Talk:Compuware

message: 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)
thread_title:  Compuware on Wikipedia 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Main Image 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Competitors 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Layoffs 

message: 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.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:28, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 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)
thread_title:  Sourcing 

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