User:Icerat/Corp page guidelines comments - draft

Content Guidelines

I've been looking into the issue of content guidelines for company articles. One of the "problems" is that broadbased traditional encyclopedias, such as Brittanica, have quite small coverage of companies so it's difficult to judge what should be considered "encyclopedic". Take for example the EB articles on Yahoo[1] and Wal-Mart[2]. A bit of history, a bit on competitors, and maybe a (very little) bit on controversy/criticism. By contrast these articles on Wikipedia are extensive (see Yahoo!,Walmart) and even have entire separate articles on for example, history (History of Yahoo!,History of Walmart) and criticism (Criticism of Yahoo!,Criticism of Wal-Mart). On other words, we don't really have historical "encyclopedia" guidelines to set the path here, instead wikipedia has to do that itself. Interestingly, if one tracks back through the history of the larger company articles, a lot of the development seems to have occurred essentially due to an "arms war" between supports and critics of the companies.

Further insight for a possible structure comes from various business intelligent reports. These typically provide some brief history, key personel, financial data, product categories, and competitors. Other sources, such as the well-regarded multi-volume International Directory of Company Histories have, not surprisingly, extensive chronological histories of the companies, and some summaries of current financial data, number of employees, subsidiaries. "Controversial" issues are rolled in to the chronologies. (eg Wal-Mart[3])

To get some perspective on what's been happening on Wikipedia, I've reviewed a range of articles, trying to look at a range of company types and home countries. Some of the WP articles reviewed include -

• amazon, microsoft, godaddy, pepsico, walmart, yahoo, cannondale, dell, chrysler,at&t, renault, bhp billiton, Pfizer, Goldman Sachs, Shell/Royal Dutch Shell, Starbucks, The Walt Disney Company, Meijer, cadbury, icici bank, adidas, lufthansa, mont blanc, sanyo, seiko, avon

The review reveals no "standard" approach to companies articles apart from the commonly used company template, however a range of themes do arise, though actually headings differ. I've summarised these below, with examples of headings used in various Wikipedia articles.

History timeline key dates logo changes acquisitions and divestments investments spinoffs Sales and Marketing Marketing and sponsorship sales and marketing marketing and branding naming rights and sponsorships sponsorships promotions endorsements Controversy controversy and criticism legislation and litigation health & safety suites & claims Products and Brands products and services products and technologies brands products marketing intellectual property product range and customer service production research and development

Operations corporate governance corporate affairs corporate organisation accounting financial data corporate information corporate affairs and identity operations executive pay Policies Structure ownership corporate structure subsidiaries and alliances divisions organization subsidiaries partnerships company divisions principal subsidiaries principal divisions People key people board of directors alumni officers and directors executive management advisory board

Locations facilities locations websites head office software development studios offices and locations Culture culture employment and diversity health & safety Recognitions awards accolades recognition Corporate Social Responsibility charitable activities/philanthropy sustainability/environment corporate social responsibility environmental initiatives environmental record Other in popular culture competition rankings market share

Suggested Structure

WP:STRUCTURE recommends that "controversy" should be "folded into the narrative" rather on than isolated. On this basis I suggest a common content template something like the following. Actual titles might need to be adjusted to suit the article (eg the term "Corporate" may not be applicable). Sub-headings would be used where appropriate (eg Sales Data)

• Lead
• History
• Corporate Structure

ownership,subsidiares, divisions, parent companies, key people

• Business Operations

incorporation locations, corporate culture, business model, sales figures

• Products, Services & Brands

brand categories, R&D, rankings, competitors

• Sales and Marketing

advertising, sponsorships, endorsements

• Awards & Recognition
• Corporate Social Responsibility

philanthropy, environment