Talk:Compuware

Compuware on Wikipedia

Why it is okay for such companies as Compuware and HP Mercury to have their products and organisations on Wikipedia but, others are bumped off immediately when they try to produce an informative page with appropriate and independent references? Where does Wikipedia draw the line as to when an organisation is perhaps important enough to allow it to be referenced? Compuware's site seems completely promotional.

I am also confused as to why HP Mercury has a competitors section but, Compuware can't? It is very confusing when it seems like the regulations are not consistent?

Jessica.jjones (talk) 16:01, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

This Compuware article (advert) seems terribly out of date, as Compuware has sold off its QA and testing divisions months ago because they unprofitable, according to its CEO. Maybe somebody should severely edit the article in a factual manner? Detroit (talk) 18:34, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Main Image

Following along with the other companies listed on Wikipedia wouldn't it be better to show the companies Logo along with an infobox rather than showing an image of the main headquarters as the Main Image. - Noctrine 13:24, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

• Edited as listed above (WP:Bold), its not all that great looking though. Need to find more Information on the Company Noctrine 13:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Competitors

Is it appropriate to link Compuware to a handful of competitors who only compete with Compuware in one narrow area of their line of business? This seems like a purposeful marketing effort, rather than an appropriate part of the Compuware wiki entry. If this were the standard approach to any entry about a corporation on Wikipedia, then large companies like Compuware would necessarily have to link to dozens of competitors...

→This is a really good point. I'm going to remove blind links to competitors that give no indication why they're there, since realistically an entire page could be written on that topic for every company that has ever existed. Seems a little foolish... Regress 17:16, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

1. This page seems to me more like a commercial than a Wikipedia entry. Why "Products" here? For the product line, just check the website. I've checked out a few other wikipedia entries for other companies and nowhere I found a product list. That part should be summarized. Also, the part about "Compuware customers include:" seems another marketing text, with no added value: I've made a summary from it. I've also readded the stub part since the information content is really low. --Folletto 21:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

1. Yes, this is an advert. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.7.166.181 (talk) 10:13, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Layoffs

I felt it appropriate to cite a few news articles about Compuware's layoffs over the last decade; this also gives this article some badly-needed neutral point of view, as the existing article was overwhelmingly positive, and read like an advertisement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.195.154.31 (talk) 22:48, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Compuware. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725193020/http://investor.compuware.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=337355 to http://investor.compuware.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=337355
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091014064506/http://www.compuware.com/contact/216.asp to http://www.compuware.com/contact/216.asp
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.compuware.com/offices/us_can.htm

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) 21:28, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Sourcing

There are literally two third-party RSes in this article. The rest is entirely sourced to the company's own materials. WP:NOTBROCHURE - is there any reason not to cut this to the RSes? - David Gerard (talk) 13:16, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Compuware

Who could forgot the hockey team? 2601:401:180:6C9A:85DF:C46F:2025:592F (talk) 22:07, 20 July 2022 (UTC)