This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
Hi, please excuse this anonymous comment -- I am doing this from a hotel room on a business trip and am a total Wiki talk page newbie.
My company was recently solicited by PA as a prospect (one reason for presently remaining anonymous) and I have been doing a web search to find out more about them. I concur with many of the comments below: this page reads like a marketing and recruiting piece from the company itself with a few minor nuggets about things that happened years ago inserted solely to do the absolute minimum required to appear neutral.
I'd love to know about how this company is managed if it is truly "employee owned." The company history is still very unclear: how exactly did the Butten Trust exit the scene and what did they get for doing so? It never really is explained in any way I could figure out. Why didn't PA suffer as much as its competitors in the 2001-4 downturn and how do they know they did better than their competitors (who are presumably also private) anyhow? Come to think of it, who exactly ARE these competitors? These are just a few of the questions I was left with after reading the article.
Thanks for everyone's great efforts, and sorry if I commented out of form, please feel free to modify this comment in that event. 86.115.12.52 19:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
The recent edits appear to have come straight from the mouth of marketing at the firm, there are no independent sources for any of the claims.
It leaves a lot to be desired and comes across as NPOV.
Looking at the main editors history it appears that it has come from their marketing department! Our Company Logo and changes requested by ..... look highly dubious to me.
ALR 18:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your balanced and constructive advice in these 'banners':
I'm not new to editing (having been 30-odd years in commercial, retail and professional services publishing ;-/ ) - but am new to the ways of Wikipedia, so your guidance is appreciated. Looks like I need to do two tranches of work:
This may take a while so bear with me !
Summilux 18:15, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Whilst PA Consulting is sufficiently notable, the article should not read like an advertisement. ALR 18:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
The History section violates NPOV and is also entirely unreferenced except for one newspaper article that supports some of the history. It could do with improvement along the lines of PA ventures, Introduction and Awards. 24.62.4.98 ( talk) 08:36, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
In style of Boston Consulting Group and Bain & Co
Summilux 14:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I propose deleting this section. As noted above, it has NPOV problems, and what little information is present is not verifiable. In short, it adds no significant value to the article. Does anyone object? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
69.86.228.200 (
talk)
23:52, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Done. 69.86.228.200 ( talk) 04:12, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
This article has several times had copyrighted ("© PA Knowledge Limited 1997 - 2006 . All rights reserved.") non-GFDL content copied and pasted in it. I've reverted to the latest non-infringing version, which was a version by User:Beland from 2005-07-24, and restored the infobox and categories. Do not copy and paste copyrighted web pages into Wikipedia. Uncle G 19:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately your note 4 doesn't meet the needs of the guidance on reliable sources, WP:RS, as it stands without independent verification it's just an assertion that the firm has waived copyright. Not my field, but someone from the copyright review shop might have a view. ALR 17:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
It's an interesting question, but why would this matter? Generally self-published information isn't a reliable source, and so shouldn't be used to build an article. That goes for press releases as well. I'd also point potential in-house contributors to WP:AUTO and the unfortunately-named WP:VAIN. We're an encyclopedia, not BusinessWire. William Pietri 16:33, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Quoting: PA Consulting Group has waived the copyright it may have owned in descriptive texts in the above paragraphs, excepting trading names, trademarked names, registered logos and domain names, for use in Wikipedia.
According to GFDL, this vaiver is insufficient, because the content of Wikipedia may be copied anywhere provided GFDL terms are observed. Therefore either please update the vaiver, or the verbatim text will be deleted soon. A suggested extesion of the waiver can be something like "...in Wikipedia and derived works withing the scope of GFDL licence". Talk to your lawyer :-) `' mikka (t) 22:41, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
This section, previously deleted by Uncle G due to a perceived breach of copyright, is reinstated. Eight additional source footnotes have been added, as well as the footnote that clarifies the status of this text's copyright.
Summilux 16:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
This section, previously deleted by Uncle G due to a perceived breach of copyright, is reinstated. Three additional source footnotes have been added, as well as the footnote that clarifies the status of this text's copyright.
Summilux 16:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
This section, previously deleted by Uncle G due to a perceived breach of copyright, is reinstated. Three source footnotes have been added, and the fourth footnote waives copyright in this text.
Summilux 14:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Image:800px-Office 1 002.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 04:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Pain in the ass bot. I inserted a fair use rationale at the image page. Summilux, up to you if you want to get something official from PA.
72.229.3.111 ( talk) 07:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Image:Pa logo2.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 14:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
A fair use rationale for this image has now been added.
