Talk:Project Management Institute

message: An anonymous contributor wrote "Need to compare with real degrees such as MBA, also reads like a PMI Brocure [sic] and is not NPOV"  I think the current information is factual, and doesn't express an positive or negative opinion.  Stating that a professional certification is not equivalent to a college degree isn't worthy of an encyclopedia entry.  Many employers require a PMP certification as a condition for employment or advancement, but do not require an MBA.  --Garrybooker 04:31, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: Is there any more information about PMI's Program Management certification and its differences to the Project Management certification?
I've read all the information PMI has to offer and it seems like Program Management is focused on mid to senior level project managers.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ykimva (talk • contribs) 15:11, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Program Management 

message: I believe the article on PMI is of a nature that does not belong in Wikipedia. It expresses more the opinion of  an individual instead that it is factual. Such an opinion article may do well in the yellow press, but does not belong in Wikipedia.
:I think the article is more balanced right now with the last section. Pm master 15:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments on the PMI Article 

message: Some chapters and SIGs are listed as registered Pennslvania non-profit corporations, but PMI itself doesn't seem to be listed. Clarification appreciated! To search the Pennsylvania Department of State business entity registration database, use this link . --65.78.213.196 (talk) 00:44, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  PMI Incorporation 

message: This is the most subjective portion of the article and is not supported by citations.  It should either be removed or edited accordingly.  --Gordon Jones (talk) 20:56, 21 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Operational Goals" Section 

message: Since there was a call for more sourcing and information, I wanted to go through this page and make suggested changes, including references. I started at the beginning, however, i believe the Not For Profit Status and Operational Goals sections have some factual mistakes as well. Here are my suggested changes for the current opening, Overview, Membership and Certification sections:
The Project Management Institute (PMI) is a member association and advocacy organization for the project management profession. 
Overview & Membership
<nowiki>PMI was founded by a group of five volunteers in 1969. Currently, the organization has 260,000 members in more than 171 countries. As of January 2008, 70 percent of the membership lived in North America.http://www.pmi.org/AboutUs/Pages/About-PMI.aspx 
To serve its members and the profession, PMI has created industry standards, such as A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), which has been recognized by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI)http://webstore.ansi.org/RecordDetail.aspx?sku=ANSI%2FPMI+99%2F001%2F2004. PMI also issues several professional certifications, produces industry and research publications, offers involvement in local chapters and holds four conferences, called “global congresses” around the world each year. 
PMI also has representative offices in Washington, D.C., and Beijing, Chinahttp://www.pmi.org/AboutUs/Pages/Representative-Offices.aspx, as well as Regional Service Centres in Singapore, Brussels, Belgium and New Delhi, India.http://www.pmi.org/AboutUs/Pages/Regional-Service-Centre-Contacts.aspx
Certification
PMI’s offers five professional certificationshttp://www.pmi.org/CareerDevelopment/Pages/Our-Credentials.aspx:
PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP)SM
PMI Scheduling Professional (PMI-SP)SM
Program Management Professional (PgMP)SM  
Project Management Professional (PMP)® 
Certified Associate in Project Management (CAPM)®
Nearly 260,000 people hold the PMP certificationhttp://www.pmi.org/AboutUs/Pages/About-PMI.aspx. In 2007, it earned the ISO/IEC 17024 accreditation from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO)http://www.pmi.org/AboutUs/Pages/Release_PMI-055-08-07.aspx. Credential holders do not have to be members of PMI.
To maintain most PMI credentials, holders must earn Professional Development Units (PDUs) which can be earned a variety of ways such as taking classes, attending PMI global congresses, contributing to professional research or writing and publishing papers on the subject.http://www.pmi.org/CareerDevelopment/Pages/Continuing-Certification-Requirements-(CCR).aspx
Makingprogress19 (talk) 04:23, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested page changes 

message: i would like to suggest removing the section Not For Profit Status section. It's neutrality has been questioned and it has been marked as vague and is need of valid citations. If there is objection can we discuss ways to make improvements to it so that it is more neutral?  Makingprogress19 (talk) 22:45, 24 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section Removal 

message: I think a section on PMI's global congresses would be helpful. Thoughts?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Makingprogress19 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Congress section 

message: I am wondering if someone can provide specifics about the questions of neutrality raised on this page. There is no discussion about it. Makingprogress19 (talk) 15:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality Question 

message: The majority of the sources on this page have been changed. They should now comply with third-party reliable sourcing. Can we remove the warnings on the page? How do you do that? Makingprogress19 (talk) 12:36, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Sourcing 

message: The first paragraph has many misspellings or non-sequiturs. Surprisingly poor quality.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.225.207.33 (talk) 22:56, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. I made some corrections. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 23:22, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overview Section 

message: I removed the advert- tag for now. I do think think claims of presument advertisment should be explained of on the talkpage, so people can do something about this. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 23:36, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The intro is identical but for formatting. The entire article appears written by the organization itself. There are many blatantly biased advertising sentences, while I have difficulty finding a single sentence that would not be expected from an organization's advertising department. —Centrx→talk • 23:59, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

text: Okay. The intro is innocuous. The rest of the article reads exactly like advertising, and some of it is copied directly from PMI literature. The simplest edit to fix this would delete half the article. I was doing this edit, when I found that part was copied. It looks like all revision prior to 03:25, 12 January 2008 need to be deleted, and many parts since. It may be easier to delete the entire article and start from scratch, retaining parts not copied. —Centrx→talk • 00:10, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks very much, I don't know about that last remark. First I will comment on the intro. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 00:18, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advert tag 

