Talk:Business/IT Fusion

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Speedy deletion tag discussion

This could look like blatant advertising, but it isn't the goal of this article. The author (www.peterhinssen.com) of Business/IT Fusion is a genuine thought leader in the field of Business and IT alignment. Moreover, his recent book contains a theory that goes beyond alignment, i.e. fusion. If a page about IT alignment can exist and a page about blue ocean strategy can exist, please explain me why this article cannot remain on wikipedia? I'm absolutely willing to rewrite this article, so please do not delete it yet. Hyperides (talk) 16:33, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem with the article is its tone; just by skim-reading it, you can tell that it reads like an advert. Wikipedia articles should present a subject from a neutral point of view. If you re-wrote it to no longer include words such as "proactive", "innovative" and so on (as the accumulation of such vocabulary leads to a generally promotional tone) - unless you can find and reference quotes by independent third parties which include those words - then it should be more eligible for inclusion. If you take a look at computing featured articles such as PowerBook 100, then that should hopefully give you an idea of what sort of tone the articles should take.

I will remove the speedy deletion template for the time being, watchlist this page and come back in a week to check up on how progress on it is coming along. It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 17:31, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, there has been progress, and well done with using inline citations (although you may want to consider using citation templates such as {{Cite book}}). However, some of the sections of the article are still inherently promotional; namely, I would get rid of all the rhetorical questions and re-write those sections to read something like "The book talks about the increasing levels of collaboration between the business and IT industries, the role of CIOs in industry, ..." (NB you need to disambiguate that last link). Also, remove all of the random capitalisation (for instance, "fusion" does not need to be capitalised). It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 10:21, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]