![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Image:Sitel logo.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 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 11:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Sitel staff have been making positive and negative statements about their labor relations experiences on internet fora, such as ratemyemployer.ca [1] and JobVent.com. [2]
This was removed as WP:OR. I think the wording was neutral, and presented a NPOV. I'm going to re-add it if there are no objections. Paranormal Skeptic ( talk) 23:35, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Sitel has been cited many times bu NLRB for unfair labor practices in the U.S. Bingojiggity ( talk) 14:58, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
References
See subject. TraceyR ( talk) 13:33, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
I am the Web & SEO Manager at Sitel Group. I would like to share a proposed rewrite of the current article, so that independent, impartial editors have an opportunity to review the draft and provide any feedback. The current article is just a couple paragraphs with no independent citations. In comparison, the proposed would add a more comprehensive warts-and-all history with proper independent references.
Pinging @ Barek: who has shown an interest in this page in the past and appears to still be active. DanSlavov ( talk) 17:11, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
@ John Broughton: and @ Dialectric: thanks for reviewing the draft I proposed with a disclosed COI a couple years ago. I wanted to add a $2.2 billion acquisition announced this August to the end of the history section as follows:
I’d also like to use the same citation to update our headcount in the infobox from 90,000 to 155,000 post-acquisition. Per WP:COI I was hoping one of you might make these changes if you think that’s ok and improves the page. DanSlavov ( talk) 19:06, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks @ North8000:. It looks like someone already updated the employee headcount in the infobox. I suggest the above sentence on the acquisition be added to the very end of the “Corporate History” section, just after “acquired Sitel in 2015, valuing the company at $850 million.[13]” DanSlavov ( talk) 17:44, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
References
My name is Daniel and I work in marketing for Sitel. Recently, an IP address created a section called "News" with a sub-section called "Involvement in 2022 data breach at Okta". There was a security breach that attracted media attention, however TechCrunch explains Sitel's and Okta's conflicting perspectives, whereas Wikipedia's content relies exclusively on a citation to Okta's website. Additionally, creating a section and sub-section dedicated to the security breach, rather than a sentence in the History section, seems excessive.
I'd like to ask editors to consider removing the section cited to Okta's website and replace it with a 1-2 sentence summary of the TechCrunch piece at the end of the History section. In the alternate, I can take a stab at it and share a draft if preferred. DanSlavov ( talk) 15:09, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
Pinging @ North8000: and @ John Broughton:, who have each helped with my COI requests in the past above. DanSlavov ( talk) 10:23, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
My depth of involvement at this article/topic/ it's sources has been just enough to fix an obvious problem and to say that your ideas and proposed changes look OK with me, and those do look OK with me. I'm also happy to make those proposed changes when explicitly clearly defined. But I don't have the deeper involvement in the topic / sources to be intelligently making statements like "I think it should be this.......". Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 18:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Image:Sitel logo.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 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot 11:06, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Sitel staff have been making positive and negative statements about their labor relations experiences on internet fora, such as ratemyemployer.ca [1] and JobVent.com. [2]
This was removed as WP:OR. I think the wording was neutral, and presented a NPOV. I'm going to re-add it if there are no objections. Paranormal Skeptic ( talk) 23:35, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
Sitel has been cited many times bu NLRB for unfair labor practices in the U.S. Bingojiggity ( talk) 14:58, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
References
See subject. TraceyR ( talk) 13:33, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
I am the Web & SEO Manager at Sitel Group. I would like to share a proposed rewrite of the current article, so that independent, impartial editors have an opportunity to review the draft and provide any feedback. The current article is just a couple paragraphs with no independent citations. In comparison, the proposed would add a more comprehensive warts-and-all history with proper independent references.
Pinging @ Barek: who has shown an interest in this page in the past and appears to still be active. DanSlavov ( talk) 17:11, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
@ John Broughton: and @ Dialectric: thanks for reviewing the draft I proposed with a disclosed COI a couple years ago. I wanted to add a $2.2 billion acquisition announced this August to the end of the history section as follows:
I’d also like to use the same citation to update our headcount in the infobox from 90,000 to 155,000 post-acquisition. Per WP:COI I was hoping one of you might make these changes if you think that’s ok and improves the page. DanSlavov ( talk) 19:06, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks @ North8000:. It looks like someone already updated the employee headcount in the infobox. I suggest the above sentence on the acquisition be added to the very end of the “Corporate History” section, just after “acquired Sitel in 2015, valuing the company at $850 million.[13]” DanSlavov ( talk) 17:44, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
References
My name is Daniel and I work in marketing for Sitel. Recently, an IP address created a section called "News" with a sub-section called "Involvement in 2022 data breach at Okta". There was a security breach that attracted media attention, however TechCrunch explains Sitel's and Okta's conflicting perspectives, whereas Wikipedia's content relies exclusively on a citation to Okta's website. Additionally, creating a section and sub-section dedicated to the security breach, rather than a sentence in the History section, seems excessive.
I'd like to ask editors to consider removing the section cited to Okta's website and replace it with a 1-2 sentence summary of the TechCrunch piece at the end of the History section. In the alternate, I can take a stab at it and share a draft if preferred. DanSlavov ( talk) 15:09, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
Pinging @ North8000: and @ John Broughton:, who have each helped with my COI requests in the past above. DanSlavov ( talk) 10:23, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
My depth of involvement at this article/topic/ it's sources has been just enough to fix an obvious problem and to say that your ideas and proposed changes look OK with me, and those do look OK with me. I'm also happy to make those proposed changes when explicitly clearly defined. But I don't have the deeper involvement in the topic / sources to be intelligently making statements like "I think it should be this.......". Sincerely, North8000 ( talk) 18:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)