Talk:Marvell Technology/Archives/2013
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Marvell Technology. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Reads like an AD
This reads like a Advertisement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.103.34.250 (talk) 16:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
YES LIKE "WE ARE NUMBER ONE AND TO HELL WITH THE REST OF YA".
There is nothing really objective about it at all except the last section.
POV complaint
This page is copied verbatim from [1]. According to the information at Image:Marvell_logo.gif the author works for Marvell so it probably isn't a copyvio. However virtually every sentence praises the company and the last sentence is "With a clear commitment to both innovation and our partnerships, Marvell is rapidly moving toward a vision of the completely integrated digital lifestyle.". -- mattrix 19:41, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- My apologies, I am still unfamilar with this medium and was unaware of the potential issues. The content has been toned down, and is more inline with other company profiles here. If you have any additional concerns let's discuss and I will make the appropriate changes. If everything is ok I'd like to close this issue and remove any comment. Appreciate your time. -- dwilsonmrvl 13:35, 24 May 2006 (PDT)
- No worries. I've removed some more marketing-sounding stuff and I'm now happy enough now to remove the POV tag. However the article is now a bit short. If you want, you could add more information about factual matters such as the companies history, structure etc. (By the way -- it looks like you typed the signature bit yourself, you can just use four tidles (~~~~) and Wikipedia will do it for you.) -- mattrix 14:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Will do, thanks again for your time Dwilsonmrvl 16:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Still
This Wiki page still is written like an ad. Should this be flagged? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lugnut64 (talk • contribs) 16:14, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Why Nothing on Criminal Behavior with Backdated Stock Options
Why is there nothing in "Controversy" or whatever it is called about the Backdating of Options problems that the company, specifically the chairman and his wife, and her brother encountered with the Securities and Exchange Commission that forced his and his wife's apparently temporary resignation from his and her original posts? Dai is still apparently demoted. I am not certain about his status... Stevenmitchell (talk) 16:17, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, the article needs to be more balanced and less dated. But all allegations need to be cited to reliable sources too. W Nowicki (talk) 19:45, 24 August 2013 (UTC)