Template talk:Infobox company/Archive 2

message: I think it is really necessary, if you say how many employees a company has, to say  that there is some date at which there were this many employees. Really, everything about a bussiness can be ephemeral. The format should allow a (date) or (year) after any bit of info in the table. RayKiddy 16:53, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. See Nokia for an example. Adraeus 19:42, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates with Info 

message: Jerryseinfeld, I'm not certain we want inexperienced users to know about editing this template or want to confuse inexperienced users into think editing this core template is how they edit the template on the company pages, but it's a nifty idea for promoting collaborative discussion and improve of this template. Adraeus 23:58, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. And it's a convenience. - Jerryseinfeld 00:11, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit link? 

message: I just went through the articles that use infobox_company and corrected formatting issues. The following are the correct formats:
* Key People First Name Middle Initial (Nickname) Last Name Suffix, Job Title/Job Title 2 (See Microsoft entry.)
* Products Product 1Product 2Product 3
This is done for consistency, readability and page size considerations. Remember: the more text used, the larger the page.
Adraeus 05:56, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Correct key_people and products formatting 

message: I would rather have it like "CEO: Person" than "Person, CEO". - Jerryseinfeld 22:01, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You suggested that we change "Person, Job Title" to "Title: Person". Why should this not be done? Simply because the person is more important than the title. How names/titles are formatted in annual reports, on business cards, etc., is how names/titles should be formatted here. Since the infobox is directly related to business, we should attempt to maintain a corporate theme. You can change the formatting, of course, but you have to change all the articles' formatting too in order to maintain consistency. You can't just change one or two and expect me—since in addition to you I'm one of the few who's working on this— to change the rest. Adraeus 22:18, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: "The person is more important than the title". Oh, really? Of course he is. I would simply like to change the formatting. - Jerryseinfeld 22:24, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a design issue: how content is laid out affects what's communication. If you'd like to change the formatting, you have to do it for all the current corporate articles. You'll also need to modify the syntax and the syntax description. Changing the formatting now due to preference is just too much work in my opinion. Adraeus 22:34, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: If the "syntax" example is updated it will drift in that directon. - Jerryseinfeld 22:43, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a good reason to change the formatting or is this simply a matter of preference? Currently, the formatting is a matter of standardization, design and consistency. Adraeus 22:54, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I have a good reason. It's better. Do you understand? Do you think hooters and yahoo put it like that by chance? 99% of these people are non-heard-of, so you first want to know there job, and then you want to know their name, and perhaps more. I would like to see you at Hooters arguing about this, "no I want the persone BEFORE the job, because the person is more IMPORTANT than the title. It's a matter of CONSISTENCY." - Jerryseinfeld 17:28, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: While I'd like to go to Hooters, I think you meant Hoover's. As a business owner and professional graphic designer with his company in D&B's database, I know exactly why their data tables are designed like so. Unless we're going to redesign our infobox so that it uses a table similar to Yahoo!'s or Hoover's, then your reason isn't a good reason at all since it's a matter of preference for you. Adraeus 21:13, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Why doesn't a third person weigh in on this? - Jerryseinfeld 21:07, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: That's not a good idea. The Monobook stylesheet justifies text and any extra spaces in a title makes the title look really bad. See Allegheny_Technologies. Moreover, the reason extraneous spaces should be avoided is due to file size concerns. Remember: the infobox adds to the size of a page. We don't want to overextend the infobox's welcome. Adraeus 22:34, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The "/" sometimes mean "or" so it reads "Chairman or CEO". But it's not a big deal. You may note how other sites list the company profile (Yahoo!), (Business Week), (CBS MarketWatch), ([http://www.forbes.com/finance/mktguideapps/personinfo/similarResults/byTicker.jhtml?passedTicker=C&passedCompanyName=Citigroup+Inc.
&resultsStart=1&resultsHowMany=25&resultsSortProperties=%2BtitleRank%2C%2BlastName%2C%2BfirstName%2C%2BmiddleInitial&resultsSortCategoryName=title Forbes]), (Fortune), ([http://briefings.ft.com/company/showFinancials.html?view=Overview/Profile&extelID=00041959&company=Citigroup%2C+Inc.®ion=
&industry=&pageNum=1&selected=Citigroup+Inc&options=1&ticker=US%3AC&ftep=CITIG00000&isin=US1729671016&sedol=2297907&tab=2&subtab=-1
&q=&s1=&s2= Financial Times]), (New York Times), (Reuters), (MSNBC), (The Street). Some of them use the ",", some of them use the "&", I believe that is better than the "/".--Jerryseinfeld 23:18, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

text: This is Wikipedia, not Yahoo! By the way, I use Hoover's.  Adraeus 22:34, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: They do to. - Jerryseinfeld 22:41, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: Except instead of for example "CEO and Director" it could be "CEO", instead of "President, COO, and Director" it could be "President, COO". - Jerryseinfeld 22:31, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Right. Only use the most important title. Adraeus 22:34, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Formatting 

message: I suggest key_people is renamed to management. - Jerryseinfeld 22:00, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Key People is general and allows editors to insert other people, such as lead game designers, into infoboxes for smaller companies without a huge hierarchy of executives. Adraeus 22:21, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Key people 

message: For the easier code formatting that looked like:
  key_people     = Chairman: Person 
CEO: Person |
  products       = Product
Product
Product |
Is there a way to make the new lines in for example "products" not create a paragraph ("p") tag, or is there some way to remove its margin? I tried a few classes from  and . Isn't it possible with for example "tocindent" from commonPrint.css?. - Jerryseinfeld 00:26, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand your question. Would you please elaborate? Thank you. Adraeus 11:32, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The p tag skews the layout. - Jerryseinfeld 22:17, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Show me an example, please. Adraeus 22:55, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: It's easier to put each on its own line, that's why I'm wondering if it's possible to get rid of the "margin" that is placed above the p tag. - Jerryseinfeld 17:30, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Code 

message: It's great that someone has finally created a decent infobox for companies. I am currently adding infoboxes to the links off List of Irish companies and just want to get a few things straight before things become inconsistant, I also have a few minor queries:
*Should their not be a line for industry e.g. Aviation, Computer Software etc., I know you have a products line, but surely an industry line is needed.
*In your Microsoft example you have the link Public, this should be Public company or Public. It would be helpful if you added that to your guidelines at the top of this page.
*Should the terms CEO, COO, SVP etc., be linked to their respective pages.
*If you are going to include varibles such as employee count, should you not include 2004 revenues & profits (at least in the case of public companies).
Again, thanks for the handy infobox, i'll try to keep it consistant across my entries. CGorman 15:20, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: One more thing, does it not look better to have slogans in italics? CGorman 15:26, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  A few comments...