72.229.23.211 ( talk) 02:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Notification of intention to update page to make it more factual, objective and add proper referencing:
Changes will be made on 11/02/2013 if no objections are made. AChatburnPA ( talk) 16:59, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
This article has been edited by representatives of the company for years and is a complete mess in terms of WP:V and WP:NPOV. Very brief research shows that the majority of independent articles about PA aren't half as rosy as this article makes out. E.g. this and this about their involvement in ID cards. Until these problems are fixed, the {{ coi}} template should remain in place to alert readers to these problems. SmartSE ( talk) 12:42, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
I am going to remove the NPOV flag as it's no longer relevant. None of the contributors listed as having a close connection with the subject of the page have edited the page for months/years. I am the only editor who has contributed this year who has a connection with the subject (a connection I've declared) and my changes were reverted in May when the page was stripped back to a very old version. AChatburnPA ( talk) 11:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Why are newspapers seen as more reliable than formally audited and recorded company records? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.217.18.166 ( talk) 21:55, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
I note from PA website they have a new logo etc. I would update this page but don't know which best format to upload, etc. Can someone check and add correct new logo and anything else needed to tweak article? Aaronboardley ( talk) 09:27, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
This appears to have been fixed. Thanks. Aaronboardley ( talk) 11:04, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on PA Consulting Group. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:23, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
This article, specifically the "Technology and Innovation" section looks like a company brochure. 2601:18F:107F:BA80:5910:DCBA:E9D2:3E91 ( talk) 22:15, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hi, I work for PA Consulting Group. The company recently announced a new CEO, and I would like to add the following sentence to the end of the 2015-present subsection of the History section:
Additionally, in the infobox, under Key people, I would like to replace Ken Toombs with Christian Norris as CEO.
References
Thank you for your help. Sunnyday825 ( talk) 11:54, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello, I am requesting updates to the lead and the history sections of this article.
References
Thank you for your help, Sunnyday825 ( talk) 14:08, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Edit request partially implemented
Regards, Spintendo 22:59, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello, I am requesting further updates to the article:
References
Thank you for your help, Sunnyday825 ( talk) 14:13, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
Hi, please excuse this anonymous comment -- I am doing this from a hotel room on a business trip and am a total Wiki talk page newbie.
My company was recently solicited by PA as a prospect (one reason for presently remaining anonymous) and I have been doing a web search to find out more about them. I concur with many of the comments below: this page reads like a marketing and recruiting piece from the company itself with a few minor nuggets about things that happened years ago inserted solely to do the absolute minimum required to appear neutral.
I'd love to know about how this company is managed if it is truly "employee owned." The company history is still very unclear: how exactly did the Butten Trust exit the scene and what did they get for doing so? It never really is explained in any way I could figure out. Why didn't PA suffer as much as its competitors in the 2001-4 downturn and how do they know they did better than their competitors (who are presumably also private) anyhow? Come to think of it, who exactly ARE these competitors? These are just a few of the questions I was left with after reading the article.
Thanks for everyone's great efforts, and sorry if I commented out of form, please feel free to modify this comment in that event. 86.115.12.52 19:18, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
The recent edits appear to have come straight from the mouth of marketing at the firm, there are no independent sources for any of the claims.
It leaves a lot to be desired and comes across as NPOV.
Looking at the main editors history it appears that it has come from their marketing department! Our Company Logo and changes requested by ..... look highly dubious to me.
ALR 18:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your balanced and constructive advice in these 'banners':
I'm not new to editing (having been 30-odd years in commercial, retail and professional services publishing ;-/ ) - but am new to the ways of Wikipedia, so your guidance is appreciated. Looks like I need to do two tranches of work:
This may take a while so bear with me !
