Talk:BigPanda

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Daily pageviews of this article

A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

New Draft For Consideration[edit]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Hi, I am a consultant at BigPanda. I would like to share a proposed rewrite of the current article, so that independent, impartial editors have an opportunity to review the draft and provide any feedback. In comparison to the current article, I believe the draft would be a substantial improvement because:

It removes: The insignificant Forbes ranking/award (#36 in the ranking), lists of investors, a minor executive appointment, the word "platform," and other lists of certifications/compatibilities/partners/etc.
It provides a much more concise and up-to-date description of the software.

As a whole, the draft would reduce excessive detail and promotionalism. Pinging @Rairden:, who is the only person to have contributed on the Talk page before. StephanieMephanie1234 (talk) 22:15, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I looked it over and it looks good to me, so I made the edit after fixing one minor error in the infobox.

Your version was noticeably better. Good job.

As always, I stand behind any edits I make in my name, even if they were originally suggested by someone else. If anyone has a problem with the change, post a note here: I am watching this page.

I had to remove the unknown parameter "key people" from the infobox. To avoid this error in the future, look at the red notice at the top when you try to edit your draft. It says

"Warning: Page using Template:Infobox company with unknown parameter "key people" (this message is shown only in preview)."

Thank you for following our guidelines for COI edoiting, and feel free to ask if you have any other suggestions. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:11, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]