User talk:Srigolot01

Hi and thanks for your message on my talk page. I'm happy to explain my comments, do you mean the ones in my edit summary? Thanks, Melcous (talk) 23:25, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * If so, one issue with the article was that sections were written as if they were biographies of the founders of the firm, whereas this is an article about the firm, so it should be written as a history of the firm itself. Plus including lots of details about all the amazing things the founders have done starts to look like promotional advertising. This is why I changed the heading to "history" - but it appears to me there is more that could be added here, for starters there is nothing about how the firm was started by the two founders etc.
 * The long list of projects also appeared promotional, plus prose is preferred in wikipedia articles. So if there are a few particularly notable projects that can be written about briefly in prose (with independent references) that is far better than the long list that looks like it belongs on the firm's website, not in an encyclopedia.
 * Looking at other articles can be helpful, but the ones you have mentioned also have some issues - it is better to look at wikipedias core guidelines than just "what has been done elsewhere"
 * Finally, I note that your name is very similar to a previous editor of this article - is that you as well? If so you might want to clarify, as there are some potential issues with having multiple accounts here which can lead to being banned from editing if they are used for improper purposes.


 * A couple of other things.
 * When you leave a message on a talk page like you did on mine, please "sign" it by including four tildes (this symbol ~) at the end.
 * If you have any kind of relationship with the firm or its founders outside of wikipedia, you should read the conflict of interest guidelines carefully and then seek to abide by them. Thanks, Melcous (talk) 23:28, 27 October 2017 (UTC)