User talk:Porterfan1

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Porterfan1, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 06:25, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additions of http://.ecompetitors.com/

Accounts

Ecompetitors (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
Porterfan1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · blacklist hits · AbuseLog · what links to user page · count · COIBot · Spamcheck · user page logs · x-wiki · status · Edit filter search · Google · StopForumSpam)
Please do not add advertising or inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.--Hu12 (talk) 20:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ecompetitors

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" is strongly discouraged. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam); and,
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. --Hu12 (talk) 20:07, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Justification for listing ECOMPETITORS

Ecompetitors has just spent seven years building the world's first global industry classification system at the line-of-business level - the level where Michael E. Porter defines the term industry. We cover the top 10,000 global industries. We think it's never been done before; and the article we wrote [Ecompetitors] was written without a sales pitch at all - totally neutral - just the facts!

We are very familiar with NAICS, the U.S. government classification system (with Canada and Mexico) and our classification system is 7 times longer in terms of "industries" - and our scope is global, not just North America.

Because we followed Wikipedia rules, and because we are relevant to anyone in the world interested in the global economy or any of the industries which define the global economy, we even thought you would use our page as a "Featured article in Wikipedia."

Your contributions to wikipedia under username Ecompetitors and user Porterfan1,, consist entirely of promoting ECOMPETITORS. It is quite evident that these account(s) are only contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote ECOMPETITORS. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia - as such many articles do not belong here. Wikipedia is not a "vehicle for advertising". In addition, Wikipedia is not a place to to promote a site--Hu12 (talk) 23:05, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hu12. Before I give up on Wikipedia, do you have any suggestions? My understanding is that the goal of Wikipedia is to convey information and knowledge. ECOMPETITORS has the most knowledge of the global economy in terms of basic elements (the industries / lines of business that make up the global economy) than anyone. If we add more details, will that help? Do you have a sample article you can point to for a format? We tried to follow an example of what Wikipedia allows by following the format of a company that is in generally the same area, but without the 10,000 components that we have. (The sample we followed is at Global Industry Classification Standard Porterfan1 (talk) 23:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, if your company is notable, someone not involved with the company will write an article. Writing it yourself tends to show the lack of notability be Wikipedia standards. Please read the notability guidelines for companies if you have not already done so. You will see that spending seven years doing something is not a criteria, being covered by third party reliable sources with in depth coverage is the criteria. Thus, your company's article as it stands should be deleted, as the sources listed under references are either not third party, or are from the Census folks. To make it pass the notability guideline, use things like newspaper articles, magazine articles, and other reputable media to source the article, not press releases or say BusinessWire. As to an example to follow, BAE Systems and Elderly Instruments are company articles listed as Featured Articles, or see the articles here which are rated as Good. But ultimately, if you are only here to promote your company, Wikipedia does not need you (we are doing just fine) and you will get little help. Aboutmovies (talk) 07:45, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An article you created is about to be deleted: Tools which can help you

The article you created, Ecompetitors is about to be deleted from Wikipedia.

There is an ongoing debate about whether your article should be deleted here:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ecompetitors.

The faster your respond, the better chance the article you created can be saved. This is because deletion debates only stay open for a few days, and the first comments are usually the most important.

There are several tools and other editors who can help you keep the page from being deleted forever:

You can list the page up for deletion on Article Rescue Squadron. If you need help listing your page, add a comment on the Article Rescue Squadron talk page.
You can request a mentor to help explain to you all of the complex rules that editors use to get a page deleted, here: Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. But don't wait for a mentor to respond on the deletion page.
When try to delete a page, veteran editors love to use a lot of rule acronyms. Don't let these acronyms intimidate you.
Here is a list of your own acronyms you can use yourself: WP:Deletion debate acronyms which may support the page you created being kept.
Acronyms in deletion debates are sometimes incorrectly used, or ignore rules or exceptions.
You can merge the article into a larger article.

If your page is deleted, you still have many options available. Good luck! travb (talk) 18:46, 29 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Industry classifications

Thanks for your article Industry information -- we have needed something like this for a while, and I'm glad you've started it. As you can see from the above comments, WP does have a pretty strict conflict-of-interest policy, so you should not be linking to your own site. I would be happy to add material about eCompetitors to the article if you can point me to information about its notability. Evidence would be things like articles in reputable publications like WSJ or HBR. We should also be sure to include other services similar to eCompetitors. --macrakis (talk) 18:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hoping this is the right place to respond.... I'm glad you're glad I started the discussion. An article about eCompetitors will be in the next publication of SCIP (the Society of Competitive Intelligence Professionals). It was approved months ago and delayed because of their re-org which you can read about at Society of Competitive Intelligence Professionals.

(If it's relevant, we have the largest LinkedIn Group focused on Global Industry Segmentation with over 4,200+ users, so our unique segmentation, which took eight years to develop, is known to many. Also, we've asked almost a thousand people and we do not know of anyone else with a similar service, although we expect in a year or so others will follow our lead.) (unsigned note by 2010-01-09T15:39:06 Porterfan1)

Thanks for the quick answer. What about Revere Data? Don't they do something very similar? --macrakis (talk) 21:10, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Revere Data would be the closest private company to what we do. They boast that they have "over 1,200 industry sectors, almost ten times as many as are visible in conventional systems". Their comment is basically true - "ten times more than most conventional systems"; although it's twice as many as Hoover's; and about 200 fewer than NAICS codes.

We have ten times more than Revere - but the number of industries is less important than the concept of what an industry is. We use Porter's definition; we don't know what the others use except that in my opinion none of them use Porter because they lump things together that should not be lumped together. For example, try growing an apple, some grapes, and a few bananas - and you'll know instantly that they represent three distinct industries, each requiring an industry analysis.