company, yet the info is too detailed for Wikipedia itself. So let's continue to use it selectively. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 15:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I'd agree; selective use is fine by me. OC not perfect but I've seen a couple of pages which would make good, useful ELs for wikipedia articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobrayner (talk • contribs) 17:00, June 27, 2011

Commerce-related renames

Greetings! Two or more stub types which you created have been nominated for renaming or deletion at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type most likely doesn't meet Wikipedia requirements for a stub type, through failure to meet standards relating to the name, scope, current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature. Dawynn (talk) 18:02, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

This is a revived proposal from 2009, in which project members would do well to particiate.

Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion/Log/2011/June/23#Commerce-related renames

--Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 20:15, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Category:Marketing analytics

The Category:Marketing analytics has been proposed for creation at Articles for Creation, with the purpose of uncluttering the overly large Category:Marketing. I don't know enough about marketing to tell whether that's a good subcategory, and what its inclusion criteria would be. Thoughts? Huon (talk) 14:07, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Budget billing

The article Budget billing has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No sign of notability Bulwersator (talk) 15:27, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Portal:Employment

{{portal|Employment}} Portal:Employment has been nominated for deletion. 65.93.15.213 (talk) 06:02, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

AfD: Inspire Records

Comments are requested at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inspire Records. Cnilep (talk) 03:18, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Erroneous redirection

In attempting to access the topic of "Personal Management" I was redirected to the "Human Resources Management" page. This, I believe, is an erroneous redirection. Personal management has to do with an individual managing their own life. The field includes, but is clearly not limited to, managing one's household, career, health and socialization. It has little to do with business management of personnel (human resources) and should be a separate topic page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.25.41.17 (talk) 23:41, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Request for feedback

I recently created Template:Stock exchanges in Germany and would appreciate some feedback on whether others find this template useful or not. The only article where it is currently being used is Börse Stuttgart. I welcome all suggestions for possible improvements of this template. Toshio Yamaguchi (talk) 10:55, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm no template expert, but it looks good to me. Huon (talk) 14:54, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Dan O'Connor

Can someone please create an article for this businessman/prospector? I don't have the time to do it right now, but it is notable. Volcanoguy 02:40, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Looking for Online Ambassadors interested in supporting business classes working on Wikipedia

Hi WikiProject Business members! The Wikipedia Ambassador Program is working with several business-related classes, and we're looking for some experienced Wikipedians with an interest in the subject area to support them as Online Ambassadors. If you're interested, please let me know.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:24, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Count me in. bobrayner (talk) 18:40, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Some issues I've noticed in business-related articles

Dear colleagues, I've done some gnoming about the management and business categories recently. Frequent issues, to me, are:

Overcapitalisation (it should be resisted, even if this cancer has spread out there—WP has house rules about it, which favour downcasing unless commercial or proprietary names, or for positions, are accompanied by an incumbent's personal name).
Overuse of boldface and bulleting (which is commonplace in organisational text ... but this is a different register).
Widespread copyright—text, and to a lesser extent, diagrams and flow-charts; often it looks like cut-and-paste, almost certainly, but hard to prove without access to offline sources.
Widespread under-referencing.
Advertising in tone and content, often not well disguised (only to be expected, I suppose, but WP needs to weed it out).
Buzzwords.
Article titles not specific enough (to invent an example off the cuff ... "Tender Love"—is it a company name or a book name?).

I do think a WikiProject drive, perhaps twice a year, to improve certain categories in these respects, would be welcomed by the community. Any support for this? Tony (talk) 03:55, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Suggested Revisions to AbitibiBowater

WikiProject Business members; I’m supplier for AbitibiBowater and have noticed the article for the company contains some errors and is out of date. I’d like to propose some updates to the article which reflect the organization today, provide accurate citations and corrects some links. I propose the following revision for your consideration. Thanks!

(update 110926: I've done some more digging and found an article which notes AbitibiBowater's debt was around $6 billion. I've amended my submission below to reflect that change. Does anyone have any objections to these updates?)

AbitibiBowater Inc. (TSX: ABH, NYSE: ABH) is a forest products company headquartered in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. It was formed by the merger of Bowater and Abitibi-Consolidated in October 2007[1]. At the time, AbitibiBowater was the third largest pulp and paper company in North America, and the eighth largest in the world. On 16 April 2009 the company filed for creditor protection in the United States and Canada, eventually reporting debt of about US$6 billion.[2]. The company won court approval for $206 million to finance restructuring[3]. The company emerged from creditor protection on 9 December 2010[4] and returned to profitability.[5]

Forest Management

On 18 May 2010, AbitibiBowater joined 29 other organizations including Greenpeace and The David Suzuki Foundation[6] to become a founding member of the Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement (CBFA).[7] The agreement formalizes the members’ commitments to protecting the diversity of ecosystems and wildlife within the Boreal region. Prior to the signing of the CBFA, the company was criticized by some environmental groups for the loss of old-growth and intact forests, and related impacts on threatened wildlife including woodland caribou.

