Talk:UKFast

Promotional tone
The following two sentences may be referenced but do they belong in an encyclopedia? "UKFast Training and Personal Growth UKFast owns a training property in Snowdonia which combines as a training centre and recreational escape for staff. Employees experience climbing weekends in Snowdon which promote camaraderie between departments and promotes a healthy lifestyle."

"UKFast.TV Training videos are also available to employees on iPods which are frequently updated with new material."

I can see what you mean by the last line, but he paragraph above about Training and personal growth is very relevant. UKFast won a string of awards for employee engagement, including "The UK's most fun and friendly work place". The training centre in Wales is part of a much wider plan to engage staff. Jones believes that the money you spend on your staff's well being and environment, directly transfers onto your bottom line. If more people treated their staff better, the UK would be a much better place!

This is all massively relevant and yes we have to be careful it is not to POV ish. I have interviewed him at SaleSharks and he is on a mission to change the way people do business.

(Professor Mole 16:06, 25 July 2010 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MarcoMole (talk • contribs)


 * This post is from 2010 and does not refer to the current content of the page, is it necessary for it to remain here?
 * Kellyormesher (talk) 11:55, 24 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, it should remain here for the record. The date is visible on the message. Nobody is going to overlook that the article has changed since then. --Stfg (talk) 10:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Ok, fair enough. Kellyormesher (talk) 15:06, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
This edit  by a connected user removed 23 references. The article now has no references and reads entirely like an advert. Theroadislong (talk) 10:44, 24 April 2014 (UTC)


 * This issue has been rectified. The page no longer reads "entirely like an advert".


 * Kellyormesher (talk) 12:10, 24 June 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kellyormesher (talk • contribs) 10:48, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

possible references moved from article space

 * http://www.prolificnorth.co.uk/2013/12/ukfast-london-scotland-glasgow/
 * http://www.thebusinessdesk.com/northwest/news/476190-ukfast-launches-uk-s-biggest-cloud.html
 * http://www.ukfast.co.uk/blog/2014/03/03/welcome-to-national-apprenticeship-week/
 * http://www.insidermedia.com/insider/north-west/73752-ukfast-expands-city-tower-and-more-lettings
 * http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/carbon-neutral-data-centre/
 * http://www.manchestercamerata.co.uk/supporters-news/ukfast-becomes-sale-sharks-main-sponsor.html
 * http://www.nationalbusinessawards.co.uk/Content/Winners-of-the-National-Business-Awards-2013
 * http://features.thesundaytimes.co.uk/public/best100companies/live/template
 * https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/?q=awards/europe
 * http://www.ey.com/Publication/vwLUAssets/2012-Award-Recipients/$FILE/2012-Award-Recipients.pd
 * http://www.ispa.org.uk/ispa-awards/previous-winners/2009-2/

Rectifying Issues With This Page
Hi all,

I’ve recently taken up the task of editing UKFast Wikipedia page and I’m working towards dealing with a few of the flagged issues on the page. I've been sorting the referencing problems gradually, but have found that the issues still remain on the top of the site, even when they have been rectified.

Likewise, there are a few issues that were flagged last year, which have been dealt with but are still cluttering the top of the page. Do you know if there's anything I can do about this?

More specifically, I noticed that the user Theroadislong made an edit on the 4 June to do with the neutral tone of the page:

PRE EDIT: In previous years, UKFast has invested in many local projects, including helping to raise £250,000 for a new MRI scanner in the "Five Stars Scanner Appeal" for the Royal Manchester Children's Hospital; participating in the "Duchess on the Estate Project" to raise money for a community project in Northern Moor in Sale; and completing regular sponsored fitness challenges with the team.

POST EDIT: UKFast helped to raise £250,000 for a new MRI scanner in the "Five Stars Scanner Appeal" for the Royal Manchester Children's Hospital; participated in the "Duchess on the Estate Project" to raise money for a community project in Northern Moor in Sale; and completed regular sponsored fitness challenges with the team.

I don't believe that this edit should have been made - it seems more stylistic than tonal. The statement "in previous years, UKFast has invested in many local projects" is factual, and can be supported by the examples and references given underneath.

I absolutely agree that Wikipedia entries should carry an objective tone and view, and fully support your efforts to ensure this remains the case. But I’m not sure that edits like that above stick to these guidelines and they muddy the water a little as to what I should and shouldn’t write.

Let me know if you can help or offer any advice,

Best wishes,

Kellyormesher


 * The only project mentioned in the reference is the "Five Stars Scanner Appeal" so that is what we mention. The statement "in previous years, UKFast has invested in many local projects" maybe factual I don't know but it's NOT refrenced. Wikipedia relies on reliable third party references for it's content. Theroadislong (talk) 16:41, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


 * The subsequent examples were also referenced, but these references were deemed inadequate and removed. Have corrected this issue by providing other examples of UKFast's many charitable activities and referenced them accordingly on 23 June 2014. Kellyormesher (talk) 12:10, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

I have come from Third opinion. Can one of you explain what the dispute is about please. Martin Hogbin (talk) 09:29, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * User:Kellyormesher (who has a declared conflict of interest) considers I am being overzealous in my efforts to keep the page encyclopaedic and neutral. See more below. Theroadislong (talk) 09:35, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Theroadislong, could you point me to the version of the page that you think is most promotional and unencyclopedic please. Martin Hogbin (talk) 13:03, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The version which is proposed below, I have an issue with the neutrality of the following...

