Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

RfC: Chrysler reception; rankings in independent surveys and ratings of quality, reliability, and customer satisfaction

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Chrysler#RfC: Reception; rankings in independent surveys and ratings of quality, reliability, and customer satisfaction. Should the following content be added to the article?

Since at least the late 1990s, Chrysler has performed poorly in independent rankings of reliability, quality, and customer satisfaction. In 2011, James B. Stewart said in The New York Times that Chrysler's quality in 2009 was "abysmal," and cited that all Chrysler brands were in the bottom quarter of J. D. Power and Associates' customer satisfaction survey. In 2015, Fiat Chrysler brands ranked at the bottom of J. D. Power and Associates' Initial Quality Study, and the five Fiat Chrysler brands were the five lowest ranked of 20 brands in their Customer Service Index, which surveyed customer satisfaction with dealer service. Chrysler has performed poorly in Consumer Reports annual reliability ratings. In 2009 and 2010, Chrysler brands were ranked lowest in the Consumer Reports Annual Auto Reliability Survey; in 2014 and 2015, Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep, Ram, and Fiat were ranked at or near the bottom; in 2015 five of the seven lowest rated brands were the five Fiat Chrysler brands. In 2016, all Fiat Chrysler brands (Dodge, Chrysler, Jeep, and Fiat; Ram was not included) finished in the bottom third of 30 brands evaluated in Consumer Reports' 2016 annual Automotive Brand Report Card; Consumer Reports cited "poor reliability and sub-par performance in our testing." Chrysler has consistently ranked near the bottom in the American Customer Satisfaction Index survey.

References
References

Please comment at Talk:Chrysler#RfC: Reception; rankings in independent surveys and ratings of quality, reliability, and customer satisfaction. Thank you! Hugh (talk) 16:56, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Magellan Solutions

Can someone take a look at Magellan Solutions for me? I'm not convinced that this is notable but am not quite up on company articles enough to make a definitive judgement. --Super Nintendo Chalmers (talk) 10:25, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Diagrams

Don't know how many of you have noticed, but an editor, User:XyZAn, has started adding diagrams (cladograms, if you like) to articles about companies with complex M&A histories; the diagrams show the M&A history graphically. You can see a couple of them here: Valeant_Pharmaceuticals#Acquisition_history (you have to click "show" to expand it) and at GlaxoSmithKline#Acquisition_history. I'm opening this because another editor, User:Leprof 7272, has some concerns, and moved the one for Shire to the Talk page, here: Unsourced, undated, unverifiable presentation of company information. You can see their thoughts, there.

What are folks thoughts about these? Jytdog (talk) 03:23, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

I agree that there's no particular problem with using cladograms/tree structures for representing hierarchical relationships (although note that the current templates cannot cope with companies that have merged, then subsequently split). For what it may be worth, for company mergers having time proceed left-to-right would be more intuitive for people not used to the conventions of phylogenetics. Left-to-right presentation would be appropriate for a company, where mergers are occurring (as opposed to speciation events splitting biological lineages). NB. reproduced from original post. T.Shafee(Evo﹠Evo)^talk 05:25, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

I like this idea. My first thought was that some of these are unwieldy to read in horizontal format and maybe something like the {{Chart}} template would work better, but the left-to-right orientation might also help. Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:39, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

the {{Chart}} template could be used--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 10:31, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Jytdog for putting this discussion in one single place. I suppose it's a matter of perspective, to me coming from a scientific & financial background reading horizontally, ie predecessor to the right, successor to the left is intuitive - but i can understand how someone with a different background may see vertical presentation easier to follow. As Jytdog as said, M&A in the pharma/biotech sector is notoriously unwieldy and complicated - see for example Allergan, Inc, Allergan, Plc & Actavis - that took a lot of work unpicking the 'story' and I believe the diagrams give a neat summary of the history of a company. More-so when we include details about what type of transaction was performed. I do like the presentation given to the reader using the chart template, however my only concern is the size it will become on screen. For example, look at how Pfizers digram is, could using the chart template may make this massive on-screen?? From a referencing point of view its unimaginably easy - as shown by myself on the Shire page yesterday. XyZAn (talk) 17:30, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

XyXAn please do consider the left-to-right flow thing. I think that is useful feedback. The charts do reflect historical events unfolding and I at least think about time flowing from left to right....Jytdog (talk) 19:08, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Jytdog absolutely, I'm more than up for having them go from left (predecessor) to right (successor) - i see the logic in both - i'm just not sure with that markup how you'd do it. I taught myself how to use that markup when I first saw that diagram style being used on JPMorgan Chase#Acquisition history. If someone could show me, I don't mind flipping them all around XyZAn (talk) 19:24, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Extended content

Having been away, I see that the discussion is sidelined (few, if any quantitative phylogenetics folks involved), insofar as the pending questions, posed elsewhere, but largely unaddressed here, are: * (1) Is it appropriate to use this quantitative tool, which is intended to convey quantitative information in its line lengths (based on a professional period of 18 mos. I spent in a molecular phylogenetics laboratory many years ago), to present qualitative information, where transpired time is not reflected in segment lengths, etc.? At the very least, to be true to design, the meaning of the ordinate and abscissa segment lengths would be somewhere defined, and the line segments connecting the M&A events would be proportionate to the time elapsing between them. Were this to be the case, the tool would convey, e.g., that a companies aquistion activities were few and far between, and clustered in short periods (or whatever). It seems not to convey this, so as it stands, it seems to me that the presentation is simply inaccurate and misleading. Specifically, the way in which passing time is represented seems to me to be tremendously misleading. * (2) Is the application to business history, in this way, a good match or a mismatch of the tool's design? In phylogenetic setting it is sophisticated and elegant (graphical presentation of the genetic distances that underpin the relationships between organisms, hence two elements, name and segment lengths, with computational generation of the trees that best fit the whole of the inter-species distance data). Whereas here, the tool fails, as it seems to present no information in the distances, and to otherwise struggle with how to handle (and therefore either ignores or oversimplifies) the complexities associated with various specific historical M&A events. In this regard, genetic distance and organism name/label, as sophisticated as the tool is in application to these, are vanishingly simple concepts/categories, relative to the wide array of event details and other information that the application to business M&A is trying to describe. * (3) Otherwise, is it likely that editors in general can add information easily to this format? The question is both one of true ease, and perceived ease of editing—over the earlier tabular forms, which have no pretense of the graphical, and allow (in this editor's opinion) greater flexibility to record historical events, and greater ease in an editor's adding to the continuing record. In summary, I do not think I would be alone among people who have actually generated phylogenetic trees based on sequence information, in perceiving this as a misuse/misapplication of the tool. (Can such experts on the meaning of this representation not be brought in?) Nor do I think, if this or other groups give it any thought, that you can conclude that this clade form of presentation of complicated historical information makes the editing by individuals, in general, less difficult, and therefore articles and M&A content more likely to be maintained. (Anyone willing to wager that when XyZAn becomes too busy in life to attend to these, that the M&A activities of companies ceases to be kept up to date?) Bottom line, real quantitative phylogenetic input is needed, and by making the venue here, this is avoided. As for practicality, if use of this tool/presentation continues in this way, I look to all the positive responders here to learn the apparatus, and commit to keeping articles up to date through its use. Otherwise, you are thrusting it on those of us who otherwise would contribute to maintaining tables. Cheers. Leprof 7272 (talk) 00:21, 23 April 2016 (UTC) [See new section below, attempting to have respondents address issues Jytdog referenced elsewhere, but no one replying took time to review and address]

@Leprof 7272: You are making this way more complicated than it is. Cladograms can be used either qualitatively or quantitively. There is nothing wrong with a qualitative application. No one else that has posted here sees any problem with this application either. If it bothers you that much, just add "branch lengths not drawn to scale" to the figure caption and be done with it. Why are you making such a big deal out of this? Boghog (talk) 10:44, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Extended content

Bohhog, though you are being consistent with your pattern of general behaviour with regard to my editing (arrival and disagreement, regardless), I would be remiss if I did not say you are being markedly inconsistent with your past statements and patterns of editing, both with respect to your usual emphases on accuracy of content relative to the source/data, and on simplicity of material presentation and practicality of editorial demand. Specifically, your arrival unsurprising as it is, amazes in that you address none of the matters raised, esp. that presentation of M&A in this style is mismatched to the data type (I say, acknowledging and supporting far-flung rigourous applications, including in astronomy), fails to offer a means to capture the complexity of M&A, is inaccurate, and indeed makes a mockery of by presenting variously spaced historical events at fixed distances from one another, and in on top of mucking the data in presenting it inaccurately as an image, furthermore makes it far more burdensome, and less likely to be maintained (than a simple table, which could also manage the complexity). Brava, bog. Oppose the person, leave the points of the argument unaddressed, entirely. If you want to feel free to address real issues, you can respond below. If you want to join in the non-rigourous popularity contest, I am not interested in another such vote. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 14:21, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

I have moved my discussion to a separate new section at the bottom of the page, to clarify the actual issue in the Section title (since Jytdog did not accept a collegial edit to properly state and direct attention, by the one who initiated the objection in the first place). Leprof 7272 (talk) 14:31, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Application of cladogram images from phylogenetics as qualitative presentation tools for business M&A activity—Strong objection

@Jytdog:, @Evolution and evolvability:, @Opabinia regalis:, @Ozzie10aaaa:, @XyZAn:: Having been away, I see that the discussion is sidelined (few, if any quantitative phylogenetics folks involved). The pending questions, posed elsewhere, but largely unaddressed here, are:

• (1) Is it appropriate to use this quantitative tool, which is intended to convey quantitative information in its line lengths? (Asked based on a professional period of 18 mos. I spent in a molecular phylogenetics laboratory many years ago.) THat is, is it appropriate to present qualitative information, where transpired time is not reflected in segment lengths, etc.? At the very least, to be true to design, the meaning of the ordinate and abscissa segment lengths would be somewhere defined, and the line segments connecting the M&A events would be proportionate to the time elapsing between them (or to some other stated parameter, that reflects this type of "evolution.". Were this to be the case, the tool would convey, e.g., that a companies aquistion activities were few and far between, and clustered in short periods (or whatever). It seems not to convey this, so as it stands, it seems to me that the presentation is simply inaccurate and misleading. (Use of alternate parameters to time elapsed between chance, such as company size or valuation, could conceivably also be used. The point is, the lines in trees mean something.) Specifically, the way in which passing time is represented seems to me to be tremendously misleading.
• (2) Is the application to business history, in this way, a good match or a mismatch of the tool's design? In phylogenetic setting it is sophisticated and elegant (graphical presentation of the genetic distances that underpin the relationships between organisms, hence two elements, name and segment lengths, with computational generation of the trees that best fit the whole of the inter-species distance data). Whereas here, the tool fails, as it seems to present no information in the distances, and to otherwise struggle with how to handle (and therefore either ignores or oversimplifies) the complexities associated with various specific historical M&A events. In this regard, genetic distance and organism name/label, as sophisticated as the tool is in application to these, are vanishingly simple concepts/categories, relative to the wide array of event details and other information that the application to business M&A is trying to describe.
• (3) Otherwise, is it likely that editors in general can add information easily to this format? The question is both one of true ease, and perceived ease of editing—over the earlier tabular forms, which have no pretense of the graphical, and allow (in this editor's opinion) greater flexibility to record historical events. That there would be greater ease in a future editor's adding to the continuing record, for a table over this image, is hard to argue (see also next point). For the markup used, see this image, clicking on on the Edit tab.
• (4) What are the sources of the information, and is the image accurate to the source? This bullet is not highlighted, because the initiator of use of these images has expressed willingness to populate the images with the source of the information. Accuracy to image is a second matter, one that has to be checked, image by image. For an example in addition to the question of handling merge-split (already raised), see this image, and consider what is implied by the unexplained differences in presentation of information at various points of the tree.

In summary, I do not think I am alone among people who have actually generated phylogenetic trees (e.g., based on sequence information, applying them to the evolution of the stars, etc.), in perceiving this as largely being a misuse/misapplication of the tool. (Can such experts on the meaning of this representation not be brought in?) Nor do I think, if this or other groups give it any thought, that you can conclude that this clade form of presentation of complicated historical information makes the editing by individuals, in general, less difficult, and therefore articles and M&A content more likely to be maintained. (Anyone willing to wager that when XyZAn becomes too busy in life to attend to these, that the M&A activities of companies ceases to be kept up to date?) Bottom line, real quantitative phylogenetic input is needed, and by making the venue here, this is avoided. As for practicality, if use of this tool/presentation continues in this way, I look to all the positive responders here to learn the apparatus, and commit to keeping articles up to date through its use. Otherwise, you are thrusting it on those of us who otherwise would contribute to maintaining tables. Cheers. Leprof 7272 (talk) 00:21, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Sources list, for all respondents to contribute to:

• A proper cross-application, presented in understandable fashion: Fraix-Burnet, Didier; Choler, Philippe; Douzery, Emmanuel J.P.; Verhamme, Anne (2006). "Astrocladistics: a phylogenetic analysis of galaxy evolution I. Character evolutions and galaxy histories" (PDF). Journal of Classification. 23: 1–16. Retrieved 23 April 2016.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) [See for instance, Figure 2, and its explanation of what distances mean in this application (and text leading to this).]
• WP article, as starting point to meaning and methodology: "Cladistics". wikipedia.org. Retrieved 23 April 2016.. [This article is better than Cladogram, for sources, and as source of a lay understanding.]
• Sample article, journal Cladistics, note methods section: "Phylogeny of Molossidae Gervais (Mammalia: Chiroptera) inferred by morphological data". wiley.com. Retrieved 23 April 2016.
• Entire sample volume, same journal, to allow checking of foregoing as representative: "Cladistics". wiley.com. Retrieved 23 April 2016.
• A book analyzing historical origins of cladistics, bringing that history forward in readable form. Wägele, J.-W. (2004). "Henning's phylogenetic systematics brought up to date". In William, D.M. & Forey, P.L. (ed.). Milestones in Systematics. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. pp. 101–126. ISBN 0203643038. Retrieved 23 April 2016.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
• Seminal, late article by Willi Hennig: Hennig, Willi (1965). "Phylogenetic Systematics". Annu. Rev. Entomol. 10: 97–116. Retrieved 23 April 2016.(subscription required)
• Important article of Farris, see "Lengths" section (inherent meaning assumed): Farris, James S. (1983). "The logical basis of phylogenetic analysis". In Platnick, Norman I. & Funk, Vicki A. (ed.). Advances in Cladistics (PDF). Vol. Vol. 2. New York, NY: Columbia University Press. pp. 7–36. Retrieved 23 April 2016. {{cite book}}: |volume= has extra text (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: editors list (link)
• A Berkeley graduate/advanced undergraduate reading list on the subject, containing several of the foregoing citations. Lindberg, David R.; Mishler, Brent & Will, Kip (2012-01-20). "IB200A, Printable Reading List" (PDF). Integrative Biology 200A, Principles of Phylogenetics: Systematics. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved 23 April 2016.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
• Brief comment: Source.
• Brief comment: Source.
• Brief comment: Source.

