Talk:Comverse Technology

Neutrality
While this articles seems to have the information right from what I know, it sounds opinionated. The phrasing could be improved, and references to the claims should be added.

nuffin 12:23, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Since August 5th a number of edits have been taken out by author YFeldman (aka YakirFeldman) always thought Wikipedia was about facts and sourced opinions. Simply deleting any of these for the sake of the good name of your company (Yakir Feldman is a Comverse Marketing director ) isn't the Wikipedia way. I invite anyone aiming to censor work from others to stop this and help create an objective page, eventhough its contents may sometimes reflect sourced opinions or facts that are not beneficial for the company discussed.

martijnb 16:47, 26 august 2009 (UTC)

Hi martijnb,

I am not a marketing director (thanks for the promotion, though...)

I am a plain entry-level marketing writer who happened to look at the Comverse text on Wikipedia one day.

As I have explained in a long note to Ipmatrix, I rapidly discovered that every edit I tried to make to the Comverse text -- minor or otherwise, was simply undone.

I would like nothing better than to invest serious effort into writing a full, truthful, balanced entry that we can all live with -- but what is the point if it will immediately be undone?

For that reason, I would like to (preferably offline) do some work to fashion a text that we will all be happy with, and end this unpleasant "undo" cycle.

If you are open to such an idea, please contact me directly at yakir.feldman@comverse.com.

Yours,

Yakir —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yakirfeldman (talk • contribs) 06:20, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

< See User talk:Yakirfeldman and User talk:Martijnb and User talk:Ipmatrix for many more of these exchanges >

Followed the links to the Comverse article from a conspiracy website, using questionable articles from the height of the post 9/11 paranoia era. Can't find any records that the "top secret investigation" ever happened, or that Comverse was in any way formally accused by anyone of anything. Can anyone provide data to contradict that? So either it was simply shoddy journalism by Fox (quelle surprise!) or else the "secret investigation" found Comverse innocent...secretly! And the link to La Monde takes you to a page that requires subscription and payment to view. The free extract does not mention Comverse.

Mothra1961 (talk) 20:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

This is one of the most biased, skewed, and poorly done articles I've ever seen. The whole company's history needs to be represented, not just the recent negative parts. Events must be summarized in regular prose; insertion of chunks of SEC jargon is not appropriate. Sources do not always have to be attributed inline in the text; footnotes are fine for that. Formatting and style violations abound. Will start trying to improve. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:55, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Have done so. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:19, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Mention of specific conspiracy theories
Wasted time has immediately deleted my appendage to the conspiracy theory note at the end of the Growth in Wireless section. I had added:

For instance, it is conjectured that Comverse technology protected Israeli espionage activities in the US, as well as covert operations involved in enabling 9/11 as a false-flag psy-op. Similar insinuations were made regarding the London underground train bombings of July 2005, where Verint were said to have got contracts for security and CCTV installations for the London underground in Sept. 2004. Immediately preceding is a reference to conspiracy theories, but not to the one that 9/11 conspiracy theorists have written about regarding Comverse and 9/11.

Wasted time wrote: "rv - the "details" of lurid conspiracy theories belong in articles about those theories, not a real article about a real company based on real facts)"

There are many problems with this. "Details" - I did not go into details but gave only the main line of the theories regarding a Comverse role in 9/11-as-false-flag-operation.

"Lurid" is a value-loaded term with no substantive content. The same applies to "real facts." What is real to me may be lurid to wasted time. What is a real fact to wasted time may seem absurd to me. That isn't relevant nor is it a reason to censor other views.

Why should theories about Comverse not appear under the Comverse article but only under the theories article? Millions of people have only heard of Comverse in connection with these theories. They are notable -- for that section of the public, certainly the most notable aspect of the company's profile -- so they shouldn't be scrubbed.