These are all promotional in tone and intended to puff up the company, as you would expect coming from their own marketing department.Theroadislong (talk) 13:44, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * "UKFast claimed to be the first UK hosting provider to be certified as 100% carbon neutral"
 * "dedicated £1m to a cyber-security fund"
 * "reached a milestone turnover of £20m"
 * "The success of The Harvey's Den Project"
 * "UKFast has consistently featured"
 * "UKFast has been involved in a number of local charity projects"


 * It seems that your problem is about the selection of material, then. The thing is, these are just things the company has done. You wouldn't remove Angelina Jolie's charity work from her Wikipedia page purely because it makes her look good, as those activities are part of what makes her notable. The same applies to UKFast. People outside of the IT industry in Manchester have heard of UKFast because of news stories like the Harvey's Den Project. As for milestones in turnover, these are valid parts of a company's history. Meanwhile, the phrases "consistently featured" and "in a number of", indicate numerical values, not promotional ones.Kellyormesher (talk) 14:13, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Hi Martin. User:Theroadislong was unhappy with previous edits I made, so after some discussion, advised me to post any proposed edits to the talk page first. I have done so, and you can read them below. The user still seems to have issues with it, although has failed to provide any examples of parts of the proposed page which flout neutrality laws (etc.) With these edits, anything which could be construed as remotely opinionated/not neutral has been qualified with "reportedly" or "claimed to". All statements and facts have been referenced with reputable sources. The general advise is to leave proposed edits on talk pages for three days - if nobody can find tangible fault, the edits can apparently be made. By this evening, these edits will have been up for three days, and I would very much like to realise them. Kellyormesher (talk) 12:15, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Kelly, I will have a look at your proposed edits a give you my opinion. Martin Hogbin (talk) 13:03, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

My opinion
I am generally rather pro-business compared with many editors but, having looked at the page and the proposed edits, my opinion is that the page is already over promotional and the proposed edits would make it more so. The fact that information is properly sourced does not guarantee inclusion in WP, it needs to be encyclopedic. As Theroadislong has said, the article reads like marketing literature.

Kelly, I suggest that you provide information and leave it to independent editors to decide what to include and how to say it. If you push too hard you may gain the attention of the anti-business faction who may take a much harder line than Theroadislong has. Martin Hogbin (talk) 15:56, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


 * What is it that you find overly promotional? Theroadislong has cited "puffery" repeatedly and yet I have not used any of the words highlighted in Wikipedia's style guidelines on what to avoid to ensure neutrality. Is it the selection of material? I'd rather receive constructive criticism than just have every edit I make reverted because it's "puffery."


 * I'll point out again that the charitable elements are part of what makes UKFast notable. Outside of the IT industry, charity work is the reason for which most people have heard of UKFast, particularly in the case of the Harvey's Den project. As a result, it makes sense that these should be included in this encyclopaedia.


 * Is it the awards that make it seem promotional, although they are simply accolades associated with UKFast's name? Theroadislong has suggested I jump through a large number of hoops to make edits, yet most of these are met with scathing responses and further ways of making the road to realised edits, in fact, longer. Highlighting any tangible issues with the article would therefore be appreciated. Kellyormesher (talk) 16:21, 27 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I gave given an opinion and that is all. Generally third opinion givers do not hang around to argue their case because it often ends up in their getting drawn into long battles. If what you say is true then, if you provide the facts, other editors with no conflict of interest will be happy to add them to the article.  That way justice and fair play are seen to be done. If editors choose not to add the facts that you have supplied to the article you must presume that they find them inappropriate in some way. Martin Hogbin (talk) 17:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Effort at Conclusion
I'm going to add most of the edits to the page, but leave out the parts which were explicitly said to be inappropriate for Wikipedia. I may also remove some other bits from my edits in line with what I think you might be looking for.

Of course, editors' wishes haven't been made clear, so I may still slip up in places. Hopefully, in those cases, the editors can make measured edits and we can come to an agreement on what should be included in the page. Kellyormesher (talk) 09:16, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

RE: Editing War
Dear Theroadislong,

I genuinely believe you have been overzealous in your efforts to keep the page for UKFast encyclopaedic. As Dorling Kindersley might tell you, encyclopaedias can be both engagingly written and objective - they do not simply have to read as a list of facts.

Unfortunately, a list of facts is what your editing suggests you would like to see on this page, and as a result I feel that your edits have been in some cases unnecessary - hence undoing them. That said, I have, of course, taken your suggestions re: referencing on board, so I must thank you for those.

I will do as you suggested and draft an entirely new page rather than making small edits, placing that draft in the talk section before publication.

However, I must ask you to remain objective as an editor, and not associate this page's previous "promotional puffery" with future edits. I have now learned what is expected of Wikipedia entries in terms of referencing and promotional statements. I don't believe that the elements you have removed in the last month defy these expectations.

