Talk:Teleflora

message: I think there should be a mention of the large number of complaints about this company. This business appears to be unreliable, judging by the number of negative online reviews and poor customer service.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.183.149.121 (talk) 03:55, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Mention of Complaints

message: After doing the rewrite of this page I have sadly realized there's just not much to write about this company that is notable which complies to WP:NPOV. It has only 4 sentences total. Then a bunch of links to the corporate website as "references" (like getting free link popularity).
I can find no reliable 3rd party sources for any notable information on Teleflora.
Per WP:CORP (notability) I'm going to go through the process of nominating this for deletion. This isn't just a matter of no one bothering to do the research. There's no research to do. This is a closely held private company that does not get much reliable 3rd party reporting. All there is are paid press releases and their own website. Also notice our "references" just go to all corporate controlled websites. Retran (talk) 18:19, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: deletion candidacy

message: I have attempted some WP:NPOV compliance revisions.
I'm removing the gushing descriptions of such things as "through its self-owned..." (not notable) "point-of-sale (POS) network known as the Dove network". This isn't an IT article where we can nerd out on names of POS networks. As fun as that may have been for me. Its an article on the company. A mention that it can provide the clearinghouse services is important and notable (as that's what makes this company a company) but the details of the infrastructure only serve as promotional material, I would argue. Retran (talk) 21:02, 9 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV impartiality fixes 

message: Hi! I work at Teleflora and have a few notes that may assist in a re-write, though obviously I don't want to do them myself because of a conflict of interest (since I work here). In response to the most recent post about deletion - we can be a challenging company to gather data on, since we are private, therefore all news releases, etc will come from our public relations team, so I would like to offer a few 3rd party resources that may help.
Sites like Glassdoor.com  do offer basic information on our company size and income, as do Hoover's , BusinessWeek  and so forth.
:Thanks. What tidbits do you think should be included in this article from these company snapshots?Retran (talk) 20:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: see my argument below, we should not include phrases like "#1 whatever" here. In this case the meaning is not obvious, and it's also problematic to assess (should one go by channel revenue or purely number of vendors to conclude which entity is #1?):ie: the neutrality and notability of such a statement cannot be established. Retran (talk) 20:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

text: I'm very confused now. How can we establish the notability of this company as a B2B player through independent news articles? If we could, I still don't understand how it could be appropriate to geek-out on all the different systems and brand names. It might be appropriate for the article to discuss that its a major B2B player in re. to POS systems, then cite a reference which elucidates all the geeky stuff names. Retran (talk) 20:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

text: "and rarely show up 'spelled out' as such because they are assumed in industry coverage"... Interesting argument but we need to see them in mainstream articles to establish notability, and THEN we can turn to industry specific sources for further citation of specifics perhaps not mentioned in mainstream press. Do you have access any mainstream press articles about your company (besides just computer-generated listings on hoovers, newsweek, glassdoor, etc)?Retran (talk) 20:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

text: Hi, thank you for providing these suggestions and possible source materials. Notability of a company or a topic about a company is best established by assessing the number of independent articles written on the company. Do you have any references to non-promotional news articles discussing the service offerings you wrote about (POS, CC, etc)? In my opinion, inclusion in hoovers and glassdoor is great for finding little factoids about private companies but it doesn't help much in establishment of notability of particular topics (such as if a particular offering is notable enough for inclusion in this article). I also notice you included a list of POS system brand names, but I wonder how that can help us in constructing this article? Retran (talk) 20:21, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

text: Also, as you may be aware, the number of purported vendors might be a certain high number, but there's other things to note when establishing relative importance of a company.. such as revenue. How does Teleflora to other peer companies in this regards, revenue from brokering distance orders? And no matter what, I can't fathom that stating a designation like "#1 florist company" would be very neutral, especially since its meaning is not very obvious. I'm not certain we can establish that having the greatest number of member vendors is notable enough to mention, but it I'm willing to hear arguments why and would be willing to include it in an update to this article. Retran (talk) 20:27, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

text: I removed your ref tags because they don't seem to work on this talk page, we can just display the URL and titles verbosely on talk anyway for clarity.Retran (talk) 20:30, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  new edit request