This Forum has been archived

Forums: Admin Central Index General Questions Companies and wikis
Central's forums are a place for the community to help other members.
To contact staff directly or to report bugs, please use Special:Contact.
Note: This topic has been unedited for 1604 days. It is considered archived - the discussion is over. Do not add to unless it really needs a response.

A general-purpose query.

I seem to be the person developing Tea wiki (albeit creating stubs at the moment), but my question is applicable to a number of other wikis as well:

How much are companies allowed to intervene in the articles on them (rather than merely keeping a watching brief)- can they advertise, provide updated links, reply to queries on the talk page etc?

A 'copy and paste general guidelines' (in which (name of wiki) is added as appropriate) would suffice. Jackiespeel 16:33, July 27, 2011 (UTC)

As much as you allow them to. It's your wiki, you can decide.  Monchoman45  Talk  Contribs  Skystone  16:36,7/27/2011 

'My wiki' only in the sense that others haven't joined in yet (g). Jackiespeel 16:39, July 27, 2011 (UTC)

Well if you're the only one editing, you are the community. See Help:Ways to promote your wiki for some ideas to grow your community. I'm a fan of Tea, so I'll stop by and help out. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 28 Jul 2011 2:45 PM Pacific
Jackiespeel, looks like you have the foundation for a great wiki. Who doesn't love tea? ;) (I'm a big fan of PG Tips). Happy editing! --Meighan WikiaStaff.png (help forum | blog) 23:47, July 28, 2011 (UTC)
I’ve looked at the Tea Wiki a few times. I think a wiki entirely dedicated to tea is a great thing. Some of the tea articles over at Wikipedia have been quite popular. I especially like the ones on old tea houses. I worked extensively on the “Aerated Bread Company” article over there. So, I know how interesting and fun the world of tea can be! Keep up the good work over at Tea Wiki! — SpikeToronto 07:01, July 29, 2011 (UTC)
P.S. Fandyllic’s a great one to help over there He’ll be a great asset to your wiki! — SpikeToronto 07:01, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

Feel free to join in ;).

I was on a bus going along Fleet Street 'a couple of weeks ago' - a shop being done up had an old fascia for the Aerated Bread Company. Jackiespeel 13:10, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

I notice the Tea wiki has no active admins and the founder never actually edited the wiki after founding it. You should consider adopting the Tea wiki. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 29 Jul 2011 12:49 PM Pacific
Jackie: You wouldn’t have happened to have taken a photo of the old Aerated Bread façade, would you?! I would love to add the image to the wikiaritcle!
Fandyllic: Great point Fandyllic! Once you’ve adopted the Tea Wiki, Jackie, Wikia Staff will grant you Administrator and Bureaucrat privileges for it. Didn’t I say Fandy was a great one to have on your team?! SmileySpikeToronto 23:42, July 29, 2011 (UTC)

No - I was in a bus at the time: it was on the Twinings side not the RCJ and 'some way along.' Jackiespeel 20:43, July 30, 2011 (UTC)

I think it might be possible to have a general agreement on company involvement - somewhere between Wikipedia's 'No direct involvment' and 'article as advertising puff.'

Changing the question slightly - what should be included on company article pages (whatever the product involved/Wiki):

  • Company name
  • Basic details - country/ies of operation, products etc
  • History of the company
  • Website (if currently active company)
  • Other relevant links, bibliography etc.

Any other key points? Jackiespeel 15:38, August 12, 2011 (UTC)

Generally, you should try to stick to the company details that are relevant to the topic of your wiki. Otherwise, it is hard to control the scope of what you can put. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 12 Aug 2011 9:56 PM Pacific
Jackie, you might find Wikipedia:Companies, corporations and economic information interesting. It is a broad brushstroke guide to creating/writing articles about companies. — SpikeToronto 07:31, August 13, 2011 (UTC)
Be careful of using Wikipedia guidelines. They can be much too broad for a typical topic-based Wikia wiki. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 13 Aug 2011 4:52 PM Pacific

There are now two threads here - 'default format for articles on companies' ('in this wiki the WP guidelines (link here) are adapted thus (list changes)'), and 'what involvement companies are allowed to have in the given wiki.' Jackiespeel 10:49, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

In answer to your original question regarding the involvement of the companies themselves, and/or their agents/representatives, and at the risk of being flamed by the WP-haters, you might want to have a look at Wikipedia:FAQ/Business#Am I allowed to edit articles about myself or my organization?SpikeToronto 11:18, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
Shall we say that those wikis in which companies are likely to feature should have 'a general internal agreement on' companies and their involvements, and theat the above two links can serve as a starting point for such discussions. Jackiespeel 16:23, August 15, 2011 (UTC)
I would say so, yes. Common sense tells us that very few WP policies can be brought over to a Wikia wiki wholesale. They all have to be adapted to the nature and size of the wiki to which they are to apply. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 17:00, August 15, 2011 (UTC)

Shall we say that it is probably useful to have a general policy across relevant wikia wikis ('more original research/communication with the company allowed than in Wikipedia but leave advertising puff to the linked website, and be courteous/non-libellous' - and if allowed on the particular wiki, indicate whether 'right of reply by interested parties' is allowed - something similar to (non wikia) Wikinfo's counterargument pages). Floating ideas for people to consider. Jackiespeel 21:48, August 29, 2011 (UTC)

Another 'point to be considered' - companies whose activities cross a number of wikis - possibly something along the lines of 'For X's activities in the field of y see (relevant wiki link)' - and 'A sister company Z deals with W, and is covered here (relevant wiki link)' etc.

If this is written into a more coherent whole, where could it be posted - 'Points to be considered' rather than policy. Jackiespeel 18:37, August 30, 2011 (UTC)

I think you mean 'guidelines' and yes, having guidelines is a good idea, but you have to make it easy for users to find guidelines and policies. -- Fandyllic (talk · contr) 31 Aug 2011 4:23 PM Pacific

I think all the main points have been covered - apart from mentioning that several 'how to write company histories' pages can be found with your favourite browser.

If someone can suggest a suitable place, something along the lines of the following.

1) Usual wiki rules apply.

2) See above two WP pages and 'how to write a company history articles on the web' for structuring.

3) Have an entry that is not a mirror of either the WP page or the company website.

4) Have an article on (your wiki) about local policy regarding companies - including what if any input they can make (and eg right of reply).

5) What coverage should be made on (your wiki) of aspects of the company that lie outside (your wiki)'s remit.

6) No hatchet jobs (as distinct from critiques) or other things likely to bring (your wiki)/Wikia into disrepute.

Anything else? Jackiespeel 13:09, September 1, 2011 (UTC)

As an example of what is probably unsuitable for a wiki - [1]. Jackiespeel 15:45, September 19, 2011 (UTC)