I must also thank you for your help with signatures on the talk pages.

Kellyormesher (talk) 11:15, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Proposed Edits for Editors' Perusal
UKFast.Net Ltd is a business-to-business hosting company  based in Manchester, UK. It is principally known for managed hosting, cloud services, and colocation, and the business utilises its own data centre complex in Trafford Park, Manchester to house its clients’ data.

Company history
UKFast was founded in September 1999 by Welsh businessman Lawrence Jones and his wife Gail. The pair had reportedly struggled to find a hosting provider with good customer service when they attempted to launch a gallery website: convinced that they could do better, they decided to start their own hosting company instead.

In 2007, the business moved to the highest office space in Manchester – the 28th floor of City Tower. As UKFast expanded, it acquired further space on the 16th floor, before moving in 2013 to UKFast Campus, in the Birley Fields area of Hulme.

Having received the PAS 2060 Certification of Carbon Neutrality from the British Standards Institution in 2010, UKFast claimed to be the first UK hosting provider to be certified as 100% carbon neutral.

In 2013 the firm launched eCloud, a range of cloud hosting services whose hardware infrastructure reportedly cost £12million to build. It also reached a milestone turnover of £20m, and dedicated £1m to a cyber-security fund designed to help businesses defend against online threats.

Sponsorship
UKFast partners with Manchester Camerata, a Manchester-based chamber orchestra. Lawrence Jones, UKFast's CEO, joined the board of the Manchester Camerata in 2009 after helping the orchestra develop and host its new website. The orchestra now uses UKFast’s purpose-built auditorium for performances and networking events.

In the sporting world, the firm was the main sponsor of rugby union club Sale Sharks in 2009. UKFast also sponsored local rugby league club Salford Reds in 2011, collaborating with internet design consultancy Harper James to launch the club’s new website. From 2014, the Diane Modahl Sports Foundation’s young athletes on the “Road to Rio” were able to use the UKFast gym free of charge, as part of the company’s ‘Year of Giving’ initiative.

Corporate social responsibility
At the end of 2013, CEO Lawrence Jones took the team of builders away from working on the development of UKFast Campus to a house in Wythenshawe. Here, the builders and many members of the UKFast team helped to build a sensory shed for an autistic seven-year-old boy called Harvey – after arsonists had destroyed a sensory shed created by his parents for his Christmas present. The success of The Harvey's Den Project launched the Random Acts of Kindness Year for UKFast (2014).

In previous years, UKFast has been involved in a number of local charity projects, including helping to raise £250,000 for a new MRI scanner in the "Five Stars Scanner Appeal" for the Royal Manchester Children's Hospital; sponsoring and offering free use of its gym to the Diane Modahl Sports Foundation; and competing in charity sporting events such as the Creative Cup - a charity football tournament in aid of the Alzheimer's Society - and the Great Manchester 10K Run.

Awards and accreditations
Between 2005 and 2009, UKFast won six ISPA awards and was named "Best Hosting Provider" for four years running.

UKFast received the Data Centre Solutions Awards’ "Private Cloud Product of the Year" in 2012 and the DatacenterDynamics Award for "Innovation in Outsourcing" in 2013.

In the same year, UKFast received the National Business Awards "Employer of the Year" award and the Institute of Customer Service "Employee Engagement Strategy of the Year" awards.

UKFast has consistently featured in the Sunday Times "100 Best Small Companies to Work For" and the Great Place to Work Institute’s "Best Workplaces" lists, placing 28th and 12th respectively in 2014, 25th and 5th respectively in 2013, and 45th and 7th respectively in 2012.

Prod
The prod states that "Article written, edited & referenced by paid contributors" whilst this almost certainly true, I think the article is fairly neutral now? Theroadislong (talk) 15:35, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

COI
Under what assumptions has this page been marked? What cleanup is necessary? --A.Hardaker (talk) 14:12, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * You have added and a huge, entirely inappropriate promotional table of every award they have ever received this is an encyclopedia not your website. Theroadislong (talk) 15:13, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm not too comfortable with the current state of the article. Currently, half of the article is still 'Sponsorship' or 'Corporate Responsibility' and reads like marketing speak. Compare, for example, the article for 1&1 Internet, which has a turnover nearly 100 times that of UKFast and has no such sections, or that of Virgin Media, the internet company with national recognition which has much less detailed information about sponsorship than this. At the moment it still sounds like a puff piece by marketers, and I think these sections should ideally be removed, or at least cleared up significantly. (Doom halo (talk) 14:05, 20 March 2016 (UTC))
 * I entirely agree. Would you like to be bold or shall I...? Fortuna  Imperatrix Mundi  14:16, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ As per this discussion, WP:BRD, WP:PROMO, WP:NOTADVERTISING etc. (sections could possibly be returned, with rewording, perhaps?) -but if so, suuggest that anything proposed for these sections is discussed here first, to avoid the Saatchi and Saatchi treatment again. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  19:46, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Brilliant, thank you! Yes, I agree *some* of the content could be returned, but not without substantial working. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doom halo (talk • contribs) 16:58, 9 April 2016 (UTC)