The company website reports AbitibiBowater manages “approximately 14.9 million hectares (36.9 million acres) of forestland in North America (as of June 30, 2011). 98% of this area is public land in Canada, managed through long-term forest management arrangements that include a public input process and regular periodic government auditing.”

AbitibiBowater is a member of the Forest Products Association of Canada.

References

1. "Abitibi, Bowater merging to create forestry giant". CBC News. 2007-01-30. Retrieved 2007-02-26.

2. "AbitibiBowater gets bankruptcy protection in Canada". CBC News. 2009-04-18. Retrieved 2011-09-26.

3. "AbitibiBowater gets court OK for $206 mln DIP". Reuters. 2009-04-17. Retrieved 2009-04-20.

4. AbitibiBowater emerges from bankruptcy. Reuters. 2010-12-09. Retrieved 2011-09-13.

5. AbitibiBowater Announces First Quarter 2011 Financial Results. CNW. 2011-05-17. Retrieved 2011-09-13.

6. Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement: Who’s involved. Retrieved 2011-09-13.

7. Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement: The Agreement. Retrieved 2011-09-13.

External Links

1. Official website

The sidebar also has outdated information. Accurate/current information is as follows...

Company name: AbitibiBowater Inc.

Key people: Richard B. Evans (Chairman) *Richard's name should not be linked as he's not an American composer/pianist* and Richard Garneau (President)

Products: Newsprint, Commercial printing papers, Market pulp, Wood products and Hydroelecticity

Revenue: US$ 4.746 billion (2010) UP

Operating income: US$ -160 million (2010) UP

Net income: US$ 2.614 billion (2010) UP

Total assets: US$ 7.156 billion (2010) UP

Total equity: US$ 3.987 billion (2010)

Employees: 10,000 (2011)

Website: www.AbitibiBowater.com

It might also be appropriate to note within the financials that AbitibiBowater has moved to the fresh start method of accounting.

Markblevis (talk) 18:10, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

I accidentally put a U$ in front of Employees in the company information section. I've removed it from my original post. Markblevis (talk) 18:24, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Updated the revisions to note (and provide citation for) debt reporting of about US$6 billion. Does anyone have any objections to these updates? Markblevis (talk) 19:23, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Wondering if anyone has any objections to these updates. Given the nature of the discrepancies, I think it's appropriate to do the updates relatively soon. I'll plan on updating the article on Thursday if there are no objections by then. Markblevis (talk) 10:12, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Viking Press = stub article

While there are many "stub" articles out there which need attention, it seems to me that Viking Press is important enough to be out of the stub stage by now. Student7 (talk) 13:32, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Shell

Shell is not dual anymore. It became single quoted company as Royal Dutch Shell pls back in 2005. See Royal Dutch Shell article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.194.55.5 (talk) 10:19, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

curious

on an article for a company, it will give the revenue and there is a little green arrow next to it, if that company had positive revenue. doesn't it look like some number "went up" a la a stock price? has this been considered a potentially confusing symbol already? maybe you guys already decided it was OK. or maybe it's more standard tham I realize. S*K*A*K *K 20:00, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Review of Mellanox Technologies

I was wondering if people here might be willing to review the aforementioned article, to see if it meets current article standards. I rewrote this article form starch, after it had been deleted at an AfD due to a copyright violation. I used 3rd party sources ranging from business press such the Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg to mainstream media such as the Christian Science Monitor and Ha'artez, and believe it is neutrally written, with a structure similar to dozens of similar articles on public companies. An editor disagrees, and has tagged it as "advertising", citing "framing and structure", and contrasting it with the Microsoft article, which he believes has an "encyclopedic narrative". Microsoft, of course, is one of the few Featured Articles we have on business related topics, so I think that might be setting the bar too high. Opinion are welcome- the discussion is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mellanox_Technologies#.22Drive_by_tagging.22 Jeff Song (talk) 22:40, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Jeff Song. The discussion we had is on Talk:Mellanox Technologies. I'll also initiate an RFC there. causa sui (talk) 22:44, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Corporate structure

Was a redirect to Departmentalization, is now an unreferenced garble. Someone might like to have a look at it. PamD 09:58, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Lean Six Sigma

