Jump to content

Talk:Piksel

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:KIT digital)
[edit]

The article appears to be nothing more than an advertisement for the company. There isn't a single reference from a news organization. It's all from the company's website or news releases from the company. In the case of the major contributors to the article, users Karolis, IPVideoblogger and Mattlee217, their only contributions to wikipedia have been to this article. I'm wondering if it is a candidate for deletion. BashBrannigan (talk) 04:05, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to clean-up and "deadvertise" article. I already did small clean-up. I do not think there is notability problem, as company is listed on multiple stock exchanges and part of main stock index on Prague Stock Exchange. --Jklamo (talk) 14:23, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody has amended this to "de-advertise" it. And actually the company doesn't exist anymore, so I am nominating for speedy deletion. theredrocket (talk) 13:46, 03 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on KIT Digital. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:41, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion about proposed changes to company page

[edit]

A page about a defunct company called Kit Digital has been renamed by a Wikipedian to Piksel. I work on behalf of Piksel and we believe this was a an error and would like to suggest some minor edits and undoing the name change. Originally I was recommended to do this on my Talk page, but other more experienced Wikipedians said the right way is to put our suggestion article on this Talk page.

As background, Kit Digital went bankrupt in 2013. The Piksel Group was formed out of the companies that previously made up parts of KIT Digital to create a standalone company under a new management team and board of directors. We think that the renaming of the page to Piksel is misleading as they are completely different businesses. The Kit Digital employee who previously contributed to the original article does not work for Piksel.

However, we recognise that the community may argue that the events leading up to Kit Digital's bankruptcy are in the public interest, so we are not in a position to objectively suggest changes to these elements.

In summary, we suggest:

  • Reverting the page back to KIT digital
  • Putting historical entries into past tense
  • Removing overtly promotional material made up the Technology section

Below you'll find our suggested edited version and the current Piksel article underneath our suggested one. To be honest, the article needs lots more, but it's not something we can go further within given our conflict of interests.

We would appreciate feedback and a reviewer making the changes directly for us. Thanks to any users' input into this.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pj520M (talk • contribs) 02:38, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pj520M. If you would like to propose changes to the article becasue you have a WP:COI with the company, please read WP:ER and follow the suggestions given there. I've had to remove the part of your previously post because you seem to have basically just copied and pasted the entire article (including your proposed changes) onto this talk page. Not only did this unintentionally damage the format of the page and create possible problems per WP:PATT, but it was also pretty much a impossible request to repsond to. Please use Template:Request edit to re-request the changes you'd like to make, only this time try to break things down into something easier to understand an more manageable. All Wikipedia editors are volunteers and those who try to answer edit requests are unlikely going to have the time or desire to read through a wall of text and try to figure out what is being proposed. So, it's best to keep things as simple as possible like "Change name of page from XXXX to YYYY" or "Correct mistake in line ## of the ## paragraph of section XXXX". Concise request are easier to respond to and verify. Prioritizing requests and proposing them one at a time also makes it easier for those responding because those reviewing the request might feel able to respond to one part but not another, and thus decide to pass on the enitre request and leave it for someone else to deal with. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:58, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your help! Pj520M (talk) 15:21, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, another copy of the requested changes was at User:Phil at Piksel/sandbox, but I am blanking that now as WP:COPYARTICLE. – Fayenatic London 12:57, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request edits to page

[edit]

A page about a defunct company called Kit Digital has been renamed by a Wikipedian to Piksel. I work on behalf of Piksel and we believe this was a an error and would like to suggest some minor edits and undoing the name change.

Kit Digital went bankrupt in 2013. The Piksel Group was formed out of the companies that previously made up parts of KIT Digital to create a standalone company under a new management team and board of directors. We think that the renaming of the page to Piksel is misleading as they are completely different businesses. The Kit Digital employee who previously contributed to the original article does not work for Piksel. We recognise that the page may still be in the public interest, given the nature of its demise.

