Talk:RGIS Inventory Specialists

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Problems with the article

  • Lack of context and information in the lead paragraph. It's not clear what "inventory services" entails nor is there any information about the size of the company (the paragraph alone wouldn't let me know that it's not just one person per continent ...).
  • Have to go through the history to see what kind of company it is.
  • Is the company notable enough to include all that detail in the company history?
  • Obvious statements. ("RGIS refers to its client stores who use its inventory services as "customers"." Duh.)
  • Job positions are definitely not notable.
  • If there is a controversy, then what is it about? And is it notable?
  • Lack of independent sources for a lot of the information.

-- Saligron 02:41, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

  • (about controversy) The mentioned legal issue - Sixth Circuit Ruling involving RGIS - is a trivial lawsuite with one of RGIS employees, and was won by RGIS —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.101.207.51 (talk)


I wrote this article originally back in 2005. They are an important company worthy of an article because they changed how inventories were done in the post-World War II years of the retail industry.

I think it would best for Wikipedia if we can remove some of the stuff like the "Controversy" bit as thats really just much hearsay in the company's water coolers. --Agentskelly 16:48, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Acutally the controversy is A LOT more than merely "water cooler" talk. I made the entry (the one that mentions the upper Midwest districts). I am a former Area Manager. Every word is true. I would invite my former Operations Manager and District Manager to refute it. They can figure out who I am. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalie1000 (talk • contribs)

Being true doesn't make it notable. Unless it has been mentioned in major news outlets, I don't see what makes it different from a gazillion other disputes in a gazillion other companies. It doesn't look like it belongs in an encyclopedia (at least not at that level of detail). Saligron 02:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

This article sounds like it was written by the company's marketing department.68.61.43.217 (talk) 08:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree, this is just marketing. The article should be removed or at least reduced (the history section definitely does not meet encyclopedic standards). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.70.78.57 (talk) 12:24, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree with your triming and undid the bot vandalisim reversion. I also notified cluebot that it was a false positive. harlock_jds (talk) 14:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC)


Yes there is controversy, Google RGIS Overtime Lawsuit. plus the "Tales of a RGIS Auditor" blog is quite accurate on the company from an employees viewpoint. The only ethics present in the company are the few people who have it there, the vast majority in the Ops Manager rank and above have no ethics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.87.32.41 (talk) 01:37, 12 June 2008 (UTC)