I wonder whether anyone from this project would be interested in taking a few minutes to improve Lean Six Sigma? I came to the article after seeing a reference in a column by George Will ("Romney and Gingrich, from bad to worse," Washington Post 2 December 2011), and didn't find our article very illuminating. If you look at the traffic stats from November to December, there seems to be a modest bump in interest. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:52, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

I know a lot about Lean and a decent amount about Six Sigma, but not enough to be an expert in combining the two. I'd be willing to collaborate with others who are more knowledgeable about the combination. Pine^talk 11:43, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I found it odd that a columnist in a major mainstream news outlet would refer to it so glancingly, as if it should be common knowledge among at least some segment of the Post readership, and yet the WP article is so inchoate. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:44, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

I know an organization that has combined the two and it wouldn't surprise me if others have done so also. Pine^talk 11:20, 24 December 2011 (UTC)

type account

ada berapa type account selain klasifikasi account — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.254.50.106 (talk) 08:20, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't speak Arabic. Could you ask your question again in English please? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 18:21, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

GFMS

I recently encountered the article GFMS. Is the company GFMS of any verifiable significance, do you businesspeople think? (I'm poorly qualified to judge.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:37, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Judging by what I see on that page, I don't think that the article meets WP's notability requirements so as far as I'm concerned it should be deleted. Pine^talk 08:56, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

GFMS seem to put out a few press releases &c which get widely repeated across the internet. That provides lots of google hits but doesn't make them notable per se. There aren't may sources which discuss GFMS in depth. I had a look through MJO and found stuff like this and this so they do have some notability... whether or not GFMS reaches the GNG is not clear to me right now but I suspect it's hovering a little below the threshold. The august Economist has lots of passing mentions (ie. "According to GFMS, a consultancy, the price of gold is likely to...") though. bobrayner (talk) 13:26, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

In light of its recent purchase by Thomson Reuters (that Bob Rayner linked above) I suggest the few brief paragraphs be merged into that article. If and when it becomes too long for that article, and there are enough reliable sources to demonstrate notability in its own right, it could be broken out into its own article again. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 16:07, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

That sounds reasonable. bobrayner (talk) 17:10, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Request for review of Partnerpedia

Hello all, many months ago I deleted an article with this title under WP:CSD because I felt it made no assertion of notability. The original editor recently contacted me and I restored it to his user space so he could work on it. He has now moved it back into main space and I wondered if someone from the project could give some feedback, eg on notability (whether it meets WP:GNG), sourcing and so on? Many thanks, Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 15:48, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

To me this article reads far too much like something I'd expect to see on a company webpage, instead of what I'd expect to see in an encylopedia. It uses promotional language and generally has a tone that sounds like a marketing pamphlet. Reference 4 doesn't even mention Partnerpedia, yet it's cited as if it supports the claim that Partnerpedia's product is a "strategic tool." Maybe Partnerpedia is notable, but this article as written doesn't belong in an encyclopedia IMO. I'd say that the article as written violates WP:NOTPROMOTION, and I wonder whether the author has a conflict of interest as a marketer for the company. Pine^talk 02:17, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks, I deleted the original version of this page last year for similar reasons, so when it was reinstated I felt I needed an outside eye to have a second look - thank you! I see the page is now at AfD, so this will be resolved there! Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 14:55, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Village Pump proposal for articles on existing businesses

Other members of WikiProject Business may want to share their views about this proposal at the Village Pump. Pine^talk 23:05, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiWomen's History Month

Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:Business will have interest in putting on events related to women's roles in business. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 19:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Trademarks

Since I assume that the issue of trademark and trademark dilution may be of interest to members of this project, I just wanted to let you know that the Wikimedia Foundation is hoping to get some guidance on how it is determined if a trademark is or is in danger of becoming generic in terms of reference in Wikipedia articles. If you know something about how this is done or have an interest in the topic, please feel free to contribute to the thread at village pump policy. Input would be very welcome. :) Thank you! --Maggie Dennis (WMF) (talk) 13:47, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Promotional fan club

Is there a better term to use for a 'fan-club' that is run by a company to promote its products? I have just re-written Ardbeg#Promotional activities and can't find a better term to describe what they call their 'committee'. Thanks. Derek Andrews (talk) 19:13, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Safeway calls their discount cards "club cards." Costco has membership cards. Facebook calls page members "followers", and people who subscribe to a Twitter feed are called "followers." So for lack of a better term, "fan-club" seems reasonable. Pine^talk 09:12, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

New Featured Picture

This business-related photo has been promoted to Featured Picture.

