Talk:Hofmann GmbH

Removal of tag "This article relies too much on references to primary sources"

I removed this tag after editing. There was no WP:OR. Using company website links was a service to give readers excact information. In some cases there was no information produced of the company itself but of German public broadcasting stations (NDR & DW-TV). In some cases the use of company website links was just additional and therefore dispensable. To be very clear: SEO was and is not intended. Atomiccocktail (talk) 09:06, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Template "written like an advertisement"

Hello everybody,

Since 2017-10-05 the template "Advertisement" / "written like an advertisement" has been placed above the article. The talk page does not say what exactly is being criticized. If that does not happen, please remove this template. Criticism must be comprehensible and detailed, otherwise it is nothing more than personal opinion and hardly to use here.
Atomiccocktail (talk) 10:03, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

"It has since developed quite varied machines, components and systems that differ in their dimensions, drives, application systems, environmental compatibilities, functions and technical performance data." Says nothing meaningful, and is just fluff. Same for "the company applied for a number of patents", followed by "Moreover it repeatedly expanded the Company grounds". Moreover? Moreover means also and more importantly. So you're saying that the company has applied for a number of patents, without saying what they are for, or demonstrating that those patents are somehow significant, and more importantly, they acquired more land several times? So that's their more important accomplishment? More land? That is nothing but creating the impression of saying something specific and meaningful, while making only a vague or ambiguous claim. That's promotional language.Mduvekot (talk) 23:27, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

That does not convince. The patents are sourced (see footnote 11), as well as the fact that media addressed the patents several times. The company started out as a small business that increasingly expanded its manufacturing facilities, adding the company's property to it. The product range was initially small and has expanded significantly in the course of corporate development. To call all these statements "advertising" shows in my eyes little knowledge of company history and advertising, sorry. This is instead trying to find a fly in the ointment and is not an encyclopedic attitude. Atomiccocktail (talk) 06:22, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

The problem is the wording, the inclusion of irrelevant factoids, not that the claims are unsourced. A company has applied for patents. That is routine. I'll point out other instances of weasel wording. "The first decade of the 21st century was characterized by a pronounced growth." Well, no. An increase from 67 to 100 over 11 years is less than four percent annual growth. To demonstrate "pronounced" growth, you'd have to show that 4% is different from trends in the same industry segment. Even then, the neutral way to refer to the increase in number of employees would be to simply state the numbers.

Kindly refrain from commenting on my perceived lack of "encyclopedic attitude". Mduvekot (talk) 13:04, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Registering patents does not mean you get patent protection. Holding patents does not mean that media mention patents when they report on the company. “Factoids”- this term is little more than an obvious attempt to portray the real expansion of the product range as totally irrelevant. If I had presented the products offered today in detail, then exactly the accusation “product advertising” would have been made. Trying to put me in a position where I can only “lose” is very obvious. Over a decade, the workforce has grown by 50 percent, which is far from normal, even though there has been a severe global economic crisis. In addition, the company has been perceived as one of the fastest growing companies of its size. Moreover, every information is seriously sourced. Atomiccocktail (talk) 14:02, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

I looked at the growth in number of employees in similar industry sector and found that Hoffman grew slightly less than the average. There is nothing unusual about a 3.7% compound annual growth. It's up to you to demonstrate that this is "far from normal". Articles about companies can mention the number of employees, that is not the problem. The tag is applied, correctly IMHO, because of the tone of the text. It needs to be rewritten in a neutral voice. It is possible to write about a business without engaging in promotion: here's a list of all the featured articles about a business enterprise: Mutual Broadcasting System, Delrina, Baltimore Steam Packet Company, Icos, Elderly Instruments, Oliver Typewriter Company, NeXT, Film Booking Offices of America, Odwalla, Scene7, London Necropolis Company, Oriental Film, Manchester United F.C., Panavision Mduvekot (talk) 23:03, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Mduvekot. I asked for a third opinion. Atomiccocktail (talk) 09:35, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello. I'm here from WP:3O. I read this article with interest. It seems to be a well-written press release / advertisement, and I note that Atomiccocktail describes his work as "Paid Edit by Peter Wuttke, head of einfach machen unternehmenskommunikation GmbH, Hamburg (Germany). Client is: Hofmann GmbH, Rellingen, Germany)." The tag is appropriate. Even more appropriate would be a drastic rewrite of the article, reducing it to a stub (for which the references offer a barely sufficient notability). I will also keep Herr Wuttke in mind if I ever need a press release or advertisement to be written. He is good at it. Sylvia de Jonge (talk) 08:22, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

First name corrected (paid edit)

Hello all. A quick note: I have just corrected the first name of a managing director. There is a source for this correction given. I also fixed a spelling error. This was a minor paid edit. Hope, that's ok. Atomiccocktail (talk) 08:40, 18 May 2021 (UTC)