Talk:Jack Morton Worldwide/Archive 1

Archive 1

Old talk

Please note the changes to this wiki, which include more external links than previous. Also, the entry is informational as it mentions the company founder, Jack Morton, a key figure the history of American business.—Preceding unsigned comment added by JMorton (talk • contribs)

I do appreciate you editing it down, but it still reads like a promotion for the company, and writing articles about yourself and/or your own company is generally frowned upon. If it's really notable, surely someone who doesn't have any vested interested will create the article. Ytny (talk) 20:19, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Ytny, please note the myriad companies on wikipedia who also list their history. Larger corporations go uncontested in this domain. Please explain to me why this is? How might I change this wiki so that it may reside in this domain, much like the myriad other companies and organizations? If in any way, you can help me understand your definition of "promotion" versus that of wikipedia, then might this wiki remain intact like the countless others (Shell Oil for example)? If I remove the award mention, would this pass for a non-promotional wiki?

Lastly, I would like to add that despite my username, I am not Jack Morton, he passed away in 2003. Therefore Jack Morton Worldwide is personally not my company. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JMorton (talk • contribs) 20:26, 5 April 2007 (UTC).

First off, I apologize for assuming that you were the Jack Morton. Honest mistake on my part - a lot of people do put up articles about themselves or their companies, and I thought that was the case here.

And yes, there are other companies with Wikipedia articles. But the issue isn't whether companies should have articles on Wikipedia, but the nature of the article. The issue is that the article reads like it could be the company's promotional material - "He was the son of a tenet farmer that pioneered a new era in corporate entertainment", for example. The award mention would actually be helpful in establishing the company's notability, since it's an independent recognition of the company. Ytny (talk) 21:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

This thread is quite ridiculous. This entry on Jack Morton Worldwide is a blatant commercial for its services, the entry has no cultural significance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.6.184.69 (talk • contribs) 15:59, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

In light of the changes

Is it possible to downgrade from "speedy deletion?" Please see the wiki. --JMorton 22:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by JMorton (talk • contribs) 22:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC).

I've removed the speedy tag already. 03:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

A note to Tom Harrison

Please engage me in how to avoid deletion. Though the user name is JMorton like the page Jack Morton, I am not Jack Morton. I am an employee. Jack Morton has been deceased for some years now.

It will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Morton Worldwide. Please join in there. Tom Harrison ^Talk 14:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Crosspost from COI/N

From Wikipedia:Username policy#Sharing accounts:

“For reasons of attribution and accountability, you are not allowed to share your account or password with others. If you do, and this becomes known, your account will be blocked. Please also note that "role accounts" associated with an office, position, or task are currently prohibited.
      [Exceptions: Wikimedia Foundation and internal Wikipedia committee accounts.]
“Role accounts for the purposes of conducting public relations or marketing via the encyclopedia are strongly discouraged and will be blocked for violations of the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guidelines.”

The policy applies to the JMorton user account. — Athaenara ✉ 01:50, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The above was posted on Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#COI: Jack Morton Worldwide. I'm crossposting it here in case the users of the JMorton account are not following the noticeboard discussion. — Athaenara ✉ 07:14, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I would just like to point out, as I have in the past, the multitude of corporations with Wikipedia pages. I ask any editor to explain in his or her own words and not those of Wikipedia's (I know how tempting it is to cut and paste) how our page can achieve the unmarked status it enjoyed only one week ago?

To address the sharing of the username/password - I am the sole contributor to this page. No one else on in the company knows how to login using with the JMorton name and password.

Before the latest changes, our page was unmarked. Now that I've learned more about the company's history and have made updates relevant to 2007, there suddenly is an issue with the tone and sourcing of the page (although I added more 3rd party sources).

I understand the Wikipedia editors' opinions of the sources to be subjective - meaning their opinions on what is "third-party" come from familiarity with a media outlet and its standards of fact-checking and fair reporting. Surely, then, BBC, Ad Age, Hoover's online can be considered third-party?

Lastly, I'd like to note that all statements in the article are facts and in no way embellish the history of Jack Morton Worldwide. It is, therefore, a page anyone can read to become more informed about his or her world.

JMorton 00:25, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

→ To JMorton: Discussion of your conflict of interest is centralised on Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#COI: Jack Morton Worldwide. Please post your messages about those issues there, whether or not you also post them here. Thank you. — Athaenara ✉ 02:37, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

→ To Athaenara: I will move my messages there. Thanks for the notice. JMorton 17:59, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

To JMorton

You may think you're doing a service to your company by changing it into corporate-speak propaganda, but I'm quite disappointed that you deleted my relevant contribution about the company's efforts to aid ESPN's NASCAR coverage in spite of the fact that that is the most publicly notable and interesting fact I could find on the page at the time. Furthermore, you did so without an explanation or any sort of discussion on the talk page. It may not matter to you since you're spreading the "good word", but what YOU--as an employee--think are relevant facts are not what wikipedia is about.MichaelProcton (talk) 09:43, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Help me response

{{helpme}} with getting independent editors to take a hand to Jack Morton Worldwide. JMorton (talk) 23:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

You may want to try posting at the appropriate page at the Village pump. Hope this helped! --omtay38 01:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)