File:Twintowers of Deutsche Bank Headquarter in Frankfurt a.M..jpg

Towers of Deutsche Bank Headquarters in Frankfurt.

Pine^talk 09:15, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of IT Plus Networks

The article IT Plus Networks has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Appears to fail general notability guidelines, but perhaps a Korean speaker can thwart that :)

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SarahStierch (talk) 06:05, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Fair-Value Accounting's Role in the Subprime Mortgage Crisis.

Fair-Value Accounting's Role in the Subprime Mortgage Crisis (AfD discussion)
Linsmeier, Thomas J. (2011). "Financial Reporting and Financial Crises: The Case for Measuring Financial Instruments at Fair Value in the Financial Statements". Accounting Horizons. 25 (2): 409–417. doi:10.2308/acch-10024. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |month= ignored (help)

As I said, I don't have the time for a Kerrrzappp! of this one. If you want to pick up the baton, I recommend Martinez 2009, pp. 281–283 as a good starting point, since it gives a overview of the history, albeit a one-sided one. Some of the others, such as Wesbury 2009, pp. 87–99, 115–116, give the other side's view, which you'll of course need to cover. I omitted the Linsmeier 2011 citation, which is the first obvious fix. So here is the wikitext for it, above. Uncle G (talk) 09:22, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

30% Club

30% Club has been deleted. It aims to bring women to at least 30% of their corporate board memberships, and it includes many CEOS: [6]. Pretty notable, isn't it?Zigzig20s (talk) 01:56, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

There are an enormous number of business associations. I'm not sure that merely having business executives as members would make it notable enough for an encyclopedia article. I think that there would need to be a stronger claim to notability, such as newspaper articles about the association. Pine^talk 02:07, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Pine. I am a female, I have an M.B.A. I would like for women to have improved representation on corporate boards, most definitely! Yet I have learned, over time, that there are many business associations, but few notable ones. More importantly, there are few enduring ones. Newspaper or professional journal mentions (in a context other than advertisement!) are good criteria for notability. --FeralOink (talk) 17:12, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Lead section of FactSet Research Systems - overly promotional?

This page came to my attention after seeing a link to it added to a page on my watchlist. The article's lead strikes me as being excessively promotional, particularly in having six consecutive sentences of rankings that sound like praise. In my view it would be sufficient to collapse that paragraph to a sentence stating the company has been ranked and put the titles of the rankings in the references. Would be appreciative of opinions from editors on this project. --IxK85 (talk) 11:37, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree that there's too much bragging in the lead section. Also, the whole section below on "recent recognition" doesn't seem to have great EV and I think that you could consider eliminating that section while you're dealing with the WP:PEACOCK issues. Pine^talk 12:01, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Have chopped almost all of that paragraph (see diff here) and restructured the lead. Comments would be welcome. --IxK85 (talk) 23:12, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Pine^(talk) 05:58, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Toby Crabel biography page

The biography of living person Toby Crabel was considered for deletion in 2006. It is included in Wikiproject Business. I just did an ad hoc review of the page. Most of the reference URL's are broken, and external links used for corroboration are misquoted. I will make entries indicating which URL's were subject to link rot, revise misquoted content where possible. After that, the article might require a review for deletion. Or not. I'll get this done first, before worrying about that! --FeralOink (talk) 09:39, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Changes to the Bloomberg Television Article

Hi-there. I want to propose some changes to the Bloomberg Television article. The current article lacks sourcing and is generally disorganized. I've written a draft of the article in my sandbox to give give a little more structure to the article while providing better citations. I tried to find feedback in the WikiProject Television talk page without success. I would appreciate it if someone would take a look at this draft and, if found appropriate, please implement the changes into the current article. I work on behalf of Bloomberg L.P. and do not want my conflict of interest to interfere with Wikipedia's guidelines by implementing any major changes into the article myself.--RivBitz (talk) 18:52, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for letting us know, and thanks for your honesty about your affiliation. I suggest that you make this same request for comment on the article's talk page at Talk:Bloomberg Television. I am personally too occupied with other priorities at the moment to review your draft, but in a week or two if you would like my input, you may ping me on my talk page. Regards, Pine^(talk) 08:03, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
- Great, I really appreciate your help.--RivBitz (talk) 18:38, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Category:Better Business Bureau members by year

I propose Category:Better Business Bureau members by year (red link now), including Category:Better Business Bureau members in 2012 (red link now). Knowing whether a particular business is or has been a member of the Better Business Bureau can help a reader to evaluate the contents and the editing history of an article about that business.
—Wavelength (talk) 19:16, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Surely businesses tend to be BBB members for several years...? In which case there will be many categories with massively overlapping membership, and business articles would have a huge list of almost-identical categories at the bottom? bobrayner (talk) 19:35, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

I have now read most of the article "Better Business Bureau", and I realize that a business’s BBB rating seems to be more indicative of its business ethics than its BBB membership status is, but even that might be difficult to use for categories.

