Talk:PSB Insights

New proposed draft

{{request edit|R}}

In recent months I've been working with the communications team at Penn Schoen Berland to create a better version of this entry. Now that it's ready, I've uploaded it to my userspace here: User:WWB Too/Penn Schoen Berland. Because of my conflict of interest with PSB as a topic, I'm looking to find an editor and / or admin willing to review the draft, offer feedback, and ideally perform a histmerge once there is consensus. Please note, whoever does so, categories have been temporarily disabled so my draft doesn't show up on category pages, and will need to be re-enabled.

First thing, an overview of what's wrong with the current version, collapsed for convenience:

Problems with current version

• Information in the current article version is badly organized and key details about the company are missing from the main article, such as a summary of their corporate work and details of current key personnel.
• Current information about the firm's personnel is inaccurate and out-of-date; in particular, Mark Penn left for Microsoft this summer.
• The current article includes some wording that sounds promotional, particularly the first paragraph of the Introduction section and much of the wording in The 2001 New York City Mayoral Race section, which makes some bold claims but provides no citations to support them.
• The External links section currently includes too many links to websites mentioning PSB; a few of the useful secondary sources have been incorporated as references in the updated draft.

Here's an explanation of what's changed / improved in the proposed draft, likewise collapsed for convenience:

What's in the new draft

• Suggests move from Penn, Schoen & Berland to Penn Schoen Berland consistent with company's own usage.
• Added an infobox with key company information.
• Rewritten introduction provides a better overview of the company's history and significant work.
• Reorganized article structure substantially, explained as follows:
  • In current version—All sections are top-level headings, including an Introduction section following the article's true introduction, a list-y Awards section at the bottom, and between them a run-on series of headings on different campaign cycles in which PSB was involved.
  • In proposed version—Top-level headings now include History and Corporate overview as well as headings focused on the firm's key business areas: "Campaigns and elections, Corporate work, Entertainment and media, and Research. Second-level headings are employed for major sub-topics, including most of the campaign cycles currently given their own top-level headers. The last section is now called Selected awards, rewritten as prose, with less repetition.
• The number of separate references has grown from 10 to 67, although the number of in-line citations is a bit more than that, because we've used a few more than once.
• The overall goal here was to create an article that better summarizes the company's history and notable client work, as reflected in third-party references, intending to keep it encyclopedic, following Wikipedia's manual of style, and without being promotional.

I welcome any and all feedback on this draft. I'm also going to place a request for review at WikiProject Companies and WikiProject Cooperation, although I will try to keep all substantial discussion here. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 20:17, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

I've left a request here for Qwyrxian to look over the draft.

Thanks for outlining everything like that, it makes this whole process so much easier. I've read over your draft and it's definitely much better and I don't see any issues with it. And you're making the article less promotional as a whole, which amuses me a bit. :P Silverseren^C 01:55, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, very appreciated! And I'm glad to hear you find it less promotional than the current version; I do think they are better-served by a well-rounded, MOS-appropriate article than what's here now. Qwyrxian, if you see this and have any questions, I'll be keeping an eye on this page. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 16:03, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

I'll be looking into it within the next 24 hours. Qwyrxian (talk) 07:02, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

It's now complete. I think that we should use a comparison between the old and new articles as a stellar example of how PR editors (or editor-for hire; I'm not exactly certain of what WWB Too's business relationship with his/her company's is) can, if they work ethically and responsibly, make articles significantly better. The previous version did not mention the accusations of push-polling for Bloomberg, nor did they capture the right tone in the Venezuelan election (that academics think PSB or their subcontractors actually made substantive mistakes). This version clearly shows that paid editing itself is not the problem. Rather, it's entirely about the ethics and writing ability of the editor/firm, along with their understanding of our rules--that is, the exact same question we must ask of every editor. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:27, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you both very much for taking the time to work on this. Regarding the question of my relationship to PSB: I was approached by them directly to research, rewrite and represent them here, on a consulting basis. I'll also be keeping an eye on the page for them for awhile yet. And while I don't typically seek attention, I'd be happy for this (or any of my work, really) to be viewed as a model for constructive COI engagement, particularly to show that it can be done without direct edits. As to the latter point, Wikipedia could really use more volunteer editors, like yourselves, willing to hear out company representatives. It's definitely a two-way street: would that more from both sides of the divide would travel it. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 12:45, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Two additional questions

Thanks, Silver and Qwyrxian for helping with this article. I have two more, minor requests—adding the logo, and a note about the naming of an interim CEO, Jay Leveton:

• I've uploaded the logo here, with a fair use claim for its inclusion on this article specifically. At 195x245 px it should be of a suitable size for the infobox, but feel free to resize as you see fit.

• I also suggest adding a new final sentence to the last paragraph of 1990s and 2000s:

In October 2012, Burson-Marsteller executive vice president Jay Leveton was named PSB's interim CEO.

References

If this looks OK, the markup is here:

Markup

In October 2012, Burson-Marsteller executive vice president Jay Leveton was named PSB's interim CEO.<ref name="Holmes">{{cite news |title=Penn Schoen Names Jay Leveton Interim Chief Executive ||url=http://www.holmesreport.com/news-info/12443/Penn-Schoen-Names-Jay-Leveton-Interim-Chief-Executive.aspx |work=The Holmes Report |date=3 October 2012 |accessdate=10 October 2012}}</ref>

As always, please let me know if you have any questions. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 14:22, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

I added the logo (shrunk just a little), as I didn't want someone to tag it for "fair use not in use". I'm about off to bed, so rest will have to wait for tomorrow. Qwyrxian (talk) 14:37, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

And i've completed the other one. Silverseren^C 16:34, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Thank you both! WWB Too (Talk · COI) 16:53, 10 October 2012 (UTC)