Talk:Rockefeller Capital Management
Add topic| This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
Source analysis
[edit]I have anlaysed the references in this permalink to the best of my ability in the table below. I have been unable to see the elements that are behind paywalls, and leave that to others to assess FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 13:41, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
| Source | Independent? | Reliable? | Significant coverage? | Count source toward GNG? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ✔ Yes | ||||
| ✘ No | ||||
| ? Unknown | ||||
| ? Unknown | ||||
| ? Unknown | ||||
| ~ Behind a paywall | ? Unknown | |||
| ? Unknown | ||||
| ? Unknown | ||||
| ✘ No | ||||
| ✘ No | ||||
| ✘ No | ||||
| ✘ No | ||||
| ~ interviews with many folk imn the sector | ✘ No | |||
| ~ UN is independent | ✘ No | |||
| ✘ No | ||||
| ✘ No | ||||
| ✘ No | ||||
| ~ Org;'s own website | ✘ No | |||
| This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}. | ||||
The notability hangs, for me, on the elements behind paywalls that I have been unable to inspect. Pinging DGG who has an interest in this draft. Please note that this analysis is my own opinion, and is a subjective analysis unless and until modified and/or ratified by oyther editors in good standing.
My firm advice is to remove anything that even feels like a PR piece, if necessary removing also the alleged fact it purports to reference. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 13:41, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
Discussion coming tomorrow. As usual, we mostly but not completely agree--we look with slightly different concerns,& I think I can get to some of the paywalled articles. DGG ( talk ) 08:58, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
- Disagreement is good. It means that eventual thoughts are better because of it. I can be persuaded by good arguments, as can you. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 14:16, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Significant coverage
[edit]For your consideration, here is a list of some full articles in major publications I have found.
--TerryBG (talk) 01:12, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
- @TerryBG Please read and understand WP:RS. Further reading is at WP:RSP. Please understand PR and Press Release material, whether issued verbatim or rehashed or regurgitated in some manner, adds precisely nothing to WP:N. Recognising PR material is very easy. I used to write a great deal of it professionally. Anything that even feels like PR does not belong on any list of potentially useful sources FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 21:44, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
- C-Class AfC articles
- AfC submissions by date/22 September 2021
- Accepted AfC submissions
- C-Class company articles
- Low-importance company articles
- WikiProject Companies articles
- C-Class Finance & Investment articles
- Low-importance Finance & Investment articles
- WikiProject Finance & Investment articles
- Talk pages of subject pages with paid contributions