—Wavelength (talk) 20:23, 14 March 2012 (UTC) and 16:29, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Greathall Productions

How can this article be fixed so that it won't be deleted? What makes someone notable enough? Does it seem too promotional? If there were more outside resources cited, would that support notability? Just wondering how to conform to Wikipedia standards. Hope this is the right place to get some clarification. Wikipedia is a fantastic resource. Just wanted to expand on this particular entry but don't seem to be doing things the right way. Thanks for any guidance.Piano.pig.boy (talk) 14:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

The purpose of Wikipedia is not to be a promotional tool for companies and individuals. In the case of Greathall Productions, it seems to be a company run by Randy and Jim Weiss, with the sole purpose of promoting children's storyteller Jim Weiss, whom very few persons have heard of - and whose activities are somewhat questionable: I would much rather see him publishing his stories as books instead of as audio CDs, because children need to read whenever possible, instead of being fed spoken words. Only through lots of reading will they ever become literate. Thomas Blomberg (talk) 01:41, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Merge discussion for List of U.S. minimum wages

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of U.S. minimum wages , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Metallurgist (talk) 17:58, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Brand equity needs some serious work

Brand equity must be one of the most poorly written articles in Wikipedia! It's full of marketing jargon and uncritical acceptance of "facts" claimed by various marketing theorists. Extremely POV! I've just tried to simplify the very convoluted first sentences, but there is much more to do here. Those willing, please go ahead! Thomas Blomberg (talk) 01:17, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Altoros AfD

I've started an AfD discussion about Altoros article (software developer business) and quickly got overwhelmed with an amount of editors who have no contribution outside the topic, so that I'm now unable to judge on the process from an unbiased point of view. Please give a glance the article and state your opinion in the discussion. The more uninvolved people will come there, the less tricky it will be to judge on consensus, as currently the amount of people (as opposed to accounts) participating in discussion is IMHO very questionable. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 12:02, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Article assessment

Hello, I've been "crafting" a business related (or at least I think it is in the scope of this project!) article Control self-assessment. Although I've been on Wikipedia for more than half a decade I haven't ever tried to build an article to a formal quality standard. If anyone gets time I'd be grateful for an informal or formal review of the article. There's a way to go in adding more content but I'd find a checkpoint useful now. In return I promise to help out here (I'll do that anyway but just trying to twist someone's arm). Cheers QU ^TalkQu 10:21, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

/peggs/chapa/b/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.58.202.206 (talk) 14:40, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

I just took a quick look at the article and it looks like it has a great start. You might also consider asking for input on the talk page of Wikipedia:WikiProject Finance. Pine^(talk) 05:13, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

User:Jitheshcxps/sandbox

I need help assessing this article for someone whos asked for my help. User:Jitheshcxps/sandbox what do you guys think? Phearson (talk) 01:50, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Remote deposit use is growing rapidly. A June 2009 survey by group Independent Community Bankers of America found that 62 percent of banks in the United States currently offered merchant remote deposit, and 78 percent have plans to adopt the technology by 2011.

62 percent + 78 precent = more than 100%............. I think the copy should read : 78 percent of those banks presently not participating in Remote deposit have plans to adopt the technology by 2011

66.143.156.40 (talk) 15:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Disputed article split regarding Psygnosis/SCE Studio Liverpool

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:SCE Studio Liverpool#Split of Psygnosis. -- Trevj (talk) 15:04, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Note: Interested parties may also wish to familiarise themselves with discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Psygnosis/SCE Studio Liverpool. -- Trevj (talk) 15:04, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Disputed WP:TARGET regarding Psygnosis/SCE Studio Liverpool

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:SCE Studio Liverpool#Targeted redirect from Psygnosis to 'Psygnosis (1984-1993)' section. -- Trevj (talk) 15:04, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Note: Interested parties may also wish to familiarise themselves with discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#Psygnosis/SCE Studio Liverpool. -- Trevj (talk) 15:04, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

FAR notice

I have nominated Search engine optimization for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Dana boomer (talk) 18:24, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Facebook IPO to main page

History of Facebook is probably hitting the main page tomorrow via WP:ITNC due to the massive coverage of its IPO. I thought I'd post a notice here if anybody wanted to take a look at the article first; I've done my best with the update, but frankly, I didn't even know what an IPO was until 12 hours ago. Smarter heads always appreciated! Khazar2 (talk) 07:01, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Globalization proposal

