Draft talk:ABL Group

A reviewer on a help desk-page said there was no notable aspects of this article, to which I would say the following:

This is a company with roots in a royally chartered corporation, as in one of the first corporations in history, and one of the world´s oldest companies. As if that wasn´t enough, it´s a tremendously large, and influential, organization, and even if it wasn´t, I don´t see what distinguishes it from all the 1000s of practically identical articles.

Disclaimer

This article was written by me, Audun H. Nilsen, as an exercise to acquaint myself with Wikipedia-editing, and the topic was chosen because I find it of public interest, as well as of private interest. NilsenAudun (talk) 19:01, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

I would recommend starting with a different topic, perhaps something biology related. Wikipedia is a terrible place to promote a company because you will have zero control over the contents of the article. Please read WP:BOSS Polygnotus (talk) 19:08, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Polygnotus I hesitate to post this with my vague knowledge of WP:OUTING, but as the editor above who has not given a satisfactory answer regarding COI chose to disclose his full name above, I gave it a cursory search. The first result returned on Google is his forum post yesterday on Upwork about trying to get his account re-verified.

Is there a COI noticeboard this can be brought to, if the editor continues to deny obvious PAID status? I've always assumed good faith before but the content of this draft was the biggest violation I've yet seen of our standards around promotional language. (I have removed the majority of the offending content, though I still think the revenue figures in the infobox should go too.)

Thanks in advance, and please let me know if I should strike my comments about the Google search and provide that information by more private means to admins, arbs, or some other party I've never even heard of 😅 Chiselinccc (talk) 06:31, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there are far worse things on Wikipedia than promotional content. WP:COIN is the conflict of interest noticeboard but I don't think we've reached that level yet. Lets keep this page on our watchlists and watch how the story plays out. Luckily the AfC process ensures most of the promotional articles never make it to mainspace. Polygnotus (talk) 06:46, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@NilsenAudun I came here from the Teahouse, I completely agree with the previous AFC commenter, and I have BOLDly removed extensive content that is wildly inappropriate for Wikipedia.

This is purely promotional and misses the entire point of Wikipedia. Please read some of the core documentation of this project, and do not re-add this inappropriate content, even in a draft article. Chiselinccc (talk) 06:20, 18 February 2024 (UTC)