In addressing the matter here, please address the arguments raised, in points (1), (2), and (3) above. Please provide sources supporting use of variable-independent distances in image (current practice, vs standard expectations of cladograms that are meaningful), and sources to rebut other main points of my argument. My goal is to arrive at a "best practices" type of assessment—not can this continue, but whether it is wise and best for the encyclopedia for it to do so. It obviously can continue; anything that garners a vote of popular support can continue, regardless of how non-rigourous, or antithetic to principles it might be. We clearly stand at a point of popular support. Please engage regarding the rigour of application of cladograms to M&A. In doing so, please provide examples from reputable publications regarding their proper use in business (as one can do in microbiology, astronomy, zoology, etc.). Leprof 7272 (talk) 14:42, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, but I do not have time to read all this, nor do I think most of it is relevant. The basic question is how valuable it is to graphically represent these corporate relationships, not the details of how the visualizations constructed. Opabinia regalis (talk) 20:45, 23 April 2016 (UTC) ——[Thank you for replying, respectfully disagree that method is not important. Cheers. Leprof 7272 (talk) 21:23, 23 April 2016 (UTC) ]——

You may have a point about upkeep and editing, but as for the rest...it's just a chart; why does it matter what tool was used to make it? clpo13_(talk) 21:30, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Not really a molecular phylogeneticist, but I consume a lot of the literature and I'm reading the proofs of a recent submission with a small cladogram in it. I don't find unscaled trees unnatural or confusing, and I think they're pretty normal in the literature, when the author is recapitulating arrangements of clades which were justified in previous research (rather than presenting a novel arrangement). Forcing all branches to conform to the same scale tends to create a sprawling and diffuse graphic, and if you're interested strictly in the structure of the tree (e.g., to maintain a monophyletic taxonomy), quantifying the degree of divergence makes that harder to follow. Bear in mind that phylogenetics infers events that were not observed to construct a tree, so the basis and methods of inference are important. In the case of these corporate "cladograms", we're arranging known events in the historical record, not inferring them, so I think a lot of the philosophical baggage that comes with phylogenetics is irrelevant.

I can't speak yet to the relative difficulty of maintaining trees vs. tables, but I'm pretty sure our table markup looks terrifying to new users, we're just used to it. Choess (talk) 14:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

I agree with the two above points, Leprof 7272 you're missing the point completely. There is no information inferred in the length of the lines other than the way in which they're connected. As far as the two valid points states (mark-up ease of usage and displaying disposals) I have answers. Leprof, as i'll re-iterate, the cladogram templates used, were not created by me. I came across them at JPMorgan Chase and could see the reason that that editor had used them. I could see how we could use them for pharma articles, especially those with high levels of M&A activity. As far as the mark-up, I taught myself and I have no prior experience of coding/mark-up systems. Information for the mark-up used can be easily found here and here it looks no more complex than table mark-up. The second valid point raised was about how we can show disposals - the first link is the Abbott page as it stands now Abbott 1.0 and my sandboxed version Abbott 2.0 - see the added colour coded bars. XyZAn (talk) 15:29, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

RfC: Impact of climate expertise on ExxonMobil operational planning at Natuna

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:ExxonMobil climate change controversy#RfC: Context of Natuna gas field on the impact of climate expertise on ExxonMobil operational planning. Should the following, bolded for clarity, be added to ExxonMobil climate change controversy?

Exxon also studied ways of avoiding CO₂ emissions if the East Natuna gas field (Natuna D-Alpha block) offshore of Indonesia were developed. An October 1984 internal report from Exxon's top climate modelers said that the gas field contained over 70% carbon dioxide and that if the carbon dioxide were released to the atmosphere it would make the gas field "the world's largest point source emitter of CO₂ and raises concern for the possible incremental impact of Natuna on the CO2 greenhouse problem." Members of Exxon's board of directors told Exxon staff that the gas field could not be developed without a cost-effective and environmentally responsible method for handling the CO₂.

Please comment at Talk:ExxonMobil climate change controversy#RfC: Context of Natuna gas field on the impact of climate expertise on ExxonMobil operational planning. Thank you! Hugh (talk) 15:46, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Help with Smithfield Foods article

Hello everyone, I'm a representative of Smithfield Foods and would like to request some assistance in updating this article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smithfield_Foods). In particular, there were a series of edits made on March 29th that are unsourced and inaccurate. I am respectful of Wikipedia's guidelines concerning conflict of interest and have made no edits myself but wanted to encourage others to make this article accurate. The infobox is also very out of date in many areas including financial figures and leadership. Thank you for your help and consideration. (Jeremy Smithfield (talk) 15:05, 7 April 2016 (UTC))

Thank you to the users who reverted some of the edits made on March 29th. Our most recent SEC filing has verified and updated information regarding our financial figures and governance. Here is the link: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/SFD/1972273717x0xS91388-16-64/91388/filing.pdf. If you anyone wants me to call out specifics I would be more than happy to or I understand if you would like to pull the information out yourself. (Jeremy Smithfield (talk) 10:30, 1 May 2016 (UTC))

Meal train

This article is currently written as if it's about "meal trains" as a general concept, which I think would fail WP:GNG. I'm pretty sure it was created as an admasq for mealtrain.com anyway and that company might be notable enough for its own article. The article would need to be rewritten entirely in that case, but I'm really not sure if it meets WP:NCORP or if I should just make an AFD. I'm not familiar with checking into a company's notability, so I hope other editors will give input. I went into more detail about all of this on the talkpage. Thanks! PermStrump(talk) 04:24, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Requesting review of proposed changes

I work for Bounce Exchange. The article had some problems, which I have tried to address in a recent edit. I have been trying to discuss them on the article’s talk page, but further perspectives would be helpful -Cxob (talk) 00:16, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

SecDes3

one of the leading and growing establishment by a talented youth headed by Mr. Tolin John Thomas, Mr. Dale Tomson & Mr. Sarankumar V.B One of the promising startup which shows a work quality and responsibility in the work. The company was started in 20th December 2014.After the two months the company incubated in Startup Village at Kinfra Hi-Tech Park. The SecDes3 come with new innovated ideas and with in the web designing& Development field. Also ensuring the security through the cyber Security Field. The company shows their other hand in the Digital Marketing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.242.154.236 (talk) 18:31, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Good Article Reassessment of Square Enix

Square Enix, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:59, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Auto-assessment of article classes

Following a recent discussion at WP:VPR, there is consensus for an opt-in bot task that automatically assesses the class of articles based on classes listed for other project templates on the same page. In other words, if WikiProject A has evaluated an article to be C-class and WikiProject B hasn't evaluated the article at all, such a bot task would automatically evaluate the article as C-class for WikiProject B.

If you think auto-assessment might benefit this project, consider discussing it with other members here. For more information or to request an auto-assessment run, please visit User:BU RoBOT/autoassess. This is a one-time message to alert projects with over 1,000 unassessed articles to this possibility. ~ Rob^Talk 22:25, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Requests for Smile Train article

Hi, I'm Shari and I'm here on behalf of my employer Smile Train to update the article. I've proposed two updates at Talk:Smile Train.

The first request is about co-founder Brian Mullaney's departure from the organization in 2010. The second proposes a slightly trimmed and less contentious re-wording of the relationship between Smile Train and Operation Smile, and puts the content in chronological order.

I know that making direct edits to Wikipedia is strongly discouraged, given my conflict of interest. Is there someone who is willing to respond to these two requests? Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! SM at Smile Train (talk) 16:04, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Shari here: I am still looking for help with this request. The first request has been completed but the second request and an additional request to remove a “citation needed” tag and to add a celebrity supporter are still outstanding. Is anyone available to help? Thanks for any assistance in advance. SM at Smile Train (talk) 13:58, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

One of your project's articles has been selected for improvement!

Hello, Please note that Shelby Gem Factory, which is within this project's scope, has been selected as one of Today's articles for improvement. The article was scheduled to appear on Wikipedia's Community portal in the "Today's articles for improvement" section for one week, beginning today. Everyone is encouraged to collaborate to improve the article. Thanks, and happy editing! Delivered by — MusikBot talk 00:07, 13 June 2016 (UTC) on behalf of the TAFI team

TechnologyOne

This company is a major software player in Australia and company reps had been editing their article directly. Happily they are now making suggestions on the Talk page instead. Would anybody here be interested in working with them to review and implement their proposed content? Not really my area. Am also posting at WT:WikiProject Australia. Jytdog (talk) 03:01, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Telcordia Technologies name change

Hi there! I've suggested that the Telcordia Technologies article be renamed iconectiv and I'm looking for editors to weigh in with their opinions here. As a disclosure, I am working on the article and proposing the name change on behalf of iconectiv as part of my work with Beutler Ink. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 17:48, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Relisted

An editor has requested that {{subst:linked|Talk:Telcordia Technologies#Requested move 17 June 2016}} be moved to {{subst:#if:|{{subst:linked|{{{2}}}}}|another page}}{{subst:#switch: project |user | USER = . Since you had some involvement with 'Talk:Telcordia Technologies#Requested move 17 June 2016', you |#default = , which may be of interest to this WikiProject. You}} are invited to participate in [[{{subst:#if:|{{subst:#if:|#{{{section}}}|}}|{{subst:#if:|Talk:Telcordia Technologies#{{{section}}}|{{subst:TALKPAGENAME:Talk:Telcordia Technologies#Requested move 17 June 2016}}}}}}|the move discussion]].  What's in your palette? Paine  21:05, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Need help updating AvalonBay Communities, Inc. Logo

Hello, Full disclosure, I do work for AvalonBay and am requesting on their behalf. We're trying to update the logo listed on our page. It's a couple years out of date. See the AvalonBay.com site for example.

As a new user I'm not yet able to upload images. We're hoping to get the logo uploaded under fair use terms -- this message does not reflect any kind of release of copyright. I can provide someone with a good resolution file for uploading.

Thanks, and apologies in advance if I've made this post in error or incorrectly. As I said, I'm new. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gayeaucrat (talk • contribs) 16:43, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Requesting feedback on recent edits to Vonage article

I work for Vonage. The article had some issues and redundancies, which I have tried to address in a recent edit. I have been trying to discuss them on the article’s talk page, but further perspective would be helpful. The cleanup banner has been on the page for some time and I am working to improve the article and remove the banner. I would appreciate if an editor or two would review my work.SStankevich (talk) 17:23, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Notice to participants at this page about adminship

Many participants here create a lot of content, have to evaluate whether or not a subject is notable, decide if content complies with BLP policy, and much more. Well, these are just some of the considerations at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship.

So, please consider taking a look at and watchlisting this page:

• Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

You could be very helpful in evaluating potential candidates, and maybe even finding out if you would be a suitable RfA candidate.

Many thanks and best wishes,

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:04, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Small updates to Ligado Networks after name change

Hi there, I'm looking for editors who are interested to help with some quick tweaks to the Ligado Networks article, formerly called LightSquared. As the company recently changed its name, and so has the article, I'm hoping editors can help with an edit request I've made to adjust tense and update the company name throughout the article. Although they're all minor, common sense edits, as I do have a financial conflict of interest (I am working for Ligado Networks via The Glover Park Group as part of my work at Beutler Ink) so I've left an edit request rather than make changes directly. If anyone can take a look, I'd appreciate it. Thanks, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 21:22, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Help with BNY Mellon?

Hi there. I've suggested several small updates to the BNY Mellon article on the Talk page here. I won't make the changes myself as I am working as a paid consultant on behalf of the company. If someone here could review the edits and, if my recommendations look okay, implement the changes, I'd appreciate it! Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 18:23, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Copied from helpdesk douts (talk) 21:14, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

August 16th, 2016

Please note that the information as it relates to HSBC Bank Bermuda Limited is not current. For current information, please refer to www.hsbc.bm > About HSBC.

Angela Cotterill, Communications Manager, HSBC Bank Bermuda Limited. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.113.20.135 (talk) 15:41, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello, Angela. Thank you for raising this here, and for not going in and editing it yourself. I assume you are talking about HSBC Bank Bermuda (it would have been helpful if you had identified the article). The best way of getting it updated is by starting a new section on the article's Talk page Talk:HSBC Bank Bermuda, requesting the changes you would like to see made. Be as specific as you can (even suggesting the text), and give citations to reliable published sources, preferably sources independent of the bank, for every piece of information you give. Since there is little traffic to that article, it would be worth adding {{edit request}} (with the double curly brackets) to your suggestion: that will bring it to more people's attention. In time a volunteer unconnected with the bank will see your suggestions, and will decide whether and how to apply them to the article, bearing in mind our policies of verifiability and neutral point of view. --ColinFine (talk) 18:48, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Help with MDC Partners?