Hi WikiProject Business members, A few of us are trying to get a WikiProject Globalization up and running. Members of this project would work together to improve the quality of articles on Wikipedia on Globalization, global issues and related topics. If you're interested in globalization, please come by and check out our proposal. We'd appreciate any feedback about our ideas, and of course your support if you were interested in lending it. Thanks, DA Sonnenfeld (talk) 11:37, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

McKinsey & Co

The article on McKinsey & Company is a high-priority, start-class article that's part of Wikiproject Business. I'm helping improve the article with a COI from the Talk page and wanted to invite any other interested editors who may be interested in participating. There is a lot of controversial material that could benefit from having a few editors in the discussion. User:King4057 14:08, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Merge Virtual assistant to Virtual assistance

I consider both these articles too similar and too short to justify being separate. One is the service and the other is the person doing it, but I still think the scope is almost the same. The suggestion has been opposed by the reason that one of the articles has little reliable information or is lacking in notability, but I think these reasons only support merging them in order to accumulate the notability and available information, so I'd appreciate further input in the discussion at: Talk:Virtual_assistance#Merge_Virtual_assistant_to_Virtual_assistance. Mikael Häggström (talk) 18:18, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Globalization

The article Globalization has undergone major re-structuring. WikiProject Business members are invited to review and comment on the article and add relevant missing information or sections in which your project may have an interest. Also, you may be interested in reviewing the updated Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Globalization proposal for a new WikiProject. Regards, Meclee (talk) 14:35, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Zorro Productions, Inc.

This article carrying your banner has been effectively deleted by redirection as one editor has taken against it again. It's talk page still exists Talk:Zorro Productions, Inc.. This might come under your remit. My only interest other than taking out all the spam elements was it orphaned the image I uploaded. REVUpminster (talk) 16:32, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Report on the use of self-published sources

The first version of a report on the use of self-published sources is now available, in Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia reliability. Some of the self-published sources listed in the report pertain to this project.

Suggestions on the report itself (a discussion has started here), and help in remedying the use of the self-published items that relate to this project will be appreciated. History2007 (talk) 06:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Results (all done):

1 false positive
1 bad reffed section removed: advertising spam
Prod see immediately below
1 out of copyright reproduction that appears to be reliable.
1 deceitful source removed (masquerading as a work by a SPS exempt expert) Fifelfoo (talk) 07:28, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Statement of retained earnings

The article Statement of retained earnings has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unsourced, but this time please no undergraduate textbooks from demonstrated self-publishing houses?

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

I have replaced the deletion tag with the UNSOURCED template and have commented on the talk page. Pine^✉ 09:26, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Article Reads Like A PR Campaign

Simplot

I think it's pretty clear that they wrote this article.

"Since the founding of the J. R. Simplot Company, the firm has actively supported community needs, education, youth, and the arts through direct contributions, scholarships, and personal involvement. According to the Idaho Business Review, “the company has established a culture of giving and support” in part by forming a volunteer service committee. This group helps employees get involved in various activities and provides hundreds of hours of volunteer service on behalf of nonprofit organizations. Causes include Terry Reilly Health Services, Ronald McDonald House events, and Special Olympics. Simplot also supports United Way campaigns throughout various communities where the company does business. In 2009, United Way of Treasure Valley awarded Simplot the Spirit of Treasure Valley award, which recognizes individuals and organizations for leadership and commitment to improve lives and strengthen communities through outstanding achievements during United Way’s annual community campaigns. Hungry families in Idaho have benefited often from Simplot’s in-kind donations of food. Most recently, the company donated 35,000 pounds of potatoes to the Idaho Foodbank and the Boise Rescue Mission. The company also provides monetary support for the arts, including Ballet Idaho, Opera Idaho, and Boise Philharmonic."

I don't have time to remedy this, just thought that I would bring it to your attention.

--Iankap99 (talk) 03:21, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

Merger proposal from Long range planning into Strategic planning

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Strategic planning/Archives/2015#Merger proposal from Long range planning. -- Trevj (talk) 13:46, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

A Harvard Associate Professor in the business field is notable... or are they?

Hi folks, I've been asked to offer opinions on how to improve Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Amy Cuddy which is a draft article about an Associate Professor in the "Negotiation, Organizations & Markets Unit at Harvard Business School".

The article has been declined twice, the second time for being about a non-notable person. I do understand that "Associate Professor" doesn't meet notability standards for academics, and that many of the more "reliable" sources cited seem to be about topics that Cuddy can claim to be an expert on (i.e. she is invited to a TV show) rather than sources talking primarily about her.

