Draft talk:GroupM

Draft feedback
In response to User:Drmies' comment, I have disclosed my conflict of interest appropriately and can confirm I have nothing to do with User:CorporateM or their work.

Thanks again for your feedback. On my user talk page, you mentioned possibly trimming the paragraph about C-suite personnel, but otherwise, can you clarify what you mean by "corporate language"? If you can point out specific text that's problematic, I can work to address. Of course, I welcome direct draft improvements from you and other editors.

Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 19:10, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Part of this was discussed on your talk page. Another example is this:
 * "GroupM India has an office in Gurgaon, as of 2019,[35] and has worked to develop tools to help advertisers target specific markets.[36]" - My question would be who cares? I realize the company does but you have to look at this from a reader's standpoint. This is something for the "about" page of their website in my opinion. --CNMall41 (talk) 19:19, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @CNMall41 I've removed "and has worked to develop tools to help advertisers target specific markets". Would you prefer to remove mention of GroupM India's office location, too? Inkian Jason (talk) 19:22, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I am giving you examples, not specific preferences that I have. Again, I am only one opinion. However, for me to review this, it would need a lot of work which you haven't addressed (specifically the WP:OVERKILL or pointing out the references that meet WP:ORGCRIT - as stated on your talk page). --CNMall41 (talk) 19:24, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @CNMall41 I've trimmed the C-suite personnel, except for the current and former CEOs. Can you confirm if I should remove mention of the current and/or former CEOs/chairpersons, too? I am attempting to improve the draft based on your feedback. Inkian Jason (talk) 19:32, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I am not sure what I can to help at this point as suggestions were already provided. Maybe first start with the WP:OVERKILL and pointing out the sources that meet WP:ORGCRIT?--CNMall41 (talk) 19:33, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * CNMall41, I have identified some of the better sources and I am actively working to trim the number of citations, per your request. I am sorry you feel I am not taking advice from editors because I'm making a genuine attempt at addressing concerns shared thus far. I've been told there's too many sources and buzzspeak, with no sources or text identified as problematic, so I apologize for asking for specificity in follow-up questions. I'll continue to work on the draft. Inkian Jason (talk) 22:15, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

An update on Citation overkill: I thought I was taking a more conservative approach by drafting text which could be attributed to multiple reliable sources (and providing all of the sources as evidence). Seeing this is not a preference, I've trimmed the number of citations and sources. The original draft had 66 sources in 59 inline citations. The current draft has 41 inline citations and less reliance on Ad Age and Adweek. CNMall41, this remains a work in progress, but I hope you see I am taking your feedback seriously and not relying on others to do the work. Thanks, Inkian Jason (talk) 14:45, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Buzzspeak
I am sorry to see this draft has been rejected. You said, "Portions of this draft contain marketing buzzspeak." Can you offer examples or identify which text is problematic? I'm happy to address. Inkian Jason (talk) 19:56, 26 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I am confused because at Articles for deletion/GroupM the nominator said, "I only see GroupM coverage in unreliable sources. There's nothing really salvageable here (which isn't already in WPP Group) so should just be deleted." This is not the case with the current draft (if any of the sources are unreliable, please let me know so I can remove), and WPP plc only mentions GroupM once in passing, grouped with other company holdings. I had hoped this article would help clarify which of WPP's businesses were under the GroupM umbrella. Inkian Jason (talk) 20:05, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * User:Inkian Jason - The draft has not been rejected. It has been declined.  There is a difference.
 * I suggest asking for advice at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:30, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Robert McClenon I have already! I appreciate the invite and hope for some helpful feedback from editors. Thanks, Inkian Jason (talk) 21:39, 26 September 2023 (UTC)