Hi there. I could use assistance over on the MDC Partners article. New material I suggested for the article was reviewed earlier this month—and some was implemented—but the editor I was working with has not been back to further discuss the rest of the changes. I have a financial COI, so I won't make any of the changes myself and would like input from others. Specifically, I'd like an editor here to assess the sections that have not been included and provide further feedback on what needs to be reworked if needed. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 14:51, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced material on Criticism of Walmart article

Hello, Wikipedians! Can someone interested in company articles take a look at an edit request on the Criticism of Walmart Talk page. I have provided independent, third-party sources where I could, and noted areas where I could not locate sources. I hope editors can help add citations to the article where appropriate, and remove content that is not verified with sources. I am one of Walmart's representatives on Wikipedia and I have a financial conflict of interest, so I am bringing this up on these Talk pages rather than editing the article itself. Thanks, JLD at Walmart (talk) 16:03, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Pinging this message again to see if anyone is interested in giving this edit request a look. @Checkingfax: Do you know of any editors who pay particular attention to sourcing issues in their editing who might be willing to review the request? Any help here is appreciated. Thanks, JLD at Walmart (talk) 15:47, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Moo.com edit request – conflict of interest

Hi! I'm staff at MOO – there's a page, Moo.com, for our business but it's inaccurate and out of date. I'd really like to work with someone to make this accurate and up to date, but as I'm an employee it's a conflict. The page is within the scope of this project so I'm wondering if someone would be willing to help me with this? I've posted a [of edit requests on the talk page] itself, and can provide updated references, images, logos and so on. I'd really appreciate any help you can give me! Thanks, AmyAtMOO AmyAtMOO (talk) 12:43, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

WP:CORP and VC funding discussion

Please feel free to join the discussion about adding clarification to WP:CORP regarding venture capital funding, see: Wikipedia talk:Notability (organizations and companies)#Venture Capital funding and company notability -- 1Wiki8........................... (talk) 08:52, 1 October 2016 (UTC)

Request for Aspen Dental article

Hi, I'm Stephanie and I'm here on behalf of my employer ADMI to propose updates to the Aspen Dental article. I am seeking help from independent volunteer Wikipedia editors to review a new draft for the page. Specifically, I'm keen to ensure that it meets guidelines and gain help in implementing changes appropriately. I described my goals for the article in more detail here. I will not be editing the article directly because of my conflict of interest, but I hope an experienced editor is able to help. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks for your consideration. Stephanie from ADMI (talk) 20:32, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

I am back with a request to update the "History" section with this request. Is there someone who is willing to review and implement this update on my behalf? @WhisperToMe: I see you have edited the article before. Might you have a few minutes to help? Stephanie from ADMI (talk) 20:54, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Request for Endurance International Group article

Hi, I'm Melanie. On behalf of my employer, Endurance International Group, I am here to propose updates to the company's Wikipedia article. I am seeking help from volunteer editors to review a proposed draft and make sure that it meets guidelines. I described my goals for the article in more detail here. I will not edit the article directly because of my conflict of interest. Is there a volunteer who is willing to help implement changes appropriately? I am happy to answer any questions you may have. Melanie from Endurance (talk) 16:32, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Websites of defunct companies

Comet Group and Allders are two defunct UK retail companies, which ceased trading in 2012 and 2013 respectively. The articles on both are headed by a "company" infobox, and at the bottom of both boxes there appears a website url. This is obviously meaningless and undesirable, as neither company exists any more: the Comet link is in fact dead, while the Allders domain name appears to have been acquired by somebody with ambitions of reviving the brand online, but the site currently contains minimal information and has nothing to do with the business described in the article. I would like to delete these urls, but if I go into "edit" mode they are not there: they are being generated indirectly by some other means (via the logo?). Can somebody please explain what's going on, and what I need to do to get rid of them. GrindtXX (talk) 00:19, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Now answered (and fixed) via Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). GrindtXX (talk) 21:25, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Request for Maritz, LLC article

Hi, I'm trying to update the Maritz, LLC Wikipedia article on behalf of Maritz Holdings, Inc. Specifically, I am looking to improve the existing infobox with this request. Knowing I have a conflict here, it's best I don't make these changes myself so I've bulleted out reasons for the update and hope someone can review and make those edits. Any questions, just let me know! Thanks. MadisonfromStanding (talk) 18:58, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Moov, Inc (Moov.cc) edit request – conflict of interest

I am a member of the Moov team, effectively new to editing on Wikipedia and tasked with having our page updated. The page for our company is about a year out of date, contains advert material and some other inaccuracies. To avoid a conflict of interest, the WikiProject Companies was recommended by another editor. In an effort not to drive the changes to the page, I have removed edits to our page by this account and flagged it for multiple issues to prevent deletion. We are fully available to assist with images, references and any other additional information that is to be used for the purpose of improving this page and make it more fitting of content expected of wikipedia. I sincerely appreciate any assistance. Matt - Moov, Inc. (talk) 18:03, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Fisker

Recently, Fisker Automotive was moved to Fisker Inc. but these are two separate companies. Henrik Fisker left FA before it died, and its assets were bought out by Wanxiang to create Karma Automotive. So this seems to be conflating two companies together due to having the same founder. Yet Fisker Coachbuild also has the same founder, and was not conflated into this new article. Further, development of the Fisker Karma continued (as the VLF Destino) at yet another company involving Henrik Fisker, VLF Automotive, which is also not part of this "merged" article. This seems misleading, since the two companies are unrelated.

Shouldn't "Fisker Inc." be returned to "Fisker Automotive" (where the edit history is mostly about that) and "Fisker Inc." be split off into a new article instead? -- 65.94.171.217 (talk) 13:53, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

This has now been fixed. Fisker Inc. is the new company, Fisker Automotive is the defunct company and Karma Automotive is the successor to Fisker Automotive. -- 65.94.171.217 (talk) 14:41, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Stockrow

Hello guys,

I have been starting to add links to Stockrow for some companies through the Finance links template. I have been told by Jytdog on my talk page to first ask here how people are comfortable with this before adding more links to this site. Maxime Vernier (talk) 11:20, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

To be clear, I suggested it. Diff. for folks here, stockrow is a fairly new stock-tracking site. See discussion here for example. Jytdog (talk) 11:42, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

SpiderG

Would someone mind taking a look at SpiderG? It's was created yesterday by an WP:SPA and I'm not quite sure if it satisfies WP:NORG. There's lots of links given as references, but no inline citations so the article is kind of a mess. Quite alot of the sources which are provide just seems like trivial coverage, press releases or other primary sources. It's also possible that the article's creator might have a WP:APPARENTCOI because the first edit made after the account was created was the creation of this article. There is also this post at the Teahouse and this post at the Reference desk which might indicate some connection between the company and the creator. The first version of the article seems fairly good for the very first edit of a total newbie, and the same editor also uploaded the company's logo to Commons about 30 minutes after the article was created which once again seems to indicate that this is not the first time they've edited on either site. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:43, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

2016 Community Wishlist Survey Proposal to Revive Popular Pages

Greetings WikiProject Companies/Archive 3 Members!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about a technical proposal to revive your Popular Pages list in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

• Fix and improve Mr.Z-bot's popular pages report

If the above proposal gets in the Top 10 based on the votes, there is a high likelihood of this bot being restored so your project will again see monthly updates of popular pages.

Further, there are over 260 proposals in all to review and vote for, across many aspects of wikis.

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 17:57, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Requesting review of new article

I have been building a basic article for a thought leadership platform The Legacy Lab created by my employer, Team One (advertising agency). I am working to avoid inserting bias or treating this like a marketing piece, in accordance with WP:COI; I recognize that direct editing is discouraged, but I am doing my best to approach it in a neutral way. Any feedback or edits welcome. -PenaCynthia (talk) 18:50, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Crazy Eddie GA Reassessment Notice

I am conducting a GA Reassessment at Talk:Crazy Eddie/GA1. Feel free to improve it per my suggestions there. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 06:15, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Help on Updating ITT Article

Hi,

Declaring my conflict-of-interest: I work with ITT. I have been hoping to get information corrected/updated at the ITT article. Can anyone help? -- 66.251.23.66 (talk) 18:34, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

Appreciate the clarity. Can you please point out the changes requested in article ? Devopam (talk) 07:01, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Requests for the Hilton Worldwide article

Resolved

I've been proposing a series of edit requests on the article's talk page on behalf of Hilton. The first of my two most recent edit requests is to update the article with information about HNA Group agreeing to acquire a 25 percent equity interest in Hilton from Blackstone, and the number of HHonors members. The second request is to correct wording about Hilton Worldwide Holdings turning its hotel holdings into a real estate investment trust, and adding a detail about the company being named one of the "World's 25 Best Multinational Workplaces" by Fortune and Great Place to Work.

I've been granted permission by a reviewing editor to implement the second edit request, but I'd prefer not to edit the article directly because of my COI. I am looking for editors to review and implement these two requests as appropriate, and I'm hoping a WikiProject Companies participant may be available to help. I can respond to questions here or on the article's talk page. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 19:41, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

These two edit requests have been answered. Inkian Jason (talk) 15:41, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Lubrizol edit request

Editors, I am looking for others to consider an edit request at Lubrizol. In my opinion, the article's About section is dated and gives undue weight, so I proposed this draft to replace it. I have discussed my draft with Devopam on the Lubrizol Talk page, but we could benefit from another look. I have a conflict of interest as I work for The Lubrizol Corporation. Can an editor, or editors, review the draft, as well as the discussion on the Lubrizol Talk page? Lz maor (Talk · COI--Lubrizol employee) 18:04, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Pearson's Candy Company

Pearson's Candy Company, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Shearonink (talk) 07:34, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Request to update the Maritz, LLC article

Hello, I'm trying to update the Maritz, LLC Wikipedia article on behalf of Maritz Holdings, Inc. Specifically, I am looking for neutral editors to review the "Corporate overview", "Current subsidiaries", and/or "Former subsidiaries" sections drafted here. As I mentioned in the edit request, I realize this is a lot of content to review, and I am fine with splitting this single request into separate requests for each section, if editors prefer. This request is not to change existing text but to expand information about the company's overall structure and subsidiaries. All of the information is sourced, and I've made neutrality a top priority. I can answer questions on my talk page or within the edit request. Thanks! MadisonfromStanding (talk) 17:25, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Transit Authority of River City

Transit Authority of River City, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 14:13, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Ownership structure of the world's largest companies

I want to add ownership information about the largest companies to Wikipedia. I already started, adding the information to Apple_Inc.#Ownership and Walmart#Ownership. The information is easy to access for companies listed in the US, as Yahoo Finance and the SEC have this information readily available. I would love for other members of the WikiProject to give me feedback, or (ideally) join in the effort. I will definetly do the [[1]] Top 10 over the next few days, but if enough people join in, perhaps this can be broadened. Thanks in advance and all the best, --Lommes (talk) 19:12, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Help with BNY Mellon?

Hi all! Posting a note to make other editors aware of a note I posted to the The Bank of New York Mellon Talk page outlining a few small updates that can be made to the article. I won't make the edits myself, because of my financial conflict of interest: I am monitoring the article on behalf of BNY Mellon. I posted the message a month ago and haven't had any responses, so I thought it made sense to bring it to folks' attention here. I welcome anyone to make the changes or leave me feedback on the Talk page. Thanks! Heatherer (talk) 17:50, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi again. Just pinging this message to let editors know that my request is still open. There are just two changes left to make, which are described here. I don't think either request will take very long to review or implement, so if you have some time, please take a look! Thanks in advance Heatherer (talk) 16:53, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Lubrizol request

Editors, I posted a request for edits on the Lubrizol Talk page. The outdated current article is not divided into any sections, so my request is the first of several to bring structure to the article, while also updating it. I work for Lubrizol and I am aware of my conflict of interest; can an editor, or editors, review the draft and move the edits into the live article if they are neutral and appropriately cited? Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Lz maor (Talk · COI--Lubrizol employee) 17:39, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done Lz maor (Talk · COI--Lubrizol employee) 13:45, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 March 18#File:United States Postal Service Logo.svg

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 March 18#File:United States Postal Service Logo.svg. Marchjuly (talk) 00:04, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Verizon Fios Telephone

Hello WikiProject Companies watchers. I posted an edit request on the Verizon Fios Talk page to clean up and streamline the section on Fios' telephone services, and I think editors here could help.

I work for Verizon and have a conflict of interest so I ask others to look at my drafts and move them into the article if you feel they look good. I'm also happy to take suggestions. Thanks so much, VZBob (talk) 18:30, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Help on creating Zifo RnD Solutions article

Hello everyone! I believe the company I work for, Zifo RnD Solutions, deserves a wiki page, and due to conflict of interest, would not like to create one myself. Can someone please outline the steps I have to take to request an article for the company? Thank you very much. Happy to have reached you all! Ayyappan Ramachandran (talk) 05:48, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Paxos Company Profile

Hi, my name is Dara Orlando and I work at Paxos. I noticed our company page has been flagged as not notable and needing more citations. I have a few of articles I'd like to add as references that I think will help clarify these two points but I want to make sure I'm not violating the code of ethics. What's the best way to go about making these updates? I've listed some references below (and I have more, if necessary).

Thanks so much!

DOrlando (talk) 16:02, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

References

itBit product page

Hi, my name is Dara Orlando and I work for Paxos, the parent company of itBit. I noticed our page on wikipedia was flagged as not notable, but I think I have some references to add that may help. What's the best way to make those edits? I've included some below but can also supply more if necessary.

Thanks!

DOrlando (talk) 16:06, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

References

Newly created Diesel emissions scandal

The article Diesel emissions scandal may need improvements, like content and title change. --George Ho (talk) 22:24, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Upcoming "420 collaboration"

You are invited to participate in the upcoming "420 collaboration", which is being held from Saturday, April 15 to Sunday, April 30, and especially on April 20, 2017! The purpose of the collaboration, which is being organized by WikiProject Cannabis, is to create and improve cannabis-related content at Wikipedia and other Wikimedia projects in a variety of fields, including: culture, health, hemp, history, medicine, politics, and religion. WikiProject Companies participants may be particularly interested in the following categories: Category:Cannabis companies and Category:Cannabis food companies. For more information about this campaign, and to learn how you can help improve Wikipedia, please visit the "420 collaboration" page.

---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:09, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

RfC on the WP:ANDOR guideline

Hi, all. Opinions are needed on the following: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#RfC: Should the WP:ANDOR guideline be softened to begin with "Avoid unless" wording or similar?. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 23:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Help with requested COI edit backlog

There's a big backlog of requested edits from COI editors, and an automatically maintained list at User:AnomieBOT/EDITREQTable. Would anybody here like to clean up some of these in the company area? See, for example,

• W. R. Grace and Company
• Talk:Quantum_Corporation#requestedit

Those two have a complex history of M&A activity and reorganization, and need a neutral update with checking of sources.

Most COI requests contain some combination of facts cited to reliable sources and blatant advertising. Feel free to reject ones that contain obvious ad copy. See the discussion at [[Wikipedia_talk:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Challenges_getting_responses_to_COI_edit_requests]. I've cleaned up a few of these, but there are about 150 pending and this needs more people on it for a while. Thanks. John Nagle (talk) 06:31, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Mark Weinberger: CEO of EY

I uploaded a full draft of an updated and expanded Mark Weinberger article in my user space. Perhaps editors experienced with articles on executives and businesses are interested in reviewing it. Disclosure: I have a WP:COI as I work in media relations at Mr. Weinberger's company EY, so I created an edit request on the article discussion page.

