Talk:Hanger, Inc.

Please offer suggestions on how this page can be improved to better reflect Wikipedia standards. It has numerous credible references so I am unsure why there is a question of "notability." (WBancroft (talk) 02:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC))

The main claim to notability in this article is that it "one of the largest provider of prosthetic and orthotic patient care services in the United States." Now "the largest" would certainly be notable, but "one of the largest" not so much. That reference comes from Funding Universe here: and if you read the company profile there you will find that the phrasing

… provide orthotic and prosthetic services … at a reasonable cost to our patients, and continually strive to improve our services and facilities, while maintaining a rewarding atmosphere for our associates and investors …

reads as if it were from a press release or a biography written and employee of the company - which by definition is not an independent, reliable source. Here is a link to the notability criteria for companies.

Sorry, but the direct quote from the source at the Funding Universe site is

Hanger Orthopedic Group, Inc. is the oldest and one of the largest prosthetics and orthotics (O & P) companies in the world.

— Funding Universe site, Company History

You can't reference that site and then make the claim that it is the largest - I am going to revert. pablo_hablo. 15:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, my mistake. I am working on locating a more credible reference for this information. What other problems do you see with the article? (WBancroft (talk) 17:12, 10 March 2009 (UTC))

Is notability validated by stories about the work of the company on/in national media outlets such as The Today Show, Good Morning America, and USA Today? (WBancroft (talk) 19:35, 10 March 2009 (UTC))

If they are "mainstream news organisations" (see WP:RS), and it's a news article, they should be fine pablo_hablo. 20:04, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance. I am still working on the notability issue and locating a more reliable source. (WBancroft (talk) 22:43, 13 March 2009 (UTC))

reply to proposed deletion

First of all, I am a new contributor to Wikipedia. I don't have ulterior motives of advertising a company or its products, but I do have the motive of providing sound and thorough information for people who may be researching that company. The article I posted was proposed for deletion and I removed the tag. I have since read that I need to explain why I removed the tag, so here goes:

One expressed concern was that the article sounded like an advertisement, but both I and other Wikipedians have deleted what I believe was the objectionable material. Another concern was notability, particularly that which would be established by the first reference in the article. I am working on correcting this by locating a reliable source for this information. Also, there was a concern that one of the references had an invalid tag, which I believe I have corrected.

I am confused because when I look at other company articles (Devon Energy for example), I don't see a reference for every fact that is stated about the company like "...one of the world's leading independent oil and gas exploration..." (no reference given.) Also, I read under reliable sources that material the actual company had produced was not considered objective. But I see other companies referencing their annual reports, or their self written corporate histories. So I am confused. But I really want to continue with this article, and make it right according to Wikipedia standards. Thank you