Steve Bennett wrote:
On 8/9/06, Rob gamaliel8@gmail.com wrote:
Well, there's a natural reaction to anything that looks like corporate advertising, but I wouldn't call it a "bias against corporations".
I don't see anything inherently wrong with MyWikiBiz, esp. since they are pretty open about what they're doing. But I also don't think Wikipedia's mission is served by cluttering up the place with articles on every small consulting firm in the US. This corporation has only 26 employees and the only citations are a local business journal. Is this really a significant enough company to make it into an encyclopedia?
That definitely depends on what your definition of "significant enough" is. If we had room for only 10 corporations, I would say no. But we're not pressed for space, and unlike pure vanity articles (my name is Jim and I have a dog called Nelly!), this type of article meets a genuine need.
Does it? How are they unique? The following,
"Norman Technologies is the only U.S.-based private-sector I.T. consultancy focused solely on global trade initiatives. The company is also unique in that it provides the only non-bank representative to the International Chamber of Commerce's Committee on Banking Technique & Practice. The firm is also a member of the International Financial Services Association."
uses a heap of weasel words/buzzwords/business jargon ("global trade initiatives") which don't really mean much; and what is the International Chamber of Commerce's Committee on Banking Technique & Practice anyway?
I think there is a valid viewpoint that says "Wikipedia is the sum of human knowledge, except for a bit of total dross that doesn't interest anyone". However, a genuine company with 26 full time employees that has been around for 5 years and does some interesting things at the global level is not such dross.
You're wrong. /Nobody cares/ about J. Random Company, manufacturer of Gnomovision, which makes passes about compilers, even if Gnomovision is notable[0].
Purely and simply, is Wikipedia better off *with* this information than *without* it? If the answer is "without", then why? Because we saved a couple of kilobytes?
Because it's just one more article which people are going to edit war and email OTRS about, and it's not particularly interesting or informative; the aim of an encyclopedia is to be factual, informative and interesting.
[0] Guess the reference...