User talk:Rose051616

Why do you keep removing well cited facts from Nolan Archibald article?

I understand you must not like these facts, but they are facts Asmithmd1 (talk) 00:54, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

You keep referring to the Emhart acquisition as “a near disastrous mis-step.” This is not a fact, it is an opinion. The Emhart acquisition significantly strengthened Black & Decker and broadened its earnings base. Also, the nonstrategic businesses sold were sold at exceptional values. Further, it was during the same exact period of time that Black & Decker launched the DeWalt brand that has now become a $4 billion business and the #1 professional and industrial brand in the world. Based on those “facts,” this was not “a near disastrous mis-step” but something that proved to be a very strategic acquisition for the company. I agree that we should both include the facts and both eliminate our personal opinions. The Emhart acquisition was a fact. “A near disastrous miss-step” is an opinion not based on the facts. Rose051616 (talk) 16:38, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

The way wikipedia works is that facts must be referenced from some published source. Disastrous misstep comes from a Wall Street Journal article you can read here: https://www.spokesman.com/stories/1995/jan/15/listening-to-consumers-pays-off-for-hardware/

I will be shocked if you can find anything published that says, "Emhart acquisition significantly strengthened Black & Decker" because the fact is it very nearly bankrupted the company. "businesses sold were sold at exceptional values" is also going to be impossible to find in print. Asmithmd1 (talk) 04:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)