User talk:CorporateM/Archive 9

Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators

ICSA is not a trade association but a professional body, one with a Royal charter. The same as with CIPR. ICSA is the only professional body (that I'm aware of) for company secretary in the UK, and has over 37,000 members worldwide, two-thirds of which are from outside the UK & Ireland. As a chartered institute of over a hundred years old with that many members, it's just infeasible to think that it doesn't meet our general notability guideline or Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). If it were the case though, I think the issue would be more with our notability guidelines than with this particular organisation. The problem with sources with an organisation such as this are that people will happily refer to it because it's the body for a subject, but don't bother writing about the organisation itself because it's so well established. Looking through the first few entries in Google Books, there's mention here, and here. Remember, there's nothing wrong with an entry being notable and yet there's only enough information for it to have a short article. -- KTC (talk) 13:47, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. I was geared up to turn it into an excellent article, so it was a big let-down to find out there weren't enough sources to cover it. I just cleaned it up to a paragraph and added the sources. Corporate 14:39, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure this is ICSA's logo? It doesn't match what's used on its website. -- KTC (talk) 19:36, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Oops, sorry, all fixed. Corporate 20:23, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

FYI, I have reduced the resolution of the image to comply with WP:NFCC. -- KTC (talk) 21:26, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Looks good. I think that's a wrap for me. I would love to write a longer article, but 1.5 paragraphs is probably about all we'll get with the sourcing. Someone may AfD it at some point, but I won't. Corporate 23:44, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

Heritage

Sure. Let's try and keep the amount of work reasonable; unlike you, virtually no one here is paid to contribute, and we take time to do it voluntarily out of a sense of altruism and in the hope of contributing something positive to the world. Just saying. --Tenebrae (talk) 21:44, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Renaming your account

Hello Corporate Minion. I happened to notice your request at User talk:MBisanz. It is up to the bureaucrat how to proceed, but note that both User:Corporate and User:CM are in use on other wikis. You would be asking for usurpation of a name that is going to create a global conflict anyway. If you ever intend to do something on another language wiki, it is best to pick a name for yourself which is globally unique. (A difficult option for you would be to persuade bureaucrats on all the other wikis where 'Corporate' is in use to usurp it in your favor). Also, it's possible that a future reform might cause the conflicted name to be assigned globally to someone else, in which case you would have to change your name anyway. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 04:12, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!! It looks like CorporateM isn't taken. That way people can still call me CM as they do now, but without the editorializing in the user name. I'll give that a try. Although I would like to say I'll probably stick to the English Wikipedia, I bet I'll end up editing other Wikis. Corporate 04:36, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

GA candidates

Sure, glad to help. You're using really high-quality citations, and providing citations for all of the text except the lead section, which is absolutely the best way to minimize COI objections, though - obviously - the choice of what to include or not, and exact wording, are still subjective and therefore open to at least second-guessing.

Regarding using non-free images, I find the Wikipedia rules (Wikipedia:Copyrights, Wikipedia:Image use policy, and Wikipedia:Non-free content) to be suitable for lawyers but not necessarily for everyday editors. If you want to be ready to address any reviewer concerns, you could ask specifically at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 23:54, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

I am greatly indebted to you and appreciate your time. I will implement your feedback tonight and take Playtex through the GA round.

Speaking of what to or not to include, do you think this[1] failed patent lawsuit belongs on the Playtex article? It didn't bubble up to the NYT/AP level, but it had a few articles.

I agree; where I have a COI, the most difficult part is convincing the company to shoot themselves in the foot by adding negative content. I have taken to implementing a "no omissions" policy, but time will tell if I can realistically enforce it. User:CorporateM 00:59, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the patent, if the Wikipedia article were about the product involved, then yes, it would be newsworthy. But the Wikipedia article is about the corporation, and I don't think a failed patent involving a single product is that important, since it doesn't seem to have significantly impacted the corporation's success.

Regarding negative news, my suggestion is to point out that (a) including negative information makes the article more credible (balanced) to other editors, and therefore less likely for editors to spend time changing, and (b) omitting the information means that if it does get added at at later point by another editor, the wording (both choice of language, and length) will be whatever that editor decides on. And once an editor has added something, it may be very difficult to convince him/her to change the wording and/or reduce the amount of text that covers the negative incident. [Up front, before doing the article: "This article will include any widely-publicized negative information that has been in the news. It is important to include such information because (a) ... and (b) ... ] -- John Broughton (♫♫) 05:25, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. That makes sense.

You absolutely hit the nail on the head. Most volunteer-written controversies are done poorly, so the pitch is to "get in front of it" by writing it ourselves. Companies that are risk-adverse and want to do things the right way will subscribe to that - those that want to "see what they can get away with" will use a service like Wiki-PR instead.