Anyone wishing to scrub these theories from wikipedia could argue that the theory of Comverse involvement is too minor a detail in the immense mass of data composing the corpus of material on 9/11-as-inside-job to be mentioned under that topic. Indeed, Comverse is not mentioned at 9/11_conspiracy_theories. It would have to go either under the article Main theories or Other theories. The suspected involvement of Comverse apparently has not been thought to be a main theory; the scope is of the treatment is quite limited, with the two articles together only adding up to about 5200 words.

Moreover, it is uncanny that Comverse has come under suspicion not only for 9/11 but also for the 7/7 London Tube bombings. That alone is a reason to cite these theories under the Comverse article, rather than at the 9/11 and 7/7 articles.

More often cited regarding 9/11 is the Odigo warning. Odigo is an Israeli company purchased by Comverse in 2002. Roughly half the Wikipedia article on Odigo is entitled "Odigo and the 9/11 investigation." If you search Wikipedia on Odigo warning, you are redirected to 9/11_conspiracy_theories, but there is no mention of Odigo there. Apparently it has been scrubbed.

So wasting time's reasoning is just a rationalization or brush-off. If the material were posted at 9/11_conspiracy_theories it would be deleted there too. JPLeonard (talk) 05:20, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Let's focus on Wikipedia's bedrock principle. The text you inserted suggests that Comverse, and the people of Comverse, are guilty of secret, terrible crimes.  But there is no WP:Verification or WP:Reliable sources to back such suggestions, only some fevered conspiracy theory books.  There was one Fox News/Le Monde report that linked Comverse to U.S. government backdoors for electronic eavesdropping, and even though there was never follow-up on that from those or other mainstream news sources, it is included in the article. But again, there are no mainstream, reliable sources that link Comverse or the people of Comverse to the terror attacks you have mentioned.  Thus, it doesn't belong.  I would also argue that WP:BLPGROUP applies here too to some extent.  Whether this belongs in articles about those conspiracy theories is up for the editors that deal with those swamps to decide.  The text here does state that Comverse has had the attention of conspiracy theorists, so if the reader is really desperate to find out what, they can do a web search and come up with all sorts of conspiracy junk.  As for your finding it "uncanny" that Comverse has been the subject of two conspiracy theories, that's hardly surprising at all.  Conspiracy theorists all use a common set of tropes and it's not hard to figure out which one Comverse falls into.  Wasted Time R (talk) 10:46, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

This is an article about Comverse. The brief mention that "allegations have become a favorite topic of conspiracy theorists" is sufficient. Further discussion or expansion of the article with examples of suspected conspiracies would not be appropriate, because that would be wandering too far from the article's primary subject. Folklore1 (talk) 20:32, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

I have removed the conspiracy theory addition due to undue weight being given to one persons opinion, there were no page numbers given so it fails on wp:v and the publisher does not seem very credible for statements of fact, so again undue comes into play. Darkness Shines (talk) 20:15, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Comverse Technology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.snl.com/irweblinkx/faq.aspx?iid=4242008

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 06:05, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Comverse Technology. 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://archive.is/20120712050154/http://newsroom.cisco.com/dlls/prod_101501.html to http://newsroom.cisco.com/dlls/prod_101501.html

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) 21:41, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Comverse Technology. 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/20140101051704/http://www.ossnewsreview.com/telecom-oss/frost-and-sullivan-choose-comverse-as-telecom-bss-vendor-of-the-year/ to http://www.ossnewsreview.com/telecom-oss/frost-and-sullivan-choose-comverse-as-telecom-bss-vendor-of-the-year/
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130415235713/http://www.tmforum.org/ComverseONEsStandardsDriven/10611/home.html to http://www.tmforum.org/ComverseONEsStandardsDriven/10611/home.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713070519/http://www.ivc-online.com/ivcWeeklyItem.asp?articleID=9740 to http://www.ivc-online.com/ivcWeeklyItem.asp?articleID=9740
 * Added tag to http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1225036826851&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

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) 00:14, 14 January 2018 (UTC)