Talk:Micah Baldwin

Size of company
I don't want to edit war, but why include "small" in front of company? I know its not "big" but nobody is saying it is. Just leave the subjective descriptor out and be done, no? --Malerooster (talk) 01:40, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I stuck the "small" in to give a little context. I've worked for "small" companies that aren't notable enough for Wikipedia that employ hundreds of people, and own equipment worth more than all Grapica.ly's assets combined. (I'm basing that on an assumption that Graphically is worth about 1-2 million dollars.) Being CEO of a 5 or 10 person company isn't like being CEO of Amazon or Apple, and the article needs to reflect that somehow, though I'm not sure how best to do this. Perhaps "start-up" or something in place of "small"? That at least is no longer subjective, and I'm pretty sure I saw it in at least one of the sources. ~Adjwilley (talk) 02:55, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: my 1-2 million estimate was probably a little low...5-6 may be more accurate...but the point still stands. ~Adjwilley (talk) 03:05, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I would stick with what sources call it. Readers can also click on the link and decide for themselves what size the company it is. Can we lose the small for now? --Malerooster (talk) 04:10, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * How's that? ~Adjwilley (talk) 05:22, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * That works.... for now :). At some point, not sure when, I would drop that discriptor as well. When do startups stop being startups and just plain ol' companies? Not sure. Thanks, --Malerooster (talk) 22:12, 6 December 2012 (UTC)ps, also, whats up with the red category, is that just a spelling error?--Malerooster (talk) 22:14, 6 December 2012 (UTC)pss, looks like a deleted category. I would remove that since it doesn't add much. --Malerooster (talk) 22:16, 6 December 2012 (UTC)