However, I do wonder if there is notability here despite that, and maybe we can improve it to reach that point? Any ideas or suggestions? The article creator is pretty new to Wikipedia, so we can maybe bring out more points - or more solid refs - that they have not quite got across? --Demiurge1000 (talk) 19:21, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Article is now live at Amy Cuddy thanks to the very prompt assistance of User:Maunus, but improvements are of course very welcome. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:02, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

New WikiProject Globalization

Wikipedia:WikiProject_Globalization is a new project to improve Wikipedia's coverage of aspects of Globalization and the organization of information and articles on this topic. This page and its subpages contain their suggestions and various resources; it is hoped that this project will help to focus the efforts of other Wikipedians interested in the topic. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Meclee (talk) 18:37, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

2nd opinion request for Ted Snyder (economist)

Could someone take a look at this edit. I think I may have trouble being objective.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:02, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

I think that much of it is broadly the kind of content I'd like to see in the article, and it's got sources, but the tone does seem slightly hagiographic. A little too much of the "prolific" and " extraordinary success" and so on - could we tone that down? Presumably there are other sources, too, who cover the subject with something other than glowing praise. bobrayner (talk) 14:36, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Yet another financial crisis name change RfC

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2007–2012 global financial crisis #How about "Global_financial_crisis_of_2008"?. This time we are considering multiple choices at the same time. We don't have to have a consensus right away but it will be good if we could drift towards one in finite time. Yaniv256 (talk) 00:19, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

The is no scope listed for this project

I am looking all throughout this WikiProject's page, and I am not finding a scope of supported articles anywhere. Could someone who is active on this project please write out what this project's scope of supported articles is? Thank you. Steel1943 (talk) 03:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

The WikiProject page says, "This WikiProject provides guidelines on topics related to Business and provides a space where users can collaborate to improve related articles. Sister projects include WikiProject Companies, WikiProject Economics, WikiProject Investment, and WikiProject Finance." Pine^✉ 07:22, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
- I saw that. However, I was looking for more about what is out of the scope of the project relating to business. Steel1943 (talk) 04:43, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Product defect

I'm casting about looking for an appropriate project under which to put this newly created stub addressing a basic and very important topic. There is no project for manufacturing, so this seems to be the closest thing. Cheers! bd2412 T 19:49, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Seems reasonable for it to be covered by the business project (broadly construed). Although defects aren't necessarily limited to manufactured goods, I think ;-) bobrayner (talk) 19:56, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Dettol: Fixing a stub page - thoughts?

Hey everyone,

The Dettol page is horribly out-of-date and violates NPOV. I have been working in my sandbox to update it [7].

Full disclosure, I work for Reckitt Benckiser, owner of Dettol brand. Our goal is to re-create the page with NPOV and good historical data and images. I would like some feedback before I continue to upload images and eventually edit the Dettol page itself.

Thank you, web250 (talk) 13:21, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Merging branding articles

As I started working on the article on brand management I came to realize we had 22 articles on different branding concepts, many of which are redundant or just a few paragraphs long. For example, Family branding and Umbrella brand are the same thing and I would think a short article like Visual brand language should be just a section on the article on Brands.

I've thrown together a rough plan here on how to consolidate 22 branding articles into 5. If anyone's interested in commenting or making suggestions, your comments are welcome. Corporate 16:05, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

What is a business excutive?

Since 2006 the article Business executive had been redirected to Executive officer, which in its present form is clearly not the correct explanation of what a business executive is. I have stopped the re-direct and copied&pasted the introduction to Business executive. Please help in building up this article which is currently a gaping hole in this encyclopedia. Thanks for any help. Ottawahitech (talk) 15:24, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

At a very quick glance, I'm wondering if Executive Officer should be moved to Business Executive and then improved. The current article is very poor, but what may be needed is to shape the article, as oppose to create a new one. Corporate 19:09, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

@Corporate, I agree that most articles tagged by this project are in desparate need of attention. What I disagree with is merging two totally concepts into the same article. What is the connection in your mind between a business executive and a Executive Officer (military) (and what is the connection of Chief Executive Officer(corporatins) to both) ? Ottawahitech (talk) 14:52, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Village Pump discussion related to this Wikiproject

Of interest to those who participate in this wikiproject is a discussion on the Village Pump. Input from those who may participate with this Wikiproject is encouraged. --Robert Horning (talk) 01:11, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

@Robert Horning, thanks for posting this headsup. Just wondering why this discussion is nnot happening here? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:00, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Merge