The article is currently marked {{third party}} because it relies too much on primary sources. I hope that my draft fixes that. You can reach out to me here or on the Mark Weinberger Talk page if you have questions. FYI: I also posted a similar note on WikiProject Biography and WikiProject Business. Thanks, RS at EY (talk) 05:47, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

This has been done. RS at EY (talk) 17:17, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Neuralink debate

I am currently engaged in a discussion with another editor on Talk:Neuralink#Musk's timeframes about whether these edits violate WP:CRYSTAL and/or WP:UNDUE. A third opinion would be much appreciated. — Bilorv_(talk)^(c)(e) 22:15, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Citation overkill proposal at WP:Citation overkill talk page

Opinions are needed on the following: Wikipedia talk:Citation overkill#Citations. A permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 07:06, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Blue Apron company page

Hi, my name is Louise Ward and I work at Blue Apron. I'm hoping to add some basic information to our company page (currently classified as a Stub), but would appreciate any guidance the community can give me to ensure I'm doing so in the right way, and the content I'm proposing is good. I've proposed some things to the Talk page for consideration. Let me know if anyone is interested/has time to help guide me.

Louise.ward (talk)Louise Ward, Blue Apron —Preceding undated comment added 18:46, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Monarch Holidays/Cosmos Holidays page split request

Hello, I work in the marketing department at Cosmos Tours Ltd and would like to request edits to the Monarch Holidays page. As of April 1, Cosmos regained the full rights and licenses to the ‘Cosmos’ brand from Monarch Holidays and changed our trading name from ‘Cosmos Tours and Cruises’ to ‘Cosmos’ on April 24, in conjunction with a site relaunch

Currently, the Cosmos Holidays page redirects to Monarch Holidays. After doing some research, I thought the best way to update both pages was to split them. As outlined in the Wikipedia:Splitting instructions, I have placed a split request at the top of the Monarch Holidays page. I have also supplied a list of sources detailing the terms of the split.

As I am aware I have a conflict of interest, I have not made any further edits. Can Wiki Editors please advise whether they’re able to carry out the split, and if there is anything else I need to do from my end? If needed, I am happy to write new copy for the Cosmos Holidays page and save it as a draft for Wiki Editors to review to ensure it’s in line with WP:NEUTRAL.

References

Emersonpovey (talk) 13:49, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

I don't see this happening at all, Cosmos is in effect a new company split off from its former owner. We don't consider new companies to be notable except in very rare cases. I don't consider the source you provided to be reliable as it is a very specific industry publication of the type that tends to promote the industry. And in most cases I don't think that travel agents are encyclopedic. In any case I've removed the split tag.

BTW, you need to declare your paid status elsewhere, e.g. on your user page. See WP:PAID Smallbones_(smalltalk) 14:04, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

PAR Technology

PAR Technology (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Would someone from this WikiProject mind taking a look at this article and assessing it? It's fairly new and a bit promotional sounding. There are also a couple of single-sentence sections and other excessive details which probably can either be incorporated into another part of the article or removed altogether. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:44, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Popular pages report

We – Community Tech – are happy to announce that the Popular pages bot is back up-and-running (after a one year hiatus)! You're receiving this message because your WikiProject or task force is signed up to receive the popular pages report. Every month, Community Tech bot will post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Companies/Archive 3/Popular pages with a list of the most-viewed pages over the previous month that are within the scope of WikiProject Companies.

We've made some enhancements to the original report. Here's what's new:

• The pageview data includes both desktop and mobile data.
• The report will include a link to the pageviews tool for each article, to dig deeper into any surprises or anomalies.
• The report will include the total pageviews for the entire project (including redirects).

We're grateful to Mr.Z-man for his original Mr.Z-bot, and we wish his bot a happy robot retirement. Just as before, we hope the popular pages reports will aid you in understanding the reach of WikiProject Companies, and what articles may be deserving of more attention. If you have any questions or concerns please contact us at m:User talk:Community Tech bot.

Warm regards, the Community Tech Team 17:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

WP:NCCORP

An editor has proposed a change to the naming conventions guideline. Opinions welcome at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(companies)#Official title in lede. UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:29, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Long lists of store locations

I just replaced, with a very short summary, a frequently-changing and, IMO, excessively-detailed section from Uniqlo. The section detailed the total number of stores per country, for numerous countries. I want to ask for other editors' feedback: do you agree with this edit, and if not, why not? In the same vein, should Ibis_(hotel)#Hotel_locations also be replaced with a concise summary? Is there yet any Wikipedia policy on this sort of thing? zazpot (talk) 14:37, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

What you did is correct.Too many articles have laundrylists like this, that replicate content from the company's website or serve as a directory. This violates WP:PROMO (which makes it clear that WP is not a proxy for a company's website) as well as WP:NOTDIRECTORY. We are an encyclopedia and high level information, ideally independently sourced (in other words, not from the company website) is what we do here. Jytdog (talk) 18:36, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Edit requests and move discussion re: Hilton Inc.

Resolved

On behalf of Hilton, I've submitted 3 edit requests for some small updates to the Hilton Inc. article. Given my conflict of interest, I do not edit Wikipedia articles directly, so I'm seeking one or more volunteers to implement these article improvements. You can view the first request here: Talk:Hilton_Inc.#Edit_request.

I should also note the ongoing discussion regarding the article's title, which can be seen near the bottom of the article's talk page. Some editors have suggested merging the Hilton Inc. article and Hilton Hotels & Resorts, so some updates may be needed to differentiate the flagship brand from the parent company. I invite WikiProject Companies participants to contribute to the discussion. Thank you. Inkian Jason (talk) 16:18, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Just a quick update: The move discussion has concluded, but you can view remaining edit requests at Talk:Hilton_Worldwide#Edit_request. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 15:08, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

These requests have been answered. I've marked this section as resolved. Inkian Jason (talk) 15:21, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

InfoTrack

Hello WikiProject Companies watchers. I'm trying to edit the InfoTrack page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InfoTrack) to fix the issues the current pages has, can anybody help me to improve this article in order to meet the guidelines of Wikipedia?

Any help is well appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thehub2017 (talk • contribs) 01:14, 29 May 2017 (UTC)

Merge discussion input needed

Request received on 12 February 2017 to Merge DMA Design into Rockstar North. Rationale: Since they are the same company (including being the same legal entity), they share the same history. The latter article already includes about all of the information from the prior, just in a different writing style, so it makes no sense to keep both. The DMA Design article should be redirected, and the lede and infobox of Rockstar North be adapted to DMA Design's. Discussion >>>here<<<. Thanks. GenQuest ^{"Talk to Me"} 16:41, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Article for AptarGroup

Hi,

My name is Diego and I work with the AptarGroup.

We're a $2.3B publicly traded company and so I figure that we meet the notability requirements here.

Obviously, I have a conflict of interest. Rather than make work for someone, I figured I would post a stub article to my sandbox for independent volunteers to react to.

Let me know what you think. -- Delgadilld (talk) 19:59, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Jaeger Kahlen Partner logo.svg

Copyright status of the image File:Jaeger Kahlen Partner logo.svg is discussed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2017 June 2#File:Jaeger Kahlen Partner logo.svg, where you are invited. --George Ho (talk) 00:59, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Porter Novelli requested edits

Hi all, my colleague Angela and I are proposing several edits and updates to Porter Novelli. We've provided full sources and details on the article's Talk page. We both work for PN, so we won't edit the article directly, and would appreciate any help or feedback. Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 20:33, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Paxos Updates

Hi, I work for Paxos as the head of marketing. Our wikipedia page has been flagged as needing further verification and I have some citations that I think can be added to help. Also, we have a new board member we'd like to add to the overall description (Duncan Niederauer - see references below). I know that I cannot make these edits, so I'm hoping someone else will help us out.

Thanks so much!

DOrlando (talk) 14:41, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

ON DUNCAN:

IN GENERAL:

References

EF Hutton Article

Hello, because of my COI, I won't edit directly but E. F. Hutton & Co. needs to be updated to reflect the company's current status. Updated info as well as more background info can be found below. If anyone can help that would be great. I'd do it myself because of that darn COI policy. Also very new so if I do anything wrong when posting please correct me. Cheers

https://www.thestreet.com/story/14021511/1/now-when-e-f-hutton-talks-your-iphone-can-do-the-listening.html

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/business/2017/01/01/1-ef-hutton-brand-relaunched-as-low-cost-startup-brokerage-will-people-listen.html

InternMBT (talk) 18:12, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Help with LegalShield article

Hello! I'm reaching out here to see if editors from this WikiProject would be interested to help in reviewing an updated draft for the LegalShield Wikipedia article. As disclosure, I'm working on behalf of LegalShield and The Pollack PR Marketing Group as part of my work at Beutler Ink. Given that editors watching this WikiProject are used to working on company Wikipedia articles, including those that have been through significant changes (legal issues, renaming, acquisition), I'm hoping someone from here can help review my proposed draft and implement its content appropriately. If you have time to take a look, you can see more details here. Thanks in advance for any help. 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 21:23, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

SMC Global Securities Limited

Would someone from this WikiProject mind taking a look at SMC Global Securities Limited and assessing it? I tried cleaning out some of the promotion stuff, but the sourcing is not very good and the company does not seem to meet WP:NORG. There may also be some COI editing involved by different IPs. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:56, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

WP:Citation overkill RfC

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Citation overkill#Should this essay be changed to encourage more citations?. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 01:54, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Help with Vianovo?

Resolved

I'm reaching out to see if any editors here have interest in helping me update the entry for Vianovo. I posted a set of updates on the Talk page over a month ago and left messages on various WikiProjects, but haven't had any responses as of yet. I appreciate that there's a big backlog of COI requests right now, but I thought I might just ping here since it's a quick request. Thanks so much for your time! Heatherer (talk) 17:59, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello, I am continuing work on the Vianovo article in place of my (now former) colleague, User:Heatherer. I am still looking for volunteers to review one or both of the edit requests seen here. I'm happy to respond to any questions or concerns on the article's talk page, or on my user talk page. Thanks for your consideration! Inkian Jason (talk) 18:06, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

The edit requests have been answered, so I am marking this section as resolved. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 16:17, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

itBit changes

Hi, I work for itBit as the head of marketing. Our wikipedia page has been flagged as potentially not meeting Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations and I have some citations that I think can be added to help. I know that I can't make these changes myself, so I'm hoping someone else will help us out.

Thanks so much!

DOrlando (talk) 14:44, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

References

 Not done – duplicate edit request. Altamel (talk) 02:06, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Scottish Financial Enterprise

The article Scottish Financial Enterprise has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

failure to address unreferenced material and reads similar to more of an advertisement then actually an article

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. BSOleader (talk) 21:55, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Outerwall - Company no longer exists - I made initial change to lead paragraph

Hello hard-working WP:Companies folks. :o)

This is just an FYI for y'all - Outerwall, who sadly went to corporate heaven last year, needs some updating/redirecting when you can get to it. Redbox and ecoATM, former components of Outerwall, Inc., still redirect to the Outerwall article, although Redbox and Gazelle (Internet company) have their own articles. I changed the first two sentences of the article but did not have time for more, plus this is definitely not an area of significant knowledge for me! So I turn it over to those of you who do possess the expertise. :O)   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) 04:23, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

Evaluation of an article's quality and importance

One of the articles I visited had the following message in its talk page:

"This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks."

• Where can I find that list of open tasks?
• How are the quality and importance of an article evaluated? I see top, high, mid low and FA, FL, A, GA..., C, Start, Stub, ... How does this grading work?

Atlassian (talk) 15:06, 2 July 2017 (UTC)

Hello Atlassian! I am not a member of this project, but I think I can answer your question. See Wikipedia:WikiProject Companies/Assessment for information on article quality and importance criteria. All the best   - Mark D Worthen PsyD (talk) 06:34, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Format of list-of-companies tables

I see there is {{Company list legend}}, which serves as the legend for the background colors used at List of companies of Finland and others (155 articles in total). But the articles' tables each hard-code the color value in each row. This makes for a very large task if someone wanted to alter the color choices. I noticed this situation via this well-meaning edit by User:Kj1595, which did not appear to be done in concert with updating all the tables who use the template as its legend. I therefore undid that edit, but no easy way to know if in the 3 months it existed, anyone edited a table to use those "new" colors instead. In order to keep everything in sync, I propose that the special (non-default for table) colors be offloaded into separate templates that are then transcluded both in the tables and in the legend. I'm not familiar with this genre of articles, so I wanted to check with others before plunging ahead. Any thoughts? DMacks (talk) 09:44, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

As a side concern, the gray of "defunct" is (nearly?) the same as that of a wikitable header row. That could confuse readers into thinking these rows are mid-table header lines instead of entries of a special type. DMacks (talk) 09:46, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

And MOS:COLOR has advice on general color choices for distinction, and the importance of not using just this background-color variation to convey encyclopediac content. DMacks (talk) 09:54, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Arg. I missed that change. Transcluding the color codes sounds like a great idea and would facilitate future changes to the colors themselves. Happy to do the dirty work of updating the articles if you can set up the templates; I pass through them every few months to update and refresh so I can add that to my list of things to do.

No issues with any evolution of the colors/intensity themselves - they were random selections.

The intent was was to use coloring to highlight material already in the entry. For example, defunct companies (gray), will almost always have "defunct since XXXX' in the description field. State-owned will usually note that as well, but I'd have to check and see how fastidious I was with that. May have missed many.

I'm excited to see someone put thought into this. My original thought was to move this series of articles (the "list of companies of COUNTRY" articles) more towards something of sortable value, instead of just useless duplications of the categories. Kuru (talk) 16:53, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Quick'n'dirty start: {{Company-list table entry}} (documented with examples). I tried to keep the syntax as similar to the current table syntax as possible to make it easy to convert to using it. DMacks (talk) 19:36, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Brilliant; looks great - I'll convert a few of the low entry "why does this article even exist" countries this weekend by hand to see how you feel. I should be able to work up a macro to convert the larger articles, but there were a few compromises in table structures for some countries that may be difficult to accommodate. I can document the exceptions as I go. Kuru (talk) 23:52, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

COI in your interest

Hello, there is a COI request at Talk:Cheyne Capital Management that could use a review. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 22:15, 15 July 2017 (UTC)

Need Articles Written Please

Hello,

I have listed three businesses I need articles written for please:

The companies are:

Avis Cart Rental
60 Laguna Drive
San Pedro, Ambergris Caye, Belize
501-627-5257
About: They offer golf cart rentals for San Pedro, Ambergris Caye, Belize. Their prices are low and their service is high.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Av-is_Cart_Rental&action=edit&redlink=1

Paradise Guy
40 Barrier Reef Drive #1,
San Pedro, Ambergris Caye, Belize
720-552-8005
About: Real Estate Professional living the dream on Ambergris Caye, Belize & helping others do the same.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paradise_Guy&action=edit&redlink=1

Belize Real Estate MLS
99 Boca Del Rio Drive
San Pedro, Ambergris Caye
Belize, Central America
1-888-980-6448
About: Belize Real Estate MLS has every property & business for sale in Belize. They also have free reports on Belize.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Belize_Real_Estate_MLS&action=edit&redlink=1
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Belizeguy67 (talk • contribs) 01:46, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

RfC: Red links in infoboxes

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#RfC: Red links in infoboxes. A WP:Permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 13:42, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Golf Galaxy

Hi all. I work for DICK'S Sporting Goods, which has owned the Golf Galaxy retail chain since 2006. If you search "golf galaxy" on Wikipedia, you are currently redirected to the DICK'S Sporting Goods page, where there is a brief mention of the Golf Galaxy brand. Also, if you do a Google search for "golfgalaxy.com," the Golfsmith Wikipedia page is featured in the Google Knowledge Graph in the search results -- I believe this is because DICK'S recently bought Golfsmith out of bankruptcy and converted 36 Golfsmith locations to Golf Galaxy stores, but there is not a Golf Galaxy Wikipedia page for Google to feature.