message: I just search though the (ANSI) website trying to get prove the PMI is accredited by the ANSI. So far I couldn't find a direct reference here. I did find in: Jan Van Bon (2006). Frameworks for IT Management. Van Haren Publishing. . p.206:
* 1999 PMI accredited as a Standard Development Organization (SDO) by ANSI
* 2000 PMBoK Guide - 2000 Edition (Second edition) was published an is recognized as standard ANSI/PMI 99-001-2000
* 2004 PMBoK Guide - 2004 Edition (Third edition) was published an is recognized as standard ANSI/PMI 99-001-2004
I guess this will do as a acceptable source. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 01:32, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Accreditation by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) 

message: To further clean this article from advertisements I have removed the following non-reliable sources:  
# http://www.certmag.com/read.php?in=1851 : Free speech on line article in Certification Magazine by Denny Smith, Ph.D., is the manager of the certification program with PMI 
# http://www.gantthead.com/blog/Project-Management-2.0/?userTagIDSort=20 : Seems a blog, which is generally not considered a reliable reference in Wikipedia.
# http://www.pmhut.com/10-quick-and-easy-ways-to-earn-pdus-for-re-certification : seems a blog on project management
# http://www.pmi.org/Resources/Pages/Standards-Development.aspx Direct link to PMI webpage on "Standards Overview"
With the removal of these references I also removed the primary sources tag, about "Primary sources or sources affiliated with the subject are generally not sufficient for a Wikipedia article". 
-- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 22:11, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further non-reliable sources + primary sources tag removed 

message: I would like to propose to remove the adverttag. It seems to me the article has been almost completely rewritten since dec 2008, see here for the difference between then and now. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 22:22, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I see very little remaining that would classify the article as advertising. No objections to the removal of that tag.  I would be very careful in restoring any of the above material unless secondary sources are clearly provided.  Kuru talk 00:56, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok thanks. I have removed the advert tag. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 22:12, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adverttag 

message: Sorry guys, the only thing I mean with burden of proof is a listing of possible copyright infrigments. Only one thing has been mentioned so far:
# "... "spearheaded PMI's financial growth from an $8 million budget in 1997 to $30 million in 2001." is directly lifted from the article word for word. If it is not in quotes it is a copyright violation..." by  -- PBS (talk) 12:37, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you are confused. There is no burden to prove that something is or is not a copy violation, you should check the wording you wish to add to an article to make sure that the wording to Wikipedia that is not a copy violation, because if you repeatedly add wording that is a copy violation, your account will be blocked (see Wikipedia:Copyright violations#Dealing with copyright violations and Wikipedia:Copyright problems#Repeated copyright violations). Now that you know that you must quote text taken from another source, you are just as capable of checking you own work as anyone else for copyright violations. Have you checked the rest of the section that you have placed here to see if any other clause is copied from another source? If you have, then you are capable of deciding if it needs to be quoted, and if you have not then you are in danger of breaching the restrictions in the WP:COPYVIO POLICY for which the sanctions are clearly laid out in the section "Dealing with copyright violations". -- PBS (talk) 11:07, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Insofar as there is a burden of proof, it is on the contributor who copies text from another source into Wikipedia, to prove that it is copyright free. Of the history section, the first two sentences are blatantly pasted from . Unless verification is provided that this text is free, this is a copyvio under Wikipedia's policies. The second paragraph also seems to be substantially copied: . Clearly that passage is not, as WP:C mandates, rewritten in entirely new language. Phrases such as "became a standard for generally recognized good practices in project management" are amply creative to warrant copyright protection. The material on Virgil Carter was taken almost wholecloth from : "experienced a 350 percent net growth in membership to 90,000-members and expanded its global component organizations in 120 countries. Carter also spearheaded PMI's financial growth from an $8 million budget in 1997 to $30 million in 2001." This varies from the source by only three words. Again, this constitutes a copyright violation under Wikipedia's policies. Wikipedia's policies are clear in that if contributors copy text from a non-free source, they must follow the guidelines at WP:NFC. If they do not, they are in violation of our copyright policy. And as the bottom of every edit screen says, "Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted." --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok, thank you. This is the feed back I wanted. Now I understand. I will study on this some more first, and get back on this how to solve this...!? -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 11:56, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Burden of proof 

message: I have doublecheked the other contributions I made to this article and I have rewritten some of it. I will leave it with tis for now, maybe rewrite a history section (if nobody else does in the mean-time). Again sorry for the inconvenience. -- Mdd (talk) 21:39, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Further comment 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :PMI® and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 15#PMI® until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  BD2412 T 05:07, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "PMI®" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Hi! I'm Acacia, an employee at PMI. I signed up for Wikipedia to request a couple of updates to this article. I read about conflict-of-interest editing, and since this article is about my employer, I will only suggest changes here and won't directly edit the article. Hopefully, the two changes I am seeking will be pretty straightforward. 
*First, can someone update the article now that Pierre Le Manh is the President and CEO as of September 1, 2022? This article, and this one confirm the change. They do both draw on our press release, which I've learned are not typically preferred sources. But, I did a bit of reading about sources and think this portion of WP:PRIMARY on when one is acceptable applies here: "A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge."
*Second, under "type" in the box at the top right it says, "Professional association organization". Could that be changed to just say "Professional organization", since it's redundant to have both? 
If there's anything else I can provide, please let me know. Thanks very much! PMIAcacia (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I see these changes have been made to the article so I am marking this as answered. Thanks! PMIAcacia (talk) 18:57, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article updates 

message: Hi! Acacia from PMI again. I'd like to suggest adding a brief mention of our CEO to the article's History section:
*Pierre Le Manh was appointed CEO on September 1, 2022.
I won't make this change because of my conflict of interest. Thanks very much! PMIAcacia (talk) 18:58, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, suggestion and source are checked and added to the article now. -- Mdd (talk) 13:59, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Add CEO to History