Talk:Chief procurement officer

Business Mid‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Occupations (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations articles

September 2010[edit]

Please revert to my last version. I have two comments -

(1) The report referenced in this article is currently being "sold" for $399 which means that it is not accessible or helpful to readers. I have updated the discussion with a more recent report called "The CPO's Agenda" that is freely available on the web

(2) The external link that was taken down is to the only media site focused on Chief Procurement Officers

Procurementleaders (talk) 20:20, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1) We can cite articles that need to be purchased to be read, this is allowed by the sourcing guidelines. What we cannot do is link to a copyrighted report hosted on a third party's web site in violation of that copyright.

2) The external link guidelines tell us not to link blogs. - MrOllie (talk) 20:27, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1) OK - Then we should update the article using what I wrote and link to the report below which is more updated and actually refers to what a CPO does, not what a CFO thinks about a CPO

http://www.aberdeen.com/aberdeen-library/5717/RA-procurement-officer-agenda.aspx

2) the media site is written by a "recognized authority" - there are CPO interviews and strategy content for CPOs

Procurementleaders (talk) 20:43, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

People arguing for a blog's inclusion love to quote "recognized authority" but they seldom bring up the rest of that point: "as a minimum standard, recognized authorities always meet Wikipedia's notability criteria for people" - MrOllie (talk) 20:46, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1) I changed the discussion and referenced a different and more current report - I request that you revert to my edit with the new link http://www.aberdeen.com/aberdeen-library/5717/RA-procurement-officer-agenda.aspx

2) OK - I know this site and the author, but I didn't add the external link to the site on this page in the first place (I did on other pages because it is an informative site). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Procurementleaders (talk • contribs) 21:11, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]