Talk:Fortinet/Archive 1

Myamar government site
Should something be done about the links to the Myamar government site because it's down...oh yeah, they cut off internet access to everyone.


 * There are presumably blogs that have reproduced the info, if you want to look them up. Sdedeo (tips) 19:52, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Fortinet editing their own article - Part 1
Question for Sdedeo: Why do you continue to remove information and external links that are a) not marketing materials b) have third-party verification or c) provide the same background as companies similar to Fortinet in the security industry (i.e. Cisco, etc.). Would appreciate some guidance, if you're open to such. Thank you. Mediaphyter 00:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)mediaphyter


 * The point of wikipedia is not to catalog every business venture that Fortinet has gone into. It is not a place to reproduce marketing materials (this is why I removed the massive list of press releases at the end of the article.) Finally, everything in wikipedia needs to be written in a neutral tone, and much of the language that I have removed is highly promotional in nature.


 * An important question to ask in a wikipedia article is "is it notable?" That means finding outside, significant, neutral, third-party coverage of some aspect of the company. Simply because Fortinet does a press release that is reprinted or summarized in a trade journal does not mean we should cover it. Ideally, we would source information in this article to major journals and newspapers.


 * I am happy to provide guidance. My suggestion is that you (and the anonymous IP who also shows up to delete material) work on other areas of the wiki for a while; whatever your connection to Fortinet, you will learn a great deal by working on something other than this single article. Sdedeo (tips) 15:11, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. I cannot speak for the anonymous editor, but I've personally added information rather than deleted information, nor have I ever tried to omit any of Fortinet's more perceivably "controversial" information. Rather, try to add third-party verified information to round out the story (as I have done with other wiki pages, under an old username -- the password for which I've lost and no longer use the email addres son file). So, if I'm to understand correctly: third-party articles -- ok. Third-party articles, however, summarizing a press release, or a press release itself summarizing third-party verification of a company's achievement -- not OK. Correct? I also understand the deletion of the product "catalog" as it was previously called in some notes, however there is information that was omitted (and not marketing focused) that would be educational and informative to experts on network security. And those are the people that would likely be researching Fortinet and its competitors. So in order for Wikipedia to truly provide third-party, non-marketing information that truly helps its readership, that type of educational material should be allowed, correct? Otherwise there'd be very little reason for a senior technologist to turn to Wikipedia for background. Just trying to determine the right divide. Thanks.

Mediaphyter 21:48, 11 November 2007 (UTC)mediaphyter

Please note that the above contributor is Director, Strategic Communications at Fortinet. Her LinkedIn public profile demonstrates this:

http://www.linkedin.com/in/mediaphyter

It appears that the purpose of mediaphyter AKA Jennifer Leggio's posts is to use Wikipedia as a marketing platform under the guise of third party information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.54.213.202 (talk) 17:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

As a former Fortinet employee, we received emails from the Fortinet marketing department instructing us that they were using Wikipedia as a vehicle for their marketing campaign and that we should under no circumstances edit it. When I attempted to correct the inaccuracy that Ken Xie was the CTO and *not* the CEO of Netscreen as documented in numerous articles on the Internet, such as http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_1998_Nov_17/ai_53230275 it was promptly removed by Fortinet corporate marketing (mediaphyter). Wikipedia will be a lot more useful for researchers if it is not viewed as an additional marketing vehicle by the vendors to advance their skewed and often untrue mythologizing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fw rulez (talk • contribs) 14:27, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * There's indeed no need to reproduce the list of company's products here. Nor the list of certifications. The reason being is that the notable fact about either is that they exist, and not their details. Details tend to change frequently, so the natural place to look for them is not the Wikipedia, but the vendor's website. Alex Pankratov 22:41, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Extlinks
I'm just one editor, and I recognize that the content here needs to reflect consensus and not just my POV. But: I take a hard link about extlinks on articles about companies. I struck the ICSA and NSS "certifications" from the extlink list. An extlink is a consensus endorsement that an external site adds significant value to the article. These links don't qualify.

Generally, anything valuable in an extlink (short of a link to Fortinet's home page) is better off summarized in the article and then referenced (extlinks are not references). So I don't object to a short graf saying that Fortigate has obtained ICSA and NSS certification (although I'll probably snipe a bit at the wording).

--- tqbf 22:14, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

FortiGuard Web filter
they also have a internet filter used to block off "bad" internet sites and gaming sites. 204.10.222.30 (talk) 14:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Fortinet editing their own article - Part 2
On 28 December user 'Rodney Mock' added what read as a copy & pasted press release, full of corporate hyperbole, not in Wikipedia style, which I removed. On 2 January he added it back but in a Wikipedia style, which I applaud, it shows he 'gets it', that the corporate hyperbole has no place in an encycopedia, that it is about the bare facts of the matter. (Though I'm not yet convinced the list of products is relevant, as others on this page have said at other times). There are posts on http://blog.fortinet.com by a Rodney Mock and http://www.lead411.com/Rodney_Mock_11244086.html claims "Rodney Mock is the Product Marketing Manager of Fortinet". I added the 'Connected contributor' tag to this Talk page, not to say that what was added was suspicious, but so that people were aware Fortinet appeared to be editing their own article. I marked his new section as requiring refs, then shortly after someone using 76.126.209.255 added the refs (albeit not third-party sources). 76.126.209.255 relates to Sunnyvale, California, where Fortinet are based. I am providing this information here for background information, not to call Rodney Mock out specifically - it appeared he was improving in his editing of Wikipedia, which I commend, but then if the later edits from a user not logged in do indeed come from within Fortinet then this appears to be a retrograde step in that attitude, unless of-course it is just a result of inadvertantly logging out of Wikipedia before editing. Lopifalko (talk) 10:12, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

