On 1/28/07, Gerard Meijssen
I have bought, owned and sold stocks. I have read the financial pages.
My observation would be that it is exactly the publicly traded companies
that the financial pages are concentrated on. Many companies that are
economically as relevant do not get the same degree of attention. When
you aim to say that companies, organisations are relevant and that they
are under represented I do agree with you. It is just that many of these
companies, like imho almost all schools are not relevant. When people
want to write about them, like with schools, people will have strong
opinions about them. People of these companies will try to game the
system for their marketing benefit. When there is a project with a
strong community of people who nurse this content, fine.
Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and many companies have no lasting
relevance. Some companies have anecdotal relevance like this company
that sold pet food over the Internet...
I think it's reasonable to consider whether the company notability
criteria are too strict, as currently written and applied.
That we should not open the floodgates to letting companies promote
themselves using Wikipedia doesn't mean that we shouldn't cover more
companies in a fair and neutral manner...
For now I don't think there is enough interest in companies for us to
worry about the floodgates. Maybe someone should tell the little boy
with his finger in the dyke that there is no water on the other side. ;-)