Specifically we suggest the following edits:

  • Revert the page name back to KIT Digital
  • Put historical entries into past tense (as the company does not exist now)
  • Remove the overly promotional material made up the Technology section
  • Delete or trim Criminal Actions section (surely this is about the individuals, not about the company, so is off topic)

If it helps, I have made specific edited changes before, if you look at my suggested amends in the history of this Talk page, on 28th March 2018.

There is a case for deleting the page altogether, but we have too much of a COI, so will leave this to more experienced people to discuss! Pj520M (talk) 15:21, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply 24-APR-2018

[edit]

As this request goes beyond the normal actions of editing an article and involves questions over the possibility of a page being fundamentally altered without merit, you should first direct your concerns to the editor who made the name change, UnitedStatesian, by asking them to clarify why those changes were made. That editor at first glance appears to be an active and conscientious one, so in the unlikely event that they are unable to assist you, please let me know. I make these suggestions because what your dealing with is one of either two possibilities:

  1. the mistake of the editor who first made the change, in which case they should revert that change
  2. the mistake of the COI editor making the request to revert, in which case they should drop their request

I believe that any changes I could make to an article in response to a COI edit request without the COI editor first trying the two possibilities listed above, might prove futile, which is why I ask that they try at least the first option. If this doesn't work, please let me know here or on my talk page. Thank you   SPINTENDO          16:46, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I might add that you've already contacted an admin, Oshwah, who advised you to raise the issue here on the talk page, which is what your doing. But no one has yet suggested that you contact the user who made the changes in the first place, UnitedStatesian, in order to find out from them what their reasons were — which seems, to me, to be the next logical next step. As I said above, please contact them first, then we can proceed from there. Thank you   SPINTENDO          17:45, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand what Pj520M wishes to do, but this is not a request we should implement in my view. When a company becomes insolvent, there are two main routes - liquidation or reorganization. The shareholders of KIT Digital chose the latter. The record at the SEC is continuous until the company delisted its stock. This SEC filing on 2013-08-14 described the reorganization, and this one filed two days later, after it was done, describe it. The second one makes the continuity clear: References to the “Company” as used below shall mean KIT digital, Inc. prior to the Effective Date and Piksel, Inc. on and after the Effective Date.. The article cited by Pj520M also makes this clear: KIT Digital's dark days may well be behind it: The company officially relaunches today as Piksel. The company that attracted a lot of attention -- first for an aggressive campaign of acquiring online video companies, then for cash shortfalls and financial improprieties -- has emerged from Chapter 11 bankruptcy leaner and more focused..
It is the same corporate entity, albeit with re-issued stock, new management etc etc.
Again I appreciate this effort to do things the correct way, unlike what this fake account did and what this account did. But we really cannot do this - we cannot treat Piksel like it is actually a different corporate entity. Jytdog (talk) 01:33, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the input Jytdog and Spintendo, appreciate the time and views. It seems that there are two options: either rename the page so that it is a more histortic piece, but essentially the same content. Or that a larger edit is conducted to bring it up to date as Piksel. Assuming that neither of your or the wider community have an appetite to do this, we would be prepared to submit something for review (obviously with COI, we wouldn't just edit the page). Let us know which you would prefer. We've seen that you have already hailed down UnitedStatesian. Pj520M (talk) 12:44, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your note. With regard to splitting off a new article about the reorganized company, see WP:SPLIT. There would have be reason as described there, to do that, and I don't see that being realistic for a long time. Adding content about what the company has done since the reorganization is fine. Please do base proposals for new content on high quality, independent sourcing. We will all be keeping notions of WP:DUE and WP:UNDUE "weight" in mind as we go. I understand that your real world job is PR; please remember that as a Wikipedia editor you need to be mindful of Wikipedia's mission, which is to present the public with articles that summarize accepted knowledge. We (and you) realize that mission by summarizing what high quality independent sources say, giving WEIGHT as they do. Not just the recent sources, but all of them. Jytdog (talk) 15:48, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Piksel&oldid=1256555728"