To avoid a conflict of interest, I requested that a separate page be created for Golf Galaxy, rather than try to write it on my own. I believe a separate page is warranted, as Golf Galaxy is now one of the largest specialty golf retailers in the world. Do you have any advice on steps I can take to help get the Golf Galaxy page published? Raymond.judy (talk) 20:30, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

COI request

Hello, I was wondering if anyone was willing to take a look at my request over at Talk:Big Y? I have a COI as a former employee of one of their supermarkets, as explained in my request. I have also posted this over at WP:BUSINESS to get feedback from both projects. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 23:46, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Help with ICF International?

Hello! Editors interested in company articles on Wikipedia might be interested in reviewing this edit request regarding ICF International. A review of the article's edit history will show that the bulk of the text was deleted, due to apparent copyright violations dating back years. Now all that remains is essentially a stub consisting of a four-sentence introduction and another one-sentence section. I am proposing a new and more informative version, and I'm here asking for another editor to review and consider implementing my proposed edits; I am working on behalf of ICF, as disclosed on the article's Talk page. Hope to see you over there, and let me know if you have any questions. :) Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 17:07, 24 July 2017 (UTC)

Never mind, this has been done. WWB Too (Talk · COI) 21:20, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Edit request: BNY Mellon

Hello, I've been working with BNY Mellon to suggest improvements to the article about the company. I posted this edit request asking for routine updates to the article, including fresh figures and the most up-to-date information on company executives and board members. I posted the edit request a few weeks back and have yet to hear from editors. Perhaps editors at WikiProject Companies are interested in reviewing the proposed updates? Thanks in advance, Danilo Two (talk) 16:14, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Companies categories -- should they only contain companies?

Hello, I have assumed that categories such as Category:IPMG Companies should only contain companies, in the same way that alumnus categories should only contain alumni. My assumption has been challenged in this edit and some related edits. Am I mistaken in my assumption about this?

(Also am I right in thinking that the category name is mis-capitalised?) MPS1992 (talk) 19:24, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

Anyone? MPS1992 (talk) 20:14, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Edit Request for The Doe Run Company

Hello! I'm an employee of The Doe Run Company and I'm here as a representative of the company. Continuing my work to update the company's Wikipedia article, I have saved an expanded and updated draft here, and posted an edit request on the article's talk page. My goals are to correct factual inaccuracies, source all content, and provide a more thorough overview of the company's operations, among others outlined in more detail in the edit request. I have posted similar requests for help at WikiProjects Mining and Missouri (where the company is based), but so far I've seen no replies to the proposed changes. Would someone from WikiProject Companies be able to give this a look over? TS at Doe Run (talk) 12:17, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Harassment allegations in company article - ScoopWhoop

I am a bit unsure about the recently added harassment allegations in this article. They are sourced and a quick Google search confirms that this incident got some media attention (I couldn't find more recent updates unfortunately). However, without a conviction these claims are still allegations and their inclusion without additional context seems like undue weight, and may be damaging for the company and their employees. I am not involved with this company (or against it in any way), but such serious allegations should be handled as carefully as possible. At the very least, the company's stance on the accusations should be included somehow. Any advice or improvements from other editors of company-related articles would be appreciated. GermanJoe (talk) 14:58, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

The names -- and job roles -- of the accused persons cannot stay in the article based on a single source that talks only about an allegation, so I have trimmed out those details according to WP:BLP. MPS1992 (talk) 20:32, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Inclusion in this project

The page for the Scripto company would probably be of interest to this group.Gooseneck41 (talk) 13:41, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Warwick Energy Group

Warwick Energy Group (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Recently created article which appears to have originally submitted as Draft:Warwick Energy Group, but was moved to the mainspace by another editor before the AfC could be finished. Would someone from this WikiProject mind taking a look at it and assessing it? Thanks in advance. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:29, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

UBoston Institute

UBoston Introduction UBoston Institute is a nonprofit educational organization that provides academic and career opportunities for international students and recent immigrants. For over 10 years, we have successfully helped students from different ages and backgrounds find the programs that could lead them to the paths that they defined for themselves.

Located in Boston metropolitan area, UBoston is led by experienced professors, experts and graduates of Harvard, MIT and other top higher education institutes. “Fit, Support & Care” are the core values this group of leaders keeps in mind. UBoston not only seeks the program that fits the student best, but also provides endless support and family-like care for its students, especially the ones that at middle or high school age. Cooperated with 70 high schools and 17 universities, UBoston mainly focuses on the following programs. Boston Precollege Boston Precollege program is designed for international middle and high school students and their families. Besides the application and transferring process, UBoston provides after-school coaching, culture introduction and networking opportunities to these international students. We also work closely with their parents to keep tract of students’ academic progress and personal development. And act as their U.S. parents whenever there is an emergency.

Background Enrichment The Background Enhancement is a short-term program scheduled for undergraduate students, graduates and researchers who desire an unforgettable scientific experience at top research institutes. UBoston offers a great opportunity for students who are excited about biology research, medical development to learn about the cutting-edge technology and laboratory operating protocols. Depends on the time frame of the visit, students may have the chance to participate in international academic conferences, patent application processes and NGO activities. Led by Harvard and MIT professors, post doctors, and senior Ph.D. candidates, this program provides students with the real working and living research environment. We believe this unique and engaged experience will helps them define the career paths, which lead them to their dream lives. MBA Partner with top business schools in the US, such as Harvard, MIT, UMass, UBoston provides students with application advisory, financial assistance and career development services. UBoston also provides Pre-MBA program for these who prefer to gain basic business knowledge and improve their English skills prior to MBA programs.

Professional Training Professional Training program enhances young professionals with particular skills. Currently we focus on the fields of high-end automotive repair, nursing, bilingual teacher training and consulting training in study abroad. Trainees take courses at our partner schools and get internship opportunities to have the hands-on and real world experience. Starting from day 1, UBoston provides career service to help them understand the job market and build up their job-hunting abilities. Trainees who complete the program successfully will get the certificates or associates’ degrees depend on the program he/she chooses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Superbovy (talk • contribs) 23:00, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Edit request to add logo to infobox

Resolved

I submitted an edit request on the AutoGravity's talk page to add File:AutoGravity logo.png to the infobox. I've been given permission to add the logo myself, but given my conflict of interest, I'd prefer not to edit the article directly. Is there a WikiProject Companies member who can help? Inkian Jason (talk) 15:13, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

The logo has been added, so I am marking this section as resolved. Inkian Jason (talk) 16:49, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

RfC: Should the WP:TALK guideline discourage interleaving?

Opinions are needed on the following matter: Wikipedia talk:Talk page guidelines#RfC: Should the guideline discourage interleaving? #2. A permalink for it is here. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 20:40, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

TVS Insurance Broking Limited

TVS Insurance Broking Limited (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Would someone mind assessing this and seeing if it's notable enough for a stand-alone article? The sources look primary and it might have been created and edited by persons connected to the company (see User talk:Anithasree.1990#Conflict of interest editing). It's been tagged with {{Notability}}, but a very quick WP:BEFORE of the company's name does not show any of the WP:CORPDEPTH type coverage typically required for companies; all I see from Googling is lots of trivial mentions. Article was also moved from the draft namespace by its creator, so it wasn't vetted by WP:AfC. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:37, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Update request for article on Hikvision Inc.

Hi. I’m Jason and I work for a company called Hikvision. There are some fairly material accuracy / completeness issues in the article but, obviously, I want to play by the rules. I left a comment over on the Talk page of our article and haven’t gotten any traction. Can anyone help? -- Skywood76 (talk) 16:46, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Responded on user's talk page with instructions on how to make an edit request when a COI is involved. --CNMall41 (talk) 20:59, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Infobox company / Headquarters location

All, currently there's a lot of movement with companies based in Catalonia given the political uncertainty posed by the Catalan independence referendum, 2017. A number of firms has announced (and in some cases executed) a move of their legal headquarters or registered office from locations in Catalonia to other Spanish regions. Now in most those cases, this is "just" the change of the legal main office. Their headoffices or main administrations remain where they are (for now at least). I wanted to bring to this group for discussion how to handle those articles, especially the infoboxes. In some cases, they now reflect the new registered office, in some cases they show both the registered office and the administrative headquarters, and some other cases show the legacy office. Given the situation is somewhat in flux, I personally prefer to show both the main admin office and the legal office. However the question to this group is, is the intention of the "headquarters" to reflect where the company is legally registered or where their main place of business is, where the CEO sits, etc.? _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 09:43, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Request to update the Teradata article's "Technology and products" section

Hello. I am a Teradata employee tasked with suggesting updates and other improvements to the company's Wikipedia article. I'm not editing the article directly and I'm looking for uninvolved editors to review my second edit request to update the "Technology and products" section. You can view my request here: Talk:Teradata#Request_to_update_.22Technology_and_products.22. Is someone at WikiProject Companies able to assist with this particular request? Dodds_Writer (Talk · Disclosure: Employee of Teradata) 23:02, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Worthington National Bank for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Worthington National Bank is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Worthington National Bank until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Theprussian (talk) 16:53, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Lubrizol edit requests 2017

Editors, I posted a request for edits on the Lubrizol Talk page. With this request I ask editors to update the revenue and employee figures in the infobox and introduction. Here I ask editors to clean up the History section and add a paragraph that can replace potentially misleading material from Operations. Lastly, there is this request asking editors to include the number of Lubrizol facilities and offices to Operations. Whoisjohngalt had answered the last request, but it was reverted by Smartse because I had used Lubrizol's website to verify the information. A third voice would be helpful in reviewing that piece of the edit request. I work for Lubrizol and I am aware of my conflict of interest; can an editor, or editors, review the draft and move the edits into the live article if they are neutral and appropriately cited? Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Lz maor (Talk · COI--Lubrizol employee) 12:23, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

• Dear Lz maor, I've been on vacation in Cuba fort he past week and just getting back online. It's a wonder that we have any editors left here on Wikipedia with the high level of bureaucracy and tedium. I will take another look when I get back to a desk. Have a good weekend. Whoisjohngalt (talk) 21:05, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

@Whoisjohngalt: Sounds good! Hope you had a nice vacation. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Lz maor (Talk · COI--Lubrizol employee) 17:55, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

@Whoisjohngalt: Just dropping a friendly note to see if you still have time to look at this again. Thanks, Lz maor (Talk · COI--Lubrizol employee) 19:18, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

RenovaCare

Would somebody from this WikProject take a look at RenovaCare and assess it? It's a fairly new article which was directly added to the mainspace. None of the content is supported by citations to reliable sources and it's not clear whether it meets WP:ORG. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:56, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

New article draft review (I have COI): PODfather

Hi all; I've written a draft page for PODFather (software company in Edinburgh) here: User:Beveradb/Draft:PODFather but as I work there and I'm fairly new to Wikipedia (well, lurker for 8 years but only minor edits), I'd appreciate somebody else's input to check my tone doesn't come across as biased, as recommended in Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations. If somebody experienced could take a look at it, and if they consider it worth adding turn it into a real article that would be much appreciated! Andrew Beveridge 12:22, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Andrew, Thanks for flagging this up. First of all, if you work for the company, you need to ensure you follow the paid editor procedure. Even if you are not directly instructed by your company to do so, it will be assumed you are a paid editor given you receive a pay cheque from the firm. Paid editors are encouraged not to author articles and request changes via the talk page (as opposed to making changes themselves). Beyond COI and tonality, the other key test is if the firm is notable for inclusion in WP. I had a read through the article and the sources and I'm not immediately convinced that notability is achieved. We would be looking to independent, editorial coverage in reputable media to assess if a company is notable. Sources 1,2,4,5 are not good as they are effectively self-written. 3 is just the write up of this press release, so does not count as independent. 6,7 and 10 also read like routing reporting or write ups of press releases (which I can't find, but anything the contains "CEO says...." and lots of positive use cases usually stems from PR). 8,9 and 11 are from customers or business partners, so independence doubtful. I'd suggest to dig out come further sources to see if notability can be shown. If you have any questions, feel fee to drop me a note on my talk page. _pseudonym Jake Brockman ^talk 11:01, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Women in Red November contest open to all

		Announcing Women in Red's November 2017 prize-winning world contest Contest details: create biographical articles for women of any country or occupation in the world: November 2017 WiR Contest Read more about how Women in Red is overcoming the gender gap: WikiProject Women in Red
		(To subscribe: Women in Red/English language mailing list and Women in Red/international list. Unsubscribe: Women in Red/Opt-out list)

--Ipigott (talk) 07:39, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Proposed updates to Pitney Bowes article

Resolved

On behalf of Pitney Bowes, I've proposed an expanded and updated article as part of my work at Beutler Ink. I've saved my draft in full here, and submitted an edit request at Talk:Pitney Bowes to update the infobox and add the proposed "Overview" section. Given my conflict of interest, I will not edit the article directly and seek uninvolved editors to review the draft for accuracy, neutrality, and verifiability. I will be submitting additional edit requests to address the article's other sections later, but for now I'm wondering if a WikiProject Philately member may be willing to help with this initial request? I can answer questions on my user talk page or on the article's talk page. Thank you, Inkian Jason (talk) 16:02, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

 Done This edit request has been answered, so I am marking this section as resolved. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 15:17, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Draft for Web.com article for consideration

Resolved

On behalf of Web.com via Burson-Marsteller, and as part of my work at Beutler Ink, I've submitted an expanded and updated draft of the Web.com article for consideration at Talk:Web.com. I am looking for an uninvolved editor to review this draft for accuracy and neutrality, and to copy over content appropriately as a replacement of the current article, which is severely problematic, as evidenced by the 5 tags seen at the top.

