Talk:Bell Pottinger/Archives/2017
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Bell Pottinger. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Redraft for review
 | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. [see below] |
Hi – this article suffers from quite a number of issues largely relating to balance and accuracy. Many of the references to the various divisions within the company are out of date and the Criticisms section is inappropriately long, containing some lengthy quotes. The Criticism section together with the Notable clients section make the whole article very unwieldy and altogether too long for a company of Bell Pottinger's size. I've prepared a shorter redraft that I hope is more proportionate, accurate and up-to-date – see here. Let me know what you think. Please note my COI – as per my user page, I work for Bell Pottinger. Thanks. Jthomlinson1 (talk) 13:09, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
- Hi there. It is not recommended for editors with a COI to propose major rewrites of the articles that they are connected to. What is also alarming is that you wish to shorten the Criticism section (which may allow for unwanted content to the company to be removed). Due to the nature of the proposed changes, you will have to submit a more detailed proposal (write down the exact changes that you wish to make, for example, change the X number of employees to Y, providing relevant sources and a reason for each of the changes). The proposal in its current form cannot be accepted. Oh, and this (retrieved from the article) seems interesting: "The Daily Telegraph reported that Wikipedia user accounts linked to Bell Pottinger had been suspended for making biased alterations to Wikipedia entries". Regards, VB00 (talk) 17:18, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
logo
I noticed that the logo being used in this article is outdated. note the logos being used here: http://bellpottinger.com/ and https://twitter.com/BellPottinger?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor MeropeRiddle (talk) 20:47, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Bell Pottinger. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.ft.com/content/f8271e3e-dd3a-3503-bcfd-e30f9465aa21?mhq5j=e2
- Added archive https://archive.is/20130114050941/http://www.chime.plc.uk/announcements/chime-final-of-mbo-new-director-of-board to http://www.chime.plc.uk/announcements/chime-final-of-mbo-new-director-of-board
- Added
{{dead link}}tag to http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifestyle/article-24019238-of-course-i-regret-it-i-need-it-like-a-hole-in-the-head-all-this-st.do - Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.ft.com/content/f8271e3e-dd3a-3503-bcfd-e30f9465aa21?mhq5j=e2
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:22, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
MBO
I googled this term and it seems to most commonly refer to "management by objectives," which does not seem fitting here. I expect it is some other business jargon, but for a general audience (myself, at any rate) this is unclear. I've requested clarification on the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:184:4980:102C:C8A1:4833:9CBB:95B8 (talk) 09:21, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
- According to the MBO disambiguation page it's 'Management buyout' - I've added an internal link in the article for clarity. JezGrove (talk) 09:33, 8 September 2017 (UTC)