Aren't Gross profit and Gross margin the same thing? If not, their needs to be a much better distinction. Right now, the definitions are pretty much identical. 70.193.197.58 (talk) 01:13, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for posting. I hope someone from this wikiproject will pipe in? Ottawahitech (talk) 15:07, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Biographies needing to be added

Biographies in Category: American health care businesspeople should be added to WikiProject Business: LambdaChi (talk) 16:15, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

RFC regarding ticker symbols in article leads

Hi. An RFC has begun regarding ticker symbols in article leads: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ticker symbols in article leads. Please weigh in! UnitedStatesian (talk) 04:24, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Requesting input

I'm requesting input into a merge discussion taking place at Talk:DI Corporation. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:58, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

RfC: Puerto Rico government finances

A request for comment has been opened regarding the Puerto Rico government budget balance and the public debt of Puerto Rico. Please see the discussion at:

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council#Request for help: Puerto Rico government finances

—Ahnoneemoos (talk) 14:37, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

No "WPBIZ" talk template?

Hello, is there a reason why when I type {{WPBIZ}} on a Talk page, it doesn't turn into the template for this project? "WPUSA" does for WikiProject USA, as does "WPINDIA", "WPUK", "WPART" etc. Can this be fixed so that an intuitive shortcut works for the template? Thanks! MatthewVanitas (talk) 21:13, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Redirect created: {{WPBIZ}} bobrayner (talk) 00:46, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Aerotek is alive

As I google "Aerotek" on 26 Dec 2012 and limit my results to pages updated in the last month, I see that it is quite an active company; active also on LinkedIn. Yet a Wikipedia look-up of the same company on the same day redirects to "Allegis Group" and says the Aerotek name has been retired. This is my very first post to Wikipedia, so I am not comfortable updating an article, and wouldn't be able to fix a redirect.

I am not affiliated with either company. I just had doubts about Aerotek and came here to check them out.

96.39.152.156 (talk) 15:28, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

Demo Mode

I have recently modified and expanded the Demo mode article. Is it still considered a stub? EdwardRech (talk) 13:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I would probably call that a start-class article instead of a stub. You are welcome to change the class listed on the article talk page. --Pine^✉ 18:47, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Awesome! And thanks for the quick reply :) Awesome signature you have, by the way :D EdwardRech

(talk) 08:29, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the compliment, and thank you for checking here on the WikiProject talk page. This WikiProject is mostly inactive but a few people check the talk page from time to time. If you have further questions you may get a faster reply by pinging me on my user talkpage. Happy editing! --Pine^✉ 09:21, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Alrighty, will do, thanks! :D EdwardRech

(talk) 21:22, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Help please- "commercial management"

Hi, I am looking to do a cleanup on commercial management, and I think it would benefit being brought into context by merging it into another article. Any suggestions please? Corporate governance was one that seemed appropriate to me, but I thought I'd ask the experts first. Thanks, 1292simon (talk) 00:20, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd never heard of "commercial management" until you mentioned it here. My web search seems to show that different websites and organizations are using that term in ways that are vague and/or conflicting. I don't think that it belongs in Corporate governance at least in the American understanding of that term. You might see if you can fit the subject of "commercial management" into the article Business development although the conflicting uses of the term "commercial management" may make that a challenge. --Pine^✉ 09:06, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I've seen "commercial management" used in a couple of different ways in different contexts, but I think Corporate governance would be a good target. bobrayner (talk) 13:57, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

If we can't agree on what "commercial management" is then I think we should leave it as its own article that includes an explanation of its different uses. Maybe once the article is expanded and has some good refs it will be easier for us to agree if we should do a merge somewhere. --Pine^✉ 19:08, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Pine and Bob for your help. Either way (merger or not), would it be possible for you to provide some refs for the definition please? I don't have a business background, so I'd be blindly googling without knowing what can be trusted. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 00:11, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I suggest that you search for professional business organizations that specialize in training or accrediting people in "commercial management" and that you search for college courses that teach "commercial management". See how they describe what "commercial management" is. If you find conflicting explanations I would suggest that you include both in the article. However, if you're interested in improving a Wikipedia article on business, I suggest that you would contribute more value to Wikipedia readers by working on a higher profile article like Online advertising or GAAP. --Pine^✉ 01:18, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

No, no corporate governance. Governance (which is through boards) is high-level and doesn't deal with management except insofar as hiring a manager and setting direction. You need management and perhaps one of the varieties shown at Management#20th_century. It's basically a UK term for business management. In the United States, I guess we saw adding commercial as redundant. II | (t - c)