Is a member of WikiProject Companies willing to take a look at the draft? It is not terribly lengthy or controversial, and I am more than happy to split the edit request into multiple if editors prefer to review one section at a time. Thanks for your consideration. Inkian Jason (talk) 15:18, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

The edit request has been answered, so I am marking this section as resolved. Inkian Jason (talk) 20:55, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

New Article for Basilinna LLC

Hi all. My name is Morgan and I work for Basilinna LLC running their communications. I would like to get an article written on the company, and obviously want to play by the rules, so I added Basilinna LLC to the Requested Articles [[2]] and would love some help getting a page up. Thanks Morganroutman (talk) 15:11, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Morganroutman, the first thing you need if you want an article is reliable sources talking about the company -- not just mentioning it in passing, not including them in a list with no commentary, and not talking about an employee. The links you included in the article request don't seem to meet this criteria, and my first quick Google search didn't show anything. If you can supply at least two sources that meet this criteria, we can go forward. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:19, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Updates to Sageworks

Hi! I'm reaching out to see if members of WikiProject Companies would be able to look at some proposed updates for the Sageworks article. In full disclosure, I'm here on behalf of Sageworks as part of my work with Beutler Ink. I believe there are some issues with the page's current content in terms of sourcing and due weight and I'd like to offer some suggestions to improve the page. To start with, I've suggested a proposal for the History section, to begin with something neutral and where it's a case of simply providing more encyclopedic content based on reliable sources.

A quick note about the history on the page prior to my involvement: A couple of years ago, individuals from Sageworks edited without disclosure, created multiple accounts, and the accounts were rightly blocked for sockpuppetry; Sageworks understand and do not intend to appeal the block or try to directly edit the page again. There was also at least one editor involved in discussions and editing the article whose opinions and suggestions appear to be motivated by a dislike for the company. Because of this history and the debates over content on the Talk page, I think fresh eyes on the article in general would be helpful. If there's any feedback or questions, please let me know. Thanks in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 17:43, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Following up to say this request has been reviewed. Of course if anyone has an interest in taking a look and has any questions, I'm more than happy to discuss. Cheers, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 21:11, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

List of Locations

Hello everyone, I am relatively new here, but I do have a question. I am considering creating a list of locations for Dave & Buster's on Wikipedia, as the sports bar arcade has 103 locations at this moment (with more to come very soon). I don't care if it is part of the Dave & Buster's article or a separate place, I just had the idea in mind. However, since this is my first time doing something like this, I have a few questions:

• Besides the location and the opening date, is there anything else specific I would need to add in a list like this?
• Are there any articles of what I am trying to do for reference? I have not seen any myself.
• Is a list of locations for a business like this allowed on Wikipedia?

JE98 (talk) 19:52, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

That is content for their website. Wikipedia is not a proxy for a company website, per WP:PROMO. Additionally, Wikipedia is not a directory, per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Jytdog (talk) 19:54, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Draft:Group SJR

On behalf of Group SJR, I've submitted draft articles for both the company and its CEO (see Draft:Alexander Jutkowitz) as part of my work at Beutler Ink. Given my conflict of interest, I will not publish either article to the main space and ask uninvolved editors to review both for accuracy, neutrality, and verifiability. Is there a WikiProject Companies member who is willing to take a look at Draft:Group SJR for possible move into the main space? I plan to upload the company's logo for the infobox once the article is live. Thanks for your consideration, Inkian Jason (talk) 19:09, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

More input needed at WP:Articles for deletion/Full Genomes Corporation

The article's author is a good faith paid editor, the CEO of the company. Doug Weller talk 19:26, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation links on pages tagged by this wikiproject

Wikipedia has many thousands of wikilinks which point to disambiguation pages. It would be useful to readers if these links directed them to the specific pages of interest, rather than making them search through a list. Members of WikiProject Disambiguation have been working on this and the total number is now below 20,000 for the first time. Some of these links require specialist knowledge of the topics concerned and therefore it would be great if you could help in your area of expertise.

A list of the relevant links on pages which fall within the remit of this wikiproject can be found at http://69.142.160.183/~dispenser/cgi-bin/topic_points.py?banner=WikiProject_Companies

Please take a few minutes to help make these more useful to our readers.— Rod ^talk 14:32, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Move and Realtor.com drafts

On behalf of Move, I am proposing expanded and updated Move (company) and Realtor.com articles. Given my conflict of interest, I will not edit either article directly and ask independent editors to review them for accuracy, neutrality, and verifiability. During this project, Move has provided feedback to ensure accuracy. I've saved my Move draft here and my Realtor.com draft here. Both articles have edit requests on their respective talk pages, which you're welcome to review if you're interested. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 16:30, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

I've had a hard time getting a volunteer to review the Realtor.com draft in its entirety, so I've split the edit request into separate, smaller requests. Currently, I am seeking help adding the "Overview" section seen at Talk:Realtor.com#"Overview", which has just six sentences. Is someone willing to review this section to help improve the (currently unsourced) Realtor.com article? I am still looking for assistance with the Move draft, too. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 20:26, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Jaeger Kahlen Partner

Is the company Jaeger Kahlen Partner notable? If so, the article needs fixing by those interested. George Ho (talk) 09:58, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Aiflc

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

No valid references, non-notable, and unverifiable. See Talk:Aiflc.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Mathglot (talk) 01:44, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

General Motors

Need some help over at General Motors. Have and editor that has tagged the article with a neutral point of view tag....but I am not sure what the concern is. All they have metioned is they would like to see death rates and I think they are saying the article reads like an add. I will research the death rates....but not sure about the add thing as the article looks like other big 5 car articles.--Moxy (talk) 04:18, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

Rolls-Royce

Rolls Royce is divided into a confusing set of articles based on changes in its corporate structure and ownership over time. Following a single product line, such as cars or aircraft engines, requires slogging through multiple articles. Would it make sense to build a single cohesive article about the company, similar to Chrysler? –dlthewave ☎ 22:41, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Yes, but then it wouldn't be about companies, would it? Eddaido (talk) 00:02, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

It seems to be the norm to have one article that covers the entire history of a company, even if it has gone through multiple changes in name or ownership. I would say that Rolls-Royce is a single business that has existed since 1904 and Rolls-Royce Holdings, Rolls-Royce Group, etc. are merely non-notable holding companies that can be covered in the same article. Volvo Cars would be another example of a brand that has been bought and sold multiple times, yet is covered in a single article. –dlthewave ☎ 03:57, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

They are very far from being "non-notable" holding companies, the subject of what was then seen as a national disaster. If you wish to read it as a continuing business you very easily may. Eddaido (talk) 07:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

What do you mean by "a company" as identified in your second paragraph? i.e. "entire history of a company" Eddaido (talk) 07:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Draft:D+S communication center management

Hello, could somebody please have a look at my draft? The German Wikipedia confirmed the notability of this company already and as we all know they are much pickier than you guys. This is the English version of that German article on one of Germany's "Hidden Champion(s)". Enjoy.Don Aslan (talk) 18:35, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

RfC to raise NCORP standards

Please see Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#RfC:_Raising_NCORP_standards Jytdog (talk) 02:36, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

withdrew it - discussion is ongoing at Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(organizations_and_companies)#RfC_discussion. Jytdog (talk) 16:35, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Appropriate to add mention of current and former CEOs in company article's prose?

Hello. I submitted a request to add mention of the current and former CEOs to the Iteris article's prose. However, my edit request was rejected because the current CEO is already mentioned in the infobox. The reviewing editor used WP:NOTDIRECTORY as a reason for not adding mention of key leadership to the prose. I'm looking for more clarification on the type of information about key employees that is standard for company articles, since there's a variety of ways this is dealt with, even between FA and GA articles, and I've not been able to find any guidelines that give more information on specific content that company articles should contain. Can any WikiProject Companies members confirm what CEO / employee details should be included? To me, it seems like a basic addition, but I want to make sure I'm understanding what's current consensus. Thanks. Inkian Jason (talk) 16:43, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't think there's any guideline on it, but I agree with the reviewer who declined the edit request. A list of non-notable CEO's without any context is vacuous information, it doesn't contribute to an understanding of the article's topic. What would be valuable information would be something about how a particular CEO influenced the company, like "Jane Smith became CEO in 1995 and instituted a new strategy that led to...", or something about how that person fits into the company's history, like "As part of efforts to distance itself from the scandal, the company appointed John Jones, a former Eagle Scout, as CEO." Toohool (talk) 19:06, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

@Toohool: Thanks for your feedback. I do understand what you mean, and while I still understand infoboxes to be summaries of content detailed in the article's prose, I will definitely keep your explanation in mind when working on other company articles. Inkian Jason (talk) 17:25, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

McKinsey & Company - alumni-related info in lead

Hello, I and another editor have a disagreement about the lead content of McKinsey & Company. It would be great, if other interested editors could have a look and offer additional feedback there (see article talk - I have already invited the disagreeing editor to join this discussion aswell). Thanks in advance. GermanJoe (talk) 15:52, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Feedback requested for the Teradata article

Hello! On behalf of my employer, Teradata, I've been submitting a series of requests to improve the company's Wikipedia article. I am familiar with COI rules and don't edit articles directly. I was pleased when my initial requests were accepted and answered by helpful editors, but my later requests (all answered by the same editor) were unsuccessful, and I've struggled to get them to reconsider my proposed improvements or offer further feedback. This has been disappointing and I am hoping some other editors from WikiProject Companies may be willing to take a look at the proposed updates.

I am seeking additional feedback on two edit requests. For the first, I proposed a simple 3-sentence update to the "Technology and products" section. I was told the first source was advertorial, and additional paraphrasing was needed. I've suggested different sourcing, and provided alternative wording for consideration. However, the editor declined to reply, despite my ping for further feedback.

For this request, I proposed simply moving content related to acquisitions and divestitures to an "Acquisitions and divestitures" subsection. I proposed no major content changes, just grouping related content together. The reviewing editor replied and said they "implemented" my request, but actually they did not. Instead, they changed the entire history section into bullet points. I never see Wikipedia articles written in the form of bulleted lists, so I have to assume this does not comply with guidelines, and I'm afraid the article looks worse than before. I replied to the editor, noting that they had not separated out content as requested, and asking for the bullet point to be converted into prose, but I did not receive any reply.

There was even another declined edit request in between these two, but I'm trying to pick my battles. I am hoping to get additional feedback from other Wikipedia volunteers. Are there any WikiProject Companies participants who are willing to take a look at the edit requests and article history? You might consider looking at the pre-bullet point version of the article, for context. Thanks for reviewing in advance. Dodds_Writer (Talk · Disclosure: Employee of Teradata) 16:27, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Notice

Be advised that, on the Smith & Wesson company talk page, there is currently a debate on whether or not to include notation of a firearm illegally used in a recent mass-shooting that was manufactured by the company which is the subject of the article. Should this item be included, then it goes to stand that all of these types of incidents will be included on numerous company articles, in some cases outweighing the total content of the remainder of the article. As this potentially affects multiple company articles, I thought this wiki-project should be aware of the issue. - ^theWOLFchild 14:22, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

FYI

I have posted a proposal regarding this issue at the Project:Firearms talk page that could potentially affect multiple articles under Project:Companies. Please have a look and consider participating. Thank you - ^theWOLFchild 21:51, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

Company histories + Forbes

In working on updates to Broadridge Financial Solutions, a few questions came up that I hope to clarify with editors experienced in editing company articles. As a disclosed COI editor, I requested edits to develop the article's History, however there are a couple places where the reviewing editor and I do not see eye-to-eye (see the discussion here), and I would value additional input.

History of companies that were once divisions of other companies

• What is now Broadridge Financial Solutions was once a division of ADP. The reviewing editor declined to include historical moves they said were "effected by ADP and had nothing outwardly to do with Broadridge Financial Services". In my opinion, important moves by ADP that created the foundation for what Broadridge is are important details that should be included. Specifically, these are details that have been ascribed to Broadridge in sourcing but took place at the time that it was part of ADP. My question: For companies that were once part of other companies, how much historical information is acceptable to include?

Referencing Forbes

• The reviewing editor says that "Forbes exists as a brand-building platform for journalists, participatory readers and marketers, all existing under the Forbes publication umbrella. Thus, it is not my practice to use them alone as a source". It's true that articles and blogs from Forbes' contributors network are not considered reliable sources for Wikipedia, but the Forbes piece I referenced is written by a staff writer that was published in the November 18, 2013, issue of the magazine, which focuses on the financial industry. My question: Are Forbes articles written by staffers for the magazine reliable sources or no?

I'm interested in how WikiProject Companies editors think about these questions. Thanks in advance, Danilo Two (talk) 17:43, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Pinging a few active WikiProject Companies editors. @AmericanAir88, WikiEditCrunch, and Whoisjohngalt: I'm interested to see what you think of the following questions: 1. For companies that were once part of other companies, how much historical information is acceptable to include in company histories? 2. Are Forbes articles written by staffers for the magazine reliable sources or no? I appreciate feedback from any editors! Thanks, Danilo Two (talk) 21:45, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

In regard to the question about historical information, I tend to put enough information to provide the reader with a good level of background. Keep historical information brief and succinct. In regards to Forbes articles I would give more weight to articles that have been published in the magazine. I've used Forbes many times in the past and I've not known Forbes to be an unreliable source. As usual, if you can find another source, use it. Whoisjohngalt (talk) 22:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Helping out AmericanAir88 (talk) 02:50, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Whoisjohngalt: Thanks for the tips! Danilo Two (talk) 18:48, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Relisting of move discussion

Greetings! I have recently relisted a requested move discussion at Talk:Hutchison 3G#Requested move 17 February 2018, regarding a page relating to this WikiProject. Discussion and opinions are invited. Thanks, SkyWarrior 20:20, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Film Booking Offices of America Featured Article Review

FAR coordinator User:Casliber has nominated Film Booking Offices of America for a featured article review here. This is a procedural review of its FA status due to the discovery of socking at its original FAC. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. The instructions for the review process are here.

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. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:28, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

YESFX Ltd - alleged "scam"?

