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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering 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.EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject EngineeringEngineering
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Occupations, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.OccupationsWikipedia:WikiProject OccupationsTemplate:WikiProject OccupationsOccupations
I added the NPOV template, just because there are personal thoughts in the article, regarding ethics and what a Sales Engineer thinks or should think. Maybe the writer was a Sales Engineer himself, and what he wrote is really agreeable, still I think that any bias (even positive ones) are strange in an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.96.130.141 (talk) 10:56, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what motivated this tag, but I removed it (and edited the article to reduce the factors that led toward it). The reason why is simply that the COI and ROI components of the role are facts rather than opinions. It's not really about ethics or what thoughts anyone is thinking, directly speaking; it's more objective than that. The industrial customers simply know that the sales engineer has some inherent COI, and so does he/she, but the customers still participate in the discussion anyway, only because he/she may actually nevertheless provide some useful consultation that will result in ROI. In this sense, all of this is encyclopedic, because it is simply a statement of what the role is and what factors are involved in it. Stating that COI exists (encyclopedic statement) is not the same as pitching bias on either side of the COI (which is what would be unencyclopedic). For another example, see the coverage of COI in pharma at the article for No Free Lunch (organization). Although ethics and thoughts are inherent in the topic, that article is not "about" ethics and thoughts; it's about the organization and its raison d'etre. — ¾-1018:02, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why anyone decided that putting in a salary comparison section would be a good idea but this is totally unreadable. What does pc even mean? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.72.166.177 (talk) 04:09, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
