User talk:ErlangExpert

Whilst it's commendable that you have spent time adding to the Workforce Management article as other users have already pointed out your views are at odds with the vast majority of the industry. You state that "Recently, WFM and WFO practices have come under sharp criticism", "criticism is primarily directed at commercial WFM and WFO software" and "To many planners in the industry, these are uncomfortable revelations" yet this is not a topic that any of the professional planning organizations (such as the SWPP in the US or the Professional Planning Forum in the UK) are discussing or that their members seem to fell is correct. Likewise the major software vendors are not dealing with these criticisms as they don't appear to be being made to them in any volume.

As your view is controversial maybe you could significantly tone down the language to reflect that it is your own, minority view, you could back things up with some proof that there really is "sharp criticism" or simply remove the section as users have already done so. One of the users mentions the links to the websites that you have added; on the face of it these do appear to be outside of the Wikipedia links policy so you should consider removing these or balancing them out with uncontroversial ones to the respected societies that I have mentioned above. If you are attempting to promote this site then it's probably best that you remove the section & links before you start an edit war and the article gets locked as that wouldn't help anyone Eric Cartmann (talk) 21:11, 1 July 2014 (UTC)