Hello, could an editor with experience in company articles could have a look at that article please? Some comments (see talk and article, now removed from article) claim, that the company might not be registered or might even be an alleged "scam". As I am not an expert in Cyprus company law or company registration in general, any help would be appreciated. There's also the question of general notability for this company, that a knowledgeable editor might be more qualified to assess. GermanJoe (talk) 22:46, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

RfC at New York Life Insurance Company

Hello! I invite editors to participate in this request for comment at New York Life Insurance Company about whether it's appropriate to have a section based on a government report. Your input would be most welcome! Thanks in advance, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 13:26, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi again! I've posted up a re-worded version of this RfC here. Looking for editors to offer their thoughts on this. Thanks! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 15:14, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Help with Kona Grill Updates

Hello, WikiProject Companies members. I've proposed an update request in the article for Kona Grill and am looking for interested editors to help. I have a COI with this company, so I do not intend to make any edits to the live article and am looking for an uninvolved editor (or editors) to review and make the changes they feel are appropriate. The article is currently a stub, so I'm proposing some additional information be added to make the article more informative to readers. Would anyone mind taking a look at this and lending a hand? Any and all help is appreciated, Deswans1 (talk) 22:37, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I'm still looking for help with this proposal. Is there anyone that can provide some assistance, please? Thank you Deswans1 (talk) 18:25, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Kohlberg Kravis Roberts

Kohlberg Kravis Roberts, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. AIRcorn (talk) 22:08, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Discussion Invitation

A merge proposal was made to merge Keith Raniere with NXIVM in November 2017, I have revived the merge proposal. Please see discussion here. Your comments in the discussion would be appreciated since the page is within this WikiProject. -- Waddie96 (talk) 14:44, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Fix up of Weber Shandwick article

If anyone is interested in working on the article on Weber Shandwick I just added a {{multiple issues}} template for that. I checked page views for Weber Shandwick and it looks to be getting on average about 100 views per day with less over the weekends.

Jjjjjjjjjj (talk) 04:02, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

Promedica Health System to buy HCR Manorcare

HCR Manorcare is already a topic, and it is stated it needs improvement because one of the writers appears to be someone close to the topic. I believe that person may be user Randall O. Which could be Randy Oostra, who is CEO of Promedica. I don't understand enough about companies buying and selling, but this buy would make Promedica the 15th largest health system in the country. Unfortunately I have reached my limit for the Toledo Blade which has been carrying the bulk of this news. Both companies have their HQ in Toledo so if someone with more adept expertise in business could update the article it would be much appreciated.

I'm not a fan of Promedica. They are heavy-handed, very powerful and they own their own health insurance company, Paramount, who insures me. So I would be having a conflict of interest as well if the updated the article.

Thanks.

LadyImpactOhio (talk) 19:57, 29 April 2018 (UTC)LadyImpactOhio 4-29-18

Clyde cancer cluster

Hello, people of WikiProject Companies. I've created this message to notify active members of the project, especially to those who know a lot about or are interested in the Whirlpool Corporation. If you are, I need help improving my article about the Clyde cancer cluster, an incident that Whirlpool was sued for; in other words, it was their fault (don't write those words on the article by the way, WP:NEUTRAL). It is definitely not a bad article. It just needs some small improvements. I'm not at all saying minor edits or improvements are bad, but I'm specifically looking for people who can help me long-term with a lot of co-research to improve the article to reach Good Article status. If you're interested in helping, the things needed to be improved are listed on Talk:Clyde cancer cluster#Improvements. In other words, more material needs to be added to improve the article, and I want more people to edit because I feel like I'm the sole editor. Regards, Philmonte101 (talk)

== Here is an article https://www.thenews-messenger.com/story/news/local/2015/02/18/cancer-cluster-lawsuit-dropped/23628511/ which names the owners of the Park who suspect the contamination in Green Springs. I don't know how to put this in without getting your numbered source links out of order. LadyImpactOhio (talk) 20:40, 29 April 2018 (UTC)LadyImpactOhio 4-29-18

WikiProject Volkswagen Group

I discovered this thing, WP:WikiProject Volkswagen Group / {{User WikiProject Volkswagen Group}} / Category:WikiProject Volkswagen Group members -- it only has one member, no talk page, no project banner, no category, no activity since mid-2016 -- 70.51.203.56 (talk) 08:27, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Quick infobox request for H&R Block

Hello! Do any WikiProject Companies editors have time to review a few potential updates to the H&R Block infobox? You can find my proposed draft infobox at Talk:H&R Block, along with the markup, and references. I'm suggesting some simple fixes including adding wikilinks, updating financials, and updating employee count, while retaining other details in the current infobox.

Since I do have a financial conflict of interest (disclosed on the article Talk page), I won't edit the article myself and am looking for uninvolved editors to review and make changes as appropriate. Thanks in advance, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 16:47, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Requesting factual changes to PicMonkey page

Greetings,

In the talk page for PicMonkey (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:PicMonkey), a Seattle-based business, I had requested some factual updates (all detailed in the talk page). As I have a conflict of interest in that I represent the company, I do not wish to make the edits myself. Rather, I'd like to ask for community input on the validity of the changes, as well as for a non-conflicted editor to make the edits. (Unless the community finds the changes benign enough for me to make).

Thanks for any input and direction. The company (and I, by extension) is new to Wikipedia editing.

CQSECU (talk) 16:13, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Company registers RfC

Talk:List of company registers

Should this article include external links or more preferably references for the listed registers? Gotitbro (talk) 17:29, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

When a company which has few reliable sources about it takes over the operations of another company, what to do?

There is a company named All Smiles Dental Centers which became notorious in Dallas after accusations of Medicaid fraud. The company closed and its remaining locations were bought out by South Texas Dental, a company which has not attracted much attention in the press. South Texas Dental itself has few sources, but it took over the operations of a notable company. How should I handle this article? WhisperToMe (talk) 13:15, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

How to handle it, in what aspect? Are you thinking about whether the two articles should be merged together? I would say no. These two companies existed as separate topics for 11 years, and they don't retroactively become the same topic because one of them acquired the other. Or are you thinking that South Texas Dental is non-notable? If that's the case, then you can nominate it for deletion. The company doesn't inherit notability by acquiring a notable company. Toohool (talk) 17:27, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Assessment progression

I've created a transcluded and simplified progression template for showing how many articles in the project are assessed. Adding {{WikiProject assessment progression|project=company}} produces:

Articles assessed for quality: 99.2% complete

Hope it helps. — Sasuke Sarutobi (talk) 23:19, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Paytm

Hi all, I'd appreciate if one or two of you could add Paytm to your watchlists, please. Article comes off as promotional/corporate brochure and there's an SPI who seems to be doing some maintenance on it. At one point there was a wall of awards--I deleted most of them because there was no clear indication that most of those awards were notable (i.e. no articles linked) but I always appreciate a second look. There's also been a bit of a back-and-forth[3][4][5] about a sting video made by an organisation called CobraPost. Anyway, corporate articles are not my specialty, so more experienced eyes would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Personal Insurance Company

The article The Personal Insurance Company has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Company exists, but there's no sourcing provided to show that it is Wikipedia notable enough for a stand-alone article (even a stub) per WP:ORG. A quick search for sources only found the routine coverage mentioned in WP:CORPDEPTH, but not the kind of multiple independent independent sources providing the WP:SIGCOV needed to establish Wikipedia notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:46, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

WikiProject collaboration notice from the Portals WikiProject

The reason I am contacting you is because there are one or more portals that fall under this subject, and the Portals WikiProject is currently undertaking a major drive to automate portals that may affect them.

Portals are being redesigned.

The new design features are being applied to existing portals.

At present, we are gearing up for a maintenance pass of portals in which the introduction section will be upgraded to no longer need a subpage. In place of static copied and pasted excerpts will be self-updating excerpts displayed through selective transclusion, using the template {{Transclude lead excerpt}}.

The discussion about this can be found here.

Maintainers of specific portals are encouraged to sign up as project members here, noting the portals they maintain, so that those portals are skipped by the maintenance pass. Currently, we are interested in upgrading neglected and abandoned portals. There will be opportunity for maintained portals to opt-in later, or the portal maintainers can handle upgrading (the portals they maintain) personally at any time.

Background

On April 8th, 2018, an RfC ("Request for comment") proposal was made to eliminate all portals and the portal namespace. On April 17th, the Portals WikiProject was rebooted to handle the revitalization of the portal system. On May 12th, the RfC was closed with the result to keep portals, by a margin of about 2 to 1 in favor of keeping portals.

There's an article in the current edition of the Signpost interviewing project members about the RfC and the Portals WikiProject.

Since the reboot, the Portals WikiProject has been busy building tools and components to upgrade portals.

So far, 84 editors have joined.

If you would like to keep abreast of what is happening with portals, see the newsletter archive.

If you have any questions about what is happening with portals or the Portals WikiProject, please post them on the WikiProject's talk page.

Thank you.    — The Transhumanist   07:29, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Draft TravelCenters of America article for review

Resolved

Hello! On behalf of TravelCenters of America, I have drafted an expanded and updated Wikipedia article for community review, which I am submitting on behalf of the company. There are several issues with the existing article, which I've outlined in more detail on the article's talk page. For those who may not be familiar, TA is the largest operator of truck stops and travel centers in the United States. I'm curious, are any WikiProject Companies participants willing to come take a look at the expanded and updated "History" section I've proposed here? I've posted a similar note to WikiProject Trucks, but there are multiple sections needing review, so help from WikiProject Companies members would also be very helpful. Thanks in advance for any assistance. Inkian Jason (talk) 21:49, 29 May 2018 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Inkian Jason (talk) 16:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Suggestion for List of pornography companies

Hi. Pornography companies can be either "solo" people working like Jill Kelly Productions or Jules Jordan Video or large conglomerates like Hokuto Corporation or MindGeek. What to include in List of pornography companies?Guilherme Burn (talk) 12:48, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

RfC at WikiProject Hospitals

A request for comments at WikiProject Hospitals might interest members of this WikiProject. I'm seeking comment to see if it is possible to make the rules clearer for how hospital reputation, rankings, ratings, and awards are handled on Wikipedia. What should the established standard be for how ratings and rankings are included on hospital Wikipedia articles? Read the ongoing discussion at WikiProject Hospitals. ClevelandClinicES (talk) 13:04, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Request at BNY Mellon

Hello, I'm looking for additional comment for a request at Talk:The Bank of New York Mellon. I'm asking for editors to consider removing the article's Historical data section. The section consists of three outdated charts of historical data from 2000 to 2008. These graphs are sourced to moneyeconomics.com (the link takes readers to a page saying the site is under maintenance). There is no context to this time period and no reason why this particular 8 year span is interesting or helpful to readers. Also, these graphs are noticeably absent from most other bank articles. (The only others I found containing similarly outdated graphs from Money Economics are State Street Bank and Trust Company and Wachovia.) Thanks for considering, Danilo Two (talk) 18:40, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/BMRB Ltd

I put BMRB Ltd to AfD, which needs adding the the AfD list for this project. Govvy (talk) 15:12, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Legacy section in Nortel article

I have started a discussion on the "Legacy" section" in the Nortel article, regarding the appropriateness of referring to a specific company. Feedback is welcome. isaacl (talk) 18:21, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Target Group Index

I really don't know why this was deleted under G11 when it had references, can the article be restored. I will gladly have a go at cleaning it up if needs be, they have a contract with Tottenham Hotspur F.C. [1, so they aren't a small company to get this deal. Govvy (talk) 17:00, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

This can be ignored above, I changed TGI to a redirect to Kantar Group, it's a surprisingly big company and the article needs a really good cleanup. Govvy (talk) 10:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Request to update Coty, Inc. article's infobox and introduction

Resolved

Hello! I've submitted a request here to update the Coty, Inc. article's infobox and introduction, on behalf of the company. As I don't edit the main space directly because of my conflict of interest, I am looking for a volunteer editor to review proposed changes and update the article appropriately. Is there a WikiProject Companies member willing to take a look? Thanks in advance. Inkian Jason (talk) 15:39, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Inkian Jason (talk) 15:43, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Help updating Gallup (company)

Resolved

Hello, Editors on this WikiProject might be interested in suggested updates to clean up Gallup, the management consulting business that also conducts public opinion polling. The infobox is missing key content, such as Gallup's former names, its industry, and where it was founded, and the Gallup Press section is currently supported only by primary sources. I've made some suggested changes to fix all these issues. As disclosed on the Gallup Talk page, I have a financial conflict of interest, as I'm offering these updates on behalf of the company as part of my work with Beutler Ink, so I'm looking for other editors to review. Thank you in advance, Danilo Two (talk) 17:36, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

This has been answered. Danilo Two (talk) 16:19, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

RfC on the treatment of corporate colors

FYI

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see Talk:Milwaukee Bucks#RfC for team colors

This is really beyond the Milwaukee Bucks or even sports in particular, and relevant to coverage of organizations and their house styles generally. This touches on all of: MOS:CAPS, MOS:TM, WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, and WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE, in various aspects (see the more detailed discussion below the !vote section).
 — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:20, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Edelweiss Broking Limited

Should "Limited" be used in the title of this article per WP:NCCORP? -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:07, 5 July 2018 (UTC)

LifeWay Christian Resources

LifeWay Christian Resources is in need of a complete rewrite, or a massive clean-up, if anyone is interested...Zigzig20s (talk) 21:54, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

BNY Mellon headquarters

Resolved

Hello, BNY Mellon recently moved its headquarters from 225 Liberty Street in New York to 240 Greenwich Street. User:Y2kcrazyjoker4 updated the infobox with the current headquarters earlier this month, but the article's Operations has not yet been updated. The issue is that the company's headquarters relocation has not been written about in third-party sources. I left a note at Talk:The Bank of New York Mellon and pinged Y2kcrazyjoker4 on their Talk page; they indicated that Operations could be updated since BNY Mellon's official website lists the new address as its headquarters but it looks like they're busy right now and haven't been able to make the edit. Could someone here assist?