Over time I've gotten better at finding excuses to justify being neutral, where a company's natural position is to be an advocate. I think the most painful thing is that every company will inevitably point to a promotional, one-sided article from a competitor with lots of primary sources and say "we want that. How come we can't get that; they have it." (*rolls eyes)

I can't compete with the "results" of astroturfing. CorporateM (Talk) 13:04, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Brands

Hello, CorporateM. You are invited to join WikiProject Brands, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of brands and brand-related topics. To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 08:32, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for joining! Northamerica1000^(talk) 14:00, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
• Also, thanks for your insights regarding Brand article consolidation at the project's talk page. I'll check these out and opine about them at another time, as my energy is beginning to fade at this time. Cheers, Northamerica1000^(talk) 14:13, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

You bet. I do wonder if the wikiproject overlaps with Wikiproject Companies and Wikiproject Marketing & Advertising, but sometimes it's useful just to build fresh energy and initiative. CorporateM (Talk) 14:22, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

I considered this, however, the number of articles within this project's focus are considerable, and it would likely burden WikiProject Companies with too many additional topics, and editors there may not be interested in a significant expansion in scope. Also, branding topics may not be congruent with WP Companies' focus. Furthermore, WikiProject Marketing & Advertising is inactive. I also noticed WikiProject Marketing (which you created), but the scope didn't fit in with this project's focus to a large degree. I just noticed that you nominated WikiProject Marketing for speedy deletion. Northamerica1000^(talk) 14:29, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Yah, there was a discussion a while back about merging Wikiproject Marketing with Wikiproject Advertising, but nobody was bold about doing the merge. Your note reminded me so I went ahead.

My COI work is very tedious and grueling; it could take a year for an article I could write in a day. So it's my release to be bold where I don't have one ;-)

CorporateM (Talk)) 14:39, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Hitachi Data Systems Page

Hi there, I am trying to figure out why you reverted the HDS page to an antique version with a very long history and not much of the current HDS content that was on the page. All of the content you put in there is available in the Hitachi Data Systems History page. Just asking before I revert to the proper HDS page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Csoares66 (talk • contribs) 23:29, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

Hmmm... I didn't do a very good job there, but I do notice that I re-instuted the History section which should obviously be kept and deleted a lot of content that was only sourced to the company website. I would say bits of the lead and some of the corporate culture that is cited to secondary sources should be restored to clean up after my sloppiness. Do you or one of the other editors work for HDS? If someone from the company was willing to provide sources and images to support the article creation, I wouldn't mind cleaning it up a bit. Surprising such a notable company has a derelict article. CorporateM (Talk) 00:08, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Ok, based on Nirvanix I am presuming you are a non-disclosed PR editor. Lots of people around here know I do Wikipedia consulting, so I would prefer not to get involved due to all kinds of speculation and unsortedness that could arise. But you should consider using {{request edit}} to transparently offer contributed content instead of astroturfing Wikipedia. CorporateM (Talk) 00:34, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 00:59, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Why thank you! Given your perspective on PR pros I can never be quite sure if we're really friends ;-)

Our elderly dog just passed away a few months ago, which makes this the first time in years we get to travel without worrying about who's going to change his diapers, etc. My wife and I's x-mas will be on a cruise!! CorporateM (Talk) 01:18, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Reply at my talk page

Hello. You have a new message at User talk:Northamerica1000#Peer review on WP:Brands's talk page. Message added by Northamerica1000^(talk) 01:13, 21 December 2012 (UTC).

Happy holidays!

Hello CorporateM: Thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable holiday season! Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Nouniquenames is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Reply at WP Brands talk page

Hello, CorporateM. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Brands#Brand article consolidation.
Message added by Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:19, 22 December 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

CIPR

I have left additional comments on the GAN review. I apologize that this is taking too long. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 05:10, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

2013

File:Happy New Year 2013.jpg		Have an enjoyable New Year!
		Hello CorporateM: Thanks for all of your contributions to Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable New Year! Cheers, Northamerica1000(talk) 15:25, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! CorporateM (Talk) 15:57, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:1985 Playtex ad.png

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:1985 Playtex ad.png. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 16:25, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Editor Review

I am currently cleaning up the backlog over at Editor Review and I found this in the backlog. As it is no longer posted on the main page at Editor Review, I was wondering if I should remove it from the backlogs and put it to rest or if I should repost it for community review. I will remove it from the backlogs three days from now if I am not given a response.—cyberpower _Offline^{Happy 2013} 19:58, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I think I have plenty of people mentoring me and I know where I need to improve. I'm working on bringing articles up to GA and I want to make that my norm. I may re-open it at some point, but not now. CorporateM (Talk) 20:10, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Ok thanks.—cyberpower _Offline^{Happy 2013} 21:57, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello. You have a new message at User talk:SMcCandlish's talk page. — SMcCandlish  Talk⇒ ɖ^⊝כ^⊙þ Contrib. 21:23, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

GISHWHES listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect GISHWHES. Since you had some involvement with the GISHWHES redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Favonian (talk) 12:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for doing the research better than I was able to. I got discouraged by all the fan cruft and assorted other crap that came up when googling for GISHWHES + "Misha Collins". Will you do the honors and add the information to the Collins article? Favonian (talk) 15:29, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I might coach my wife through it. She is a fan and GISHWHES participant and it might be a good excuse to get her hooked on Wikipedia. CorporateM (Talk) 15:43, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Hope you don't live to regret it. Favonian (talk) 15:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)