Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a2304fb38e22ea0a

Jump to content

Talk:MobileIron

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Spintendo in topic Proposing changes to lead paragraph

Some proposed changes

[edit]


Information to be added:

1. Please expand the infobox with the details given below:

2. Also, please add this image - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:MobileIron_Headquarters.png - in the body of the page.

Explanation of the issue: Requesting to expand the infobox with information found online and adding images found on Wikimedia Commons. All URLs are given above with the text. Thanks.

TP495 (talk) 17:16, 20 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Reply 20-AUG-2019

[edit]

  Edit request implemented    Spintendo  22:43, 20 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Proposing a few more changes

[edit]

Information to be added:

1. Please add a section named 'Technology'

TP495 (talk) 18:04, 27 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Reply 27-AUG-2019

[edit]

  Edit request declined  

  1. Wikipedia is not an instruction manual on how to use this technology, per WP:NOTMANUAL.
  2. By their very nature, accolades can be subjective — in that they represent a very specific point of view — the point of view of the individual or organization which determines who receives the accolade and why. To counter this, a good practice is to limit the listing of accolades to only those which are independently notable in Wikipedia.[a]
  3. To include a list of accolades here, please ensure that only accolades which are independently notable in Wikipedia are listed in the request.[b]

Regards,  Spintendo  01:25, 28 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

Notes

  1. An accolade which is independently notable is recognized by having its own article in Wikipedia.
  2. The requirement I'm asking for here that the accolades be notable is not due to WP:N (which is not a content requirement). My asking for notability here is to ensure WP:NPOV. The adding of several points of view to an article in the form of an accolades section may skew the article's balance.[1] Thus, my own practice is to limit the listing of accolades to only those which are independently notable in Wikipedia.

References

  1. "WP:BALANCE". Wikipedia. 20 July 2019. ...articles should not give minority views or aspects as much of or as detailed a description as more widely held views or widely supported aspects.

Proposing some changes

[edit]

Information to be added:

TP495 (talk) 15:42, 13 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Reply 13-SEP-2019

[edit]

  Edit request partially implemented  

  1. Red X The lead section was not implemented, as the terms used there, such as mobile device management (MDM), zero trust technologies, zero sign-on (ZSO) user and device authentication, multi-factor authentication (MFA), and mobile threat defense (MTD) have not been Wikilinked.
  2. check The information concerning the NASDAQ ticker symbol is already included in the infobox.
  3. Red X Information on IoT management was not added, as it was referenced by TechCrunch.
  4. check Information on the appointment of the CEO in 2017 is already in the article.
  5. Green tick Information on the Google Cloud partnership was added.
  6. Red X Information on Access was not added because it was referenced by BrianMadden.com, which offers opinion/editorial content.
  7. Red X Information on the zero sign-on enterprise was not added, because it was referenced by a Forbes.com contributor.
  8. Red X Information provided by Fast Company was not added, as it does not conform with WP:BALANCE (e.g., "at the leading edge").[a]

Regards,  Spintendo  17:33, 13 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Notes

  1. As other views of this company have not been included regarding their "shift away from passwords", this would be the only viewpoint given.
@Spintendo: - Thanks for the partial implementation and appreciate your guidance. TP495 (talk) 15:00, 16 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Proposing changes to lead paragraph

[edit]

Information to be edited:

Please change the first paragraph from

MobileIron Inc. is an American software company specializing in security for mobile devices, apps, and cloud services, including enterprise mobility management (EMM) and mobile device management (MDM).

to:

MobileIron Inc. is an American software company specializing in enterprise security for mobile devices, apps, and cloud services, through Unified Endpoint Management (UEM), Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) and Mobile Device Management (MDM). MobileIron offers zero trust technologies such as multi-factor authentication (MFA).

Explanation of the issue: Addressing the Wikilinks as suggested by the moderator - Spintendo in the previous edit request. Thanks. TP495 (talk) 15:07, 16 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Reply 16-SEP-2019

[edit]

  Edit request implemented  

  • "Zero trust technologies" was not wikilinked, so it was not added. As MFA was mentioned (and since MFA is part and parcel of the company's provision of MDM), these two sentences were combined. That being said, if it's true that these two things are very different, then a suggestion would be appreciated on how to combine the two sentences without using the generic "they also provide MFA." This dilemma on how to structure the lead section is shown below:[a]
Lead sentence No. 1
Main components
Lead sentence No. 2
Main components
Company provides UEM, EMM and MDMMobileIron offers zero trust technologies such as[b] multi-factor authentication (MFA).

If there is some other way of combining these two elements without implying anything incorrect, please advise.[c] Regards,  Spintendo  23:28, 16 September 2019 (UTC)Reply

Notes

  1. The dilemma only exists if the COI editor finds fault with the implemented lead section (which they might). If they do not, then this part of my reply may be ignored.
  2. The phrase "such as" was re-used to connect the two sentences. If this re-use is incorrect, then the dilemma spelled out here comes into play. If it's ok to use, then there is no dilemma — and this part of my reply may be ignored.
  3. As an alternative, the entire proposed claim as originally written could be implemented (albeit in abbreviated form) so long as the phrase zero trust technologies was Wikilinked.