Basically, I'm trying to replace the third sentence of Operations with something along the lines of: "BNY Mellon's American and global headquarters are located at 240 Greenwich Street, New York". Sourcing-wise, this Wall Street Journal article notes that BNY Mellon would move from Liberty Street to the new location (then addressed 101 Barclay St.) this summer. There is also this press release and the company's website, which both confirm the move took place and new address. Usually, press releases and company websites are not adequate sources, but I'm wondering if this might be an exception. What's the best way to move forward? I have a financial conflict of interest as I'm here on behalf of BNY Mellon as part of my work at Beutler Ink. I appreciate any advice. Danilo Two (talk) 20:00, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

This has been answered. Danilo Two (talk) 19:57, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

HOFELE-Design

This is a newly created article, so I'm wondering if someone from WPCPY would mind assessing it. I'm also wondering about the all caps name and whether a move to "Hofele-Design" might be appropriate. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

• Looking at a handful of news items unrelated to the company, it appears the common form is "Hofele Design". --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:49, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Draft article for Aleris

Resolved

Hello! On behalf of Aleris, I have drafted an expanded and improved Wikipedia article for community review. The existing article is outdated and has some problematic sourcing, so I've worked to provide a more complete and up to date overview of the company's products, history, and corporate affairs with appropriate sourcing. I do not edit articles directly because of my COI, and I'm seeking help from volunteers to review and implement the proposed draft. Interested WikiProject Companies members can learn more at Talk:Aleris and view my draft here. Thanks for any assistance. Inkian Jason (talk) 14:31, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

This request has been answered. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 15:34, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Article title

More participants are welcome at Talk:DiDi (company). Widefox; talk 18:23, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Request at Ogilvy & Mather

Hello, WikiProject Companies editors might be interested in updates I proposed for the infobox at Ogilvy & Mather. Within the infobox, I'm looking to update the CEO's title, remove two people, and update the company's subsidiaries following its recent restructuring. All of this is explained in my request on the article's Talk page. As disclosed on the Ogilvy Talk page, I have a financial conflict of interest, as I'm offering these updates on behalf of Ogilvy as part of my work with Beutler Ink, so I'm looking for other editors to review. Thank you in advance, Danilo Two (talk) 19:56, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

List of store locations SM_Supermalls#Current_malls

Hi i was wondering what to do about this article as it seems to violate WP:NOTDIRECTORY

7 "Simple listings without context information. Examples include, but are not limited to: listings of business alliances, clients, competitors, employees (except CEOs, supervisory directors and similar top functionaries), equipment, estates, offices, store locations, products and services, sponsors, subdivisions and tourist attractions. Information about relevant single entries with encyclopedic information should be added as sourced prose. Lists of creative works in a wider context are permitted." (my bolding).

Most of the entries in the remarks column contain things like "First SM Mall in Northern Luzon with no air-conditioning system." or "Second SM Mall in Visayas". I suppose this is to try and show there is context. Does anyone have an opinion on whether this should be left as is? Dom from Paris (talk) 14:48, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

I don't see it as a problem when most of the list entries have their own articles or are otherwise likely to be notable. The wikilink to the article is the context. I would trim some of the details in the list though - a lot of the "Remarks" seem trivial, and the "Land area" doesn't seem particularly noteworthy to me. Toohool (talk) 20:51, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Content Update for Alder Biopharmaceuticals page

Hello,

I have a conflict of interest so will not edit the page directly but wanted to share with the editor of this page a recent company update regarding a new CEO to keep the page recent and updated.

Robert W. Azelby has succeeded Randy Schatzman as Alder Biopharmaceutical's new CEO and President. This was announced by a company press release issued on June 7, 2018.

Alder BioPharmaceuticals® Names Robert W. Azelby President and Chief Executive Officer

I believe the Wikipedia page still notes Randy Schatzman as the CEO so thought this may be a relevant update. Would an editor be able to help update this?

Thanks! SGTGRN (talk) 18:40, 3 October 2018 (UTC)<https://investor.alderbio.com/news-releases/news-release-details/alder-biopharmaceuticalsr-names-robert-w-azelby-president-and>

Honey

I recently added a Requested Article for Honey Coupons. Because I work for the company, there is an obvious conflict of interest. However, I do believe it's notable with reliable, independent, third party sources. Would an editor be able to write a new article for the company or provide any feedback? Dnguye10 (talk) 00:18, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

References

Company "alumni"

Hello, sorry to bother again about this aspect, but it would be great if editors interested in company articles could chime in at Talk:McKinsey & Company and/or Talk:Bain & Company about the "alumni" lists in these articles. These lists were unsourced, didn't have clear inclusion criteria and primarily served as PR tool to polish the company's prestige (unfortunately there is a significant amount of undisclosed COI-editing in consultancy-related articles). I'd argue, that this kind of listcruft violates list guidelines and probably WP:NOTDIRECTORY. To be clear: noteworthy alumni with a significant connection to the company (based on independent sources) could of course be added as prose anytime. Any feedback on the article talkpages to clarify/form a consensus would be appreciated. On the other hand, a broader discussion and clear guidance about company alumni in general might also be useful, independent from these 2 specific cases - just a thought. GermanJoe (talk) 11:17, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Featured quality source review RFC

Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:47, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

FiiO Electronics Technology

Could someone from this WikiProject assess this for notability per WP:NCORP? The only citation provided is to the company's own website, but that does nothing per WP:CORPDEPTH. The article's been around for a bit, but never seems to have gotten properly assessed because (1) it wasn't submitted to AfC and (2) nobody bothered to create a talk page for it and add WikiProject banners for it until I just did. There are a few stand-alone articles about some of the companies products; so, maybe the sources used in them can also be added to the main company article. I was considering WP:PROD, but figured I'd ask here first. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:50, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Marchjuly, this one is difficult as while there are not many references in English, there seems to be a lot in non-English sources. Would suggest to tag someone on a project that is familiar with the other languages so they can determine if those references are WP:RS and meet WP:SIGCOV. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks CNMall41 for the feedback. I did also post something at WT:CHINA#FiiO Electronics Technology; so, perhaps someone from that WikiProject will being to provide some help with the sourcing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:18, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Good luck. I will keep an eye on the page as well. Hopefully it can get resolved. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:23, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Does the Johnson & Johnson credo merit its own article?

I was looking over the article on Johnson & Johnson and noticed the section on the company's credo is rather lacking. I started conducting some additional research to see if there was anything that could give it more context, and in doing so started to wonder if it met notability guidelines for its own article. From what I can tell, there's enough coverage to suggest that it is, but I haven't seen any articles dedicated to a company's credo (or motto, or slogan). My initial thought was that it would be overly promotional, but after realizing how much it's been talked about in the media, adding more context to the existing article might make it unwieldy. Can anyone weigh in? I can see the rationale for it going either way.--FacultiesIntact (talk) 21:06, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Personally, I would not think this warranted ... but there are stranger things here that have survived challenge, and I would not go out of my way to propose it for deletion just because. There is nothing wrong with composing an article on pretty much anything that can pass notability measures, which is one of the beauties of the platform. Go for it. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:43, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

I wouldn't think that it would be substantive enough to warrant its own page, even if it received enough coverage to meet notability guidelines. My opinion is that the section within the J&J article can be cleaned up to incorporate the information. Just MHO. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:57, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Just my two cents: depending on the amount of content you plan to add, it might be fine in the current section. If you plan to add a lot more on the subject, then a new article would probably be better. — AfroThundr ^{(u · t · c)} 19:08, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Business Services Company

What is this (for Wikipedia)? Is there a description or definition anywhere within Wikipedia? Asking because WP has a specific category assigned to businesses ("companies") of this type. Eddaido (talk) 20:51, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Eddaido, if you are referring to the specific category "business services company", I think it should actually be a subpage of the category "Companies by industry" instead of a standalone category. I am not sure how to do category moves though. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:48, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

I am referring specifically to the specific category "Business Services Company" but I just want to know exactly what a Business Services Company is, in WP. (Of course I think I know but a disagreement has arisen which I hope to clarify). I thought this talkpage would be the place to go to find out the WP definition. Have I come to the wrong place? Thanks CNMall41 for your response. Eddaido (talk) 23:34, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Eddaido, I have not seen the disagreement so I am unsure if you are in the right place. For Wikipedia, I am sure that different people have different opinions on what constitutes a "business services company." In the real world, this would be a business whose services are its primary offering. Banks, realtors, etc. offer a services, not a product. Companies like GE offer products and would not fall into such definition. Not sure if that helps or not. --CNMall41 (talk) 06:30, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Draft article for FXCM

On behalf of FXCM, I have created an updated draft of the current Wikipedia article for review. The draft is located in my sandbox. The draft clarifies previous and current ownership issues and neutral point of view concerns (such as the first sentence of the article overall). It also uses better and more recent references. If someone is able to assist in the process I would appreciate it. --Formilds (talk) 23:32, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Formilds, I suggest that you reach out directly to @Spintendo: on their talk page. I pinged them so you may get a response here, but I would still reach out on their talk page. It looks like they are the one involved with most of the recent discussion. Give it some time for a response. --CNMall41 (talk) 05:14, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you. I did receive a response from another editor who says they will look at this next week. I appreciate your response. --Formilds (talk) 02:33, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

The last message left for me by Formilds on my talk page failed to indicate any issues or problems on their end:

I know that it is a burden to go through my edits requests. I am sorry and wish I knew an easier way for both of us. I also understand there are issues with the company that must be documented to have a neutral article. I am just tasked with making sure everything is done correctly and isn't promotional for the company or written in a way that makes the company seem like the devil. Thanks for your help with these. Hopefully we can get through them all.
— User:Formilds 8:14 pm, 15 October 2018, Monday (1 month, 5 days ago) (UTC−7)

What was actually left unresolved with this request were the issues that I raised in my review which I saw as problematic, namely:

1. In a request which is asking for text to be moved, the failure of the COI editor to identify which references are to be moved along with the text
2. The failure to explain why it is—according to the COI editor—unnecessary for the lead section to summarize information found in the body of text. Having the lead section summarize text is a generally widespread practice which requires more than "it's not necessary" as the reason to remove it (i.e., "the structure of the company is explained in the body of the article so not necessary to have all of the previous company names in the first paragraph."
3. Unclear directions (i.e., "The current second paragraph would be eliminated based on the moves and changes above." and "The current second sentence of the third paragraph remains from a move above.")

Unfortunately, instead of addressing these concerns, the COI editor has chosen to WP:FORUMSHOP find other avenues of review. As far as I am concerned they are more than welcome to do so, and I truly hope that those issues might be resolved better with whomever agrees to assist them. Regards,  Spintendo  01:12, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Notes

Spintendo, I don't help forumshoppers so thanks for clearing up that this is not exactly what is happening. I also normally don't like to review COI edit requests but can assist if no one else does. I see that they reached out to Chetsford on their talk page. If they are unwilling, I can take a look when I get time (and the focus). --CNMall41 (talk) 20:02, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Sorry if I made it seem like I was looking for a more favorable response from someone else. My intention was just to make things easier for everyone. Please let me know what is needed for a review of the draft. I would be happy to receive any feedback that editors can provide. --Formilds (talk) 02:50, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Please be patient with your request. People here are volunteers so they have real world responsibilities and may not be as quick to respond as you hope. I will take a look in a few days if no one else gets to it. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:12, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

I have taken a look at the draft and the page itself and made some changes. I also posed a question on the talk page. Further communication about your requests can be made on the talk page instead of here. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Renaming Zodiac Seats U.S. to Safran Seats

Please visit Talk:Zodiac_Seats_U.S.#Requested_move_4_December_2018 to discuss moving Zodiac Seats U.S. to Safran Seats. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:48, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

BNY Mellon CFO Request

There is an edit request to update the CFO of The Bank of New York Mellon on the article talk page. Can editors update the article's Leadership section to reflect the correct CFO? I am an employee at BNY Mellon and refrain from direct edits. Thanks! Madelyn at BNY Mellon (talk) 16:45, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Spintendo: is this one you are addressing? If not, it is an easy change we can likely take care of. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:18, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Seeking Help for Consumer Bankers Association article

Hello, Wikipedia! I work for Consumer Bankers Association (CBA), and I'd like to suggest some improvements for the organization's article. I've posted a request on the article's talk page, but there hasn't been any movement yet. I've already sought help at WikiProject Finance & Investment and WikiProject Organizations.

The current article is quite short and hasn't been updated since 2008. I have suggested a draft to add more content to the existing sections and build off of those as sourcing allows. Please take a look at my proposed draft here - User:CBA NS/Consumer Bankers Association. I know about COI rules, and I've done my best to follow them.

Are there any WikiProject Companies editors who can take a look at the draft and copy over content or provide any feedback? Thank you! CBA NS (talk) 14:05, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi, CBA NS. You need to use the {{request edit}} template on the talk page. Here is a simple how-to on making COI edit requests - Wikipedia:Simple conflict of interest edit request - --CNMall41 (talk) 22:10, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

BNY Mellon Request

There is a new edit request to clarify information in the Operations section at The Bank of New York Mellon on the article talk page. I am an employee at BNY Mellon and I refrain from directly editing articles about the company. Can editors review and update the article if they are comfortable with these changes? Thanks! Madelyn at BNY Mellon (talk) 21:19, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

FYI - answered --CNMall41 (talk) 04:34, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

proposal to split Foursquare

Hi! I've been paid by Foursquare to propose splitting Foursquare into two articles: one focused on the Foursquare City Guide app, and one focused on Foursquare Labs the company, which for the past several years has focused on advertising technology and other enterprise products. Details and proposed drafts are on the current article's talk page, here. I tremendously appreciate any help or feedback. Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 21:12, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

MaryGaulke, sorry that I am late to the party on this one. I see that you have already started the relevant discussion here. --CNMall41 (talk) 04:15, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Correct! If you're interested in chiming in, I welcome your feedback. Mary Gaulke (talk) 20:55, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Alibaba Group assessment

Josephua has posted an assessment request to Wikipedia:WikiProject Computing. Since this article is much more about a company than computer technology, that request may be better entertained by someone here. ~Kvng (talk) 13:46, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Kvng, this has been already done. Alibaba was moved to B status in a review as I had requested, but this is in behalf of WikiProject Companies. Since there are 3 more WikiProjects Alibaba Group is a part of that categorize the article as C class, I want them to get reviews in hope for a B on behalf of those WikiProjects. However, I must say, the people I ask are usually inactive to review the article, such as the people of WikiProject China etc. - Josephua (talk) 23:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

I appreciate the active community of WikiProject Companies though. They are quick to respond and I was able to get a review from you guys in a short time. Cheers! - Josephua (talk) 23:19, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Organizations underpinned by multiple companies

When there is a longstanding organization with a consistent trading name, that over time has been underpinned by multiple legal entities, do we have separate articles for each legal entity or do we combine as one?

Case in point being A & G Price. It originally commenced trading in 1868, a new legal entity was established in 1951 that was placed in administration in 2017[6] the business was then sold and resumed trading under new ownership with the same brand, same core employees, same premises etc, underpinned by a new legal entity.[7] It has been suggested they should be split. Could understand if the article was massive, and it would be a logical point to split if required, but this one is fairly short. Onetrung (talk) 00:31, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Endemol company articles

Editors who follow this WikiProject talk page may be interested in a discussion at WT:FILM about merging two articles: Endemol and Endemol Shine Group. The discussion can be found here. Thanks, Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 15:23, 1 February 2019 (UTC)