Talk:MapInfo Corporation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Editing out P.R. bloviation[edit]

The article was pure P.R. -- lots of words and phrases that added bulk but no meaning to the whole. I fear that this article will become part of an edit war with the original writer (or company flacks). If that's you (and you're reading this :) ), please read this section before editing. (For the record, I was a journalist for four years and a P.R. executive for another four. I sympathise. But this is Wikipedia.) --tgeller 18:38, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Article rewrite[edit]

I just completley rewrote this article, removing all the advertising and just providing the basic facts. I also removed the {{advertisement}} template. -Aude (talk | contribs) 03:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not in Troy[edit]

As has been discused elsewhere on wikipedia, MapInfo is not in Troy. The company's headquarters is several miles south of the city, in North Greenbush. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.195.201.47 (talk) 02:49, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where did it go?[edit]

Maybe it should say what product it became: "inspiration for the Microsoft MapPoint program, which became a separate product from Microsoft, and since that Microsoft Map was dropped." -- SEWilco (talk) 21:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:32, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

MapInfo → Pitney Bowes Business Insight — because the company name has changed. —Quantling (talk | contribs) 19:47, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Survey[edit]

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Discussion[edit]

Any additional comments:

See Wikipedia:official names for an informal introduction to the policy at WP:AT. I have not relisted this move, but it would be in order to relist if there is evidence that a move is in order. It seems unlikely to me, having looked at the current article. Andrewa (talk) 13:09, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I propose that the name be kept and the article be edited to refer to the company in the past tense. It no longer exists as an independent entity and the only way revenues, profits, or numbers of employees can be reported is to use those reported in the last year that it existed as such, before the acquisition. -AndrewDressel (talk) 01:25, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That sounds reasonable to me. I confess I'm puzzled as to exactly what the proposed move was expected to achieve. It's doubtful that a division of Pitney Bowes qualifies for an article of its own; The previous organisation still might. Andrewa (talk) 03:59, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Notability and verifiability[edit]

Cleanup or worse still required.

Infobox says Revenue $165.5 million USD (2005), Employees 900 (2005) with a non-MOS-compliant link direct to http://www.pbinsight.com/welcome/mapinfo/ and no retrieval date and that page doesn't currently support these figures.

So verifiability currently not established, notability unknown, previous advert and COI issues, and lead now reads a leading Location Intelligence/ GIS company with no reference for the leading which strikes me as a citation needed at least. Multiple issues despite the work above.

I'm not going to AFD it for now, I'll AGF and the AFD case is not all that strong but just possible IMO as it stands. Andrewa (talk) 20:51, 4 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I obviously have a conflict of interest, but I hope that doesn't preclude me from doing some of the legwork necessary to hunt down and insert some missing references. They're from the New York Times, so I hope you find them verifiable and that they establish notability. -AndrewDressel (talk) 01:14, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
NYT is an excellent source IMO, and there's absolutely no objection to your providing those refs. There's a systematic problem with COI in that an interest in any area generally leads to both expertise and opinions. We want the expertise! But so long as you're aware of the problem, normally (not always) there isn't one. Andrewa (talk) 04:04, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MapInfo Corporation. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 10:50, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on MapInfo Corporation. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 02:54, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MapInfo Corporation. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 23:26, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:MapInfo_Corporation&oldid=1208394163"