Talk:Intelligentsia Coffee & Tea

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

Business and economics Portal This article is within the scope of the Business and Economics WikiProject. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. Chicago Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles related to Chicago. Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale. Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale. This article is part of WikiProject Illinois, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

This article is a former Chicago Collaboration of the Week. Every week, a Chicago-related article that is in need of substantial improvement is selected to be the Chicago COTW. Visit CHICOTW to nominate and vote for future COTWs. This week's Chicago COTW is List of Chicago Landmarks update. Please help us improve it to a higher standard of quality. See the To Do List to suggest a change or to see a list of open tasks. See past CHICOTWs. Note our good articles.

Contents 1 Tone of article 2 Template 3 Fix references please 4 Speedy

[edit] Tone of article

This stub reads more like a PR piece than an encyclopedia entry. It needs more information about the company's importance, especially for a company just over a decade old. 22:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Haha. Wow! I wonder who wrote this one. Is this article a joke? C'mon guys...Doesn't running a roastery take too much of your time and energy to bother with meaningless self promotion like this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.174.228.25 (talk) 21:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Template

Articles are about their subjects, not about the article itself. Articles should not reference their status on Wikipedia, unless that status is somehow notable and attributable to an independent source. –  Anþony  talk  01:03, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fix references please

Currently, there is a major issue with the references. Most of the references are linking to press-releases and that's really not great. It looks like these press releases are about things that happened in real media. For example. this press release is about something that was reported in "Best of Chicago." That citation needs to be converted into a {{cite news}} format that references the page/issue/date so others can verify it. Otherwise, it doesn't pass WP:RS/WP:V. I'll spend some time tonight working on this after I get home, but it would be nice if someone could get a jump on it today. ---J.S ^(T/C) 19:49, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Well it's beyond that, most of those references are to trivial press mentions. Wikipedia is not a clipping agency. The only reference I noticed that documented anything significant was the Roast Magazine Roaster of the Year article, and that was on intelligentsia's own site, and I'm a bit shaky on using trade magazines from small incestuous industries as WP:RS. All the remaining minor mentions should be removed as having undue weight in the article. But after you do that, there's not much left. This article is extremely marginal per WP:CORP, maybe hanging on by a thread because of the Roaster of the Year article. It is still basically promotional in nature. I recommend AfD. 67.117.130.181 20:14, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it -could- be notable. At-least marginally... ---J.S ^(T/C) 22:50, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy

I don't think it qualifies as a speedy. Most of the promo-esc stuff has been removed. ---J.S ^(T/C) 22:50, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

You mean it was even more promo-esque before? It's still very promotional as I see it, but yeah, speedy seemed like overdoing it. I'd support deletion if someone wants to file an AfD. 67.117.130.181 02:06, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I added back all the awards I could find that were not from their own site. I hope this does not cause a advert problem. I will be travelling much of Wed and Fri so I may not be online much. TonyTheTiger 07:18, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The awards do cause an advert problem (possible exception, the Roaster of the Year award which appears to be at least slightly nontrivial). They are not especially relevant to the company's notability and they take up way too much of the article (WP:NPOV#Undue weight). It's like spending half the biography of some tennis player describing every event she ever won. Most of those awards are just meaningless plugs that newspapers give to their advertisers--companies like this accumulate them in the normal course of business. If these awards are relevant then their relevance should be documented by a reliable source, for example an article that says the company has won 73 of those awards (and then you can just cite the number without having to list them all). If they're irrelevant they shouldn't be in the article (this is an encyclopedia, not a clipping service). I'd suggest including one or two of the more notable awards (Roaster of the Year probably comes closest to this, but even that one is slightly marginal unless there's press coverage outside of Roast magazine of that award) and omitting the trivial ones. 67.117.130.181 08:40, 20 December 2006 (UTC)