Summilux 18:15, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Whilst PA Consulting is sufficiently notable, the article should not read like an advertisement. ALR 18:37, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
The History section violates NPOV and is also entirely unreferenced except for one newspaper article that supports some of the history. It could do with improvement along the lines of PA ventures, Introduction and Awards. 24.62.4.98 ( talk) 08:36, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
In style of Boston Consulting Group and Bain & Co
Summilux 14:43, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
I propose deleting this section. As noted above, it has NPOV problems, and what little information is present is not verifiable. In short, it adds no significant value to the article. Does anyone object? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
69.86.228.200 (
talk)
23:52, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
Done. 69.86.228.200 ( talk) 04:12, 26 April 2008 (UTC)
This article has several times had copyrighted ("© PA Knowledge Limited 1997 - 2006 . All rights reserved.") non-GFDL content copied and pasted in it. I've reverted to the latest non-infringing version, which was a version by User:Beland from 2005-07-24, and restored the infobox and categories. Do not copy and paste copyrighted web pages into Wikipedia. Uncle G 19:08, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately your note 4 doesn't meet the needs of the guidance on reliable sources, WP:RS, as it stands without independent verification it's just an assertion that the firm has waived copyright. Not my field, but someone from the copyright review shop might have a view. ALR 17:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
It's an interesting question, but why would this matter? Generally self-published information isn't a reliable source, and so shouldn't be used to build an article. That goes for press releases as well. I'd also point potential in-house contributors to WP:AUTO and the unfortunately-named WP:VAIN. We're an encyclopedia, not BusinessWire. William Pietri 16:33, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
Quoting: PA Consulting Group has waived the copyright it may have owned in descriptive texts in the above paragraphs, excepting trading names, trademarked names, registered logos and domain names, for use in Wikipedia.
According to GFDL, this vaiver is insufficient, because the content of Wikipedia may be copied anywhere provided GFDL terms are observed. Therefore either please update the vaiver, or the verbatim text will be deleted soon. A suggested extesion of the waiver can be something like "...in Wikipedia and derived works withing the scope of GFDL licence". Talk to your lawyer :-) `' mikka (t) 22:41, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
This section, previously deleted by Uncle G due to a perceived breach of copyright, is reinstated. Eight additional source footnotes have been added, as well as the footnote that clarifies the status of this text's copyright.
Summilux 16:19, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
This section, previously deleted by Uncle G due to a perceived breach of copyright, is reinstated. Three additional source footnotes have been added, as well as the footnote that clarifies the status of this text's copyright.
Summilux 16:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
This section, previously deleted by Uncle G due to a perceived breach of copyright, is reinstated. Three source footnotes have been added, and the fourth footnote waives copyright in this text.
Summilux 14:51, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Image:800px-Office 1 002.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 04:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Pain in the ass bot. I inserted a fair use rationale at the image page. Summilux, up to you if you want to get something official from PA.
72.229.3.111 ( talk) 07:11, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Image:Pa logo2.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot ( talk) 14:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
A fair use rationale for this image has now been added.
72.229.23.211 ( talk) 02:58, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Notification of intention to update page to make it more factual, objective and add proper referencing:
Changes will be made on 11/02/2013 if no objections are made. AChatburnPA ( talk) 16:59, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
This article has been edited by representatives of the company for years and is a complete mess in terms of WP:V and WP:NPOV. Very brief research shows that the majority of independent articles about PA aren't half as rosy as this article makes out. E.g. this and this about their involvement in ID cards. Until these problems are fixed, the {{ coi}} template should remain in place to alert readers to these problems. SmartSE ( talk) 12:42, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
I am going to remove the NPOV flag as it's no longer relevant. None of the contributors listed as having a close connection with the subject of the page have edited the page for months/years. I am the only editor who has contributed this year who has a connection with the subject (a connection I've declared) and my changes were reverted in May when the page was stripped back to a very old version. AChatburnPA ( talk) 11:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Why are newspapers seen as more reliable than formally audited and recorded company records? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.217.18.166 ( talk) 21:55, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
I note from PA website they have a new logo etc. I would update this page but don't know which best format to upload, etc. Can someone check and add correct new logo and anything else needed to tweak article? Aaronboardley ( talk) 09:27, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
This appears to have been fixed. Thanks. Aaronboardley ( talk) 11:04, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on PA Consulting Group. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:23, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
This article, specifically the "Technology and Innovation" section looks like a company brochure. 2601:18F:107F:BA80:5910:DCBA:E9D2:3E91 ( talk) 22:15, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hi, I work for PA Consulting Group. The company recently announced a new CEO, and I would like to add the following sentence to the end of the 2015-present subsection of the History section:
Additionally, in the infobox, under Key people, I would like to replace Ken Toombs with Christian Norris as CEO.
References
Thank you for your help. Sunnyday825 ( talk) 11:54, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello, I am requesting updates to the lead and the history sections of this article.
References
Thank you for your help, Sunnyday825 ( talk) 14:08, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
Edit request partially implemented
Regards, Spintendo 22:59, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hello, I am requesting further updates to the article:
References
Thank you for your help, Sunnyday825 ( talk) 14:13, 26 September 2023 (UTC)