History
Below are discussions about the "History" section of the main article. - I am actively working on this section and will periodically post updates here for initial feedback ForrestLyle (talk) 23:32, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Products Section
I am making significant edits to the Products so that it reflects a logical structure with verifiable references. If you wish to discuss any of these changes please do so in threat. Thank you ForrestLyle (talk) 22:46, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

Template
Hi All,

Can we discuss a structure for this page? There has been very little work here for a long time beyond some minor edits. Comparative companies such as Cisco Systems or Juniper Networks have pretty standard page structures. Lets bring one over. I suggest: -- History
 * Acquisitions
 * Awards

Products and Services
 * XYZ

Criticism and Controversy
 * XYZ

etc. -- Can we agree on a structure and start filling in the appropriate gaps? ForrestLyle (talk) 23:56, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me - go for it Beleg Tâl (talk) 13:23, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Just an FYI, I am a newbie, using this page and others to get a foothold on editing. Your (nearly) harshest criticism is welcomed. ForrestLyle (talk) 15:22, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Backdoor
Version 4.x to 5.0.7 http://seclists.org/fulldisclosure/2016/Jan/26

Introduction and History
Hi Wikipedians,

I have been researching and collecting material for the history section.I think we should discuss what belongs in the intro and what is better suited for the history section. I think the intro should be relatively short. Maybe just having a one liner about business from the 10-K, date founded, Ken and Michael Xie cofounders, date of ipo, end. Thoughts?
 * I agree. I tried to rework the existing material into something at least encyclopedic. Honestly, there's not much to say beyond that, and half the stuff I left in can honestly be cut. By all means, prune away :) As for the history, I don't know much beyond what's in the header already. If you have some good sources and want to list them here, I can help you sift through them to get to the main points. Beleg Tâl (talk) 01:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * ===History Sources===
 * I found the following. They are not all about history but have major historical components to them.
 * http://goldsea.com/Text/index.php?id=10973
 * http://www.weforum.org/pdf/techpioneers/apax2006.pdf
 * http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/77840-2#
 * ForrestLyle (talk) 15:36, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Cleanup Tag
Hi Everyone. I Have placed a clean up tag here to attract other users to come and edit, fill in missing information, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForrestLyle (talk • contribs) 16:42, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Fortinet Adware
This article reads like adware. Massive re-write or delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.234.42.162 (talk) 00:09, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

Draft
I am affiliated with the article-subject. In compliance with WP:COI, I would like to request a disinterested editor consider a draft I put together at Talk:Fortinet/draft that I think would substantially improve the article and bring it up to GA standards. The proposed would expand the article, eliminate the indiscriminate list of products and merge the "Criticism and controversy" section into the Corporate History section in compliance with WP:CRITICISM. From a conflict of interest perspective, that section is probably most relevant in terms of reviewing my work for fairness and COI.

Appreciate any help in advance! Also pinging and, who have shown an interest in this page in the past. CorporateM (Talk) 20:18, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I read both versions of the article, and while the newer one that you proposed is better, with more detail and more sources, in my opinion it is weaker than the current version from a high level product perspective. By removing the products from the infobox and reducing the four product sections into two - firewalls and others - it's harder to get a sense of the company's full product offerings.  Perhaps this signifies that they prefer to focus on their firewall, but you could have subsections under "other", for threat protection, wireless LAN, ADC, etc.  Also, by replacing the current product sections with three new sections: an overview, reception and history, the latter two with a section each for firewall and other, it's a bit jumbled, and hard for readers to find the product they are looking for using the table of contents.  Also, by not having a comprehensive section showing all products, specifically spelling them out by type if not also by name, you risk missing some.  For example, the ADC, FortiDirector and FortiDDoS are mentioned in the history section but nowhere else.  Anyone not reading all the way down to the history section will not see them or know they exist.  So I recommend a single products section, broken down into Firewalls, Software and Other, with "Other" having sections for everything else.  I'd include the product reception in that product's section, not in a separate reception section, to minimize jumping around.


 * A secondary quibble - I don't know that I've ever seen a separate product history section within a company article that already has a main history section. Notwithstanding the multitude of sources you provide, it's also unclear to me that these products are significant enough to warrant the thorough historical treatment you give them.  I would recommend you add all the significant product history to the main history section, but consider limiting it to the first appearance of the product line, unless a later version is an industry first or otherwise so significant that it warrants a mention.  Who knows - you might then even consider giving that product its own article.  You can list the current versions/model numbers of each in the product section, and use your "introduction" citations there.Timtempleton (talk) 21:43, 3 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for taking a look ! It will take some time for me to cull through this and incorporate all of your notes, but I will work on it and ping you when I've incorporated all of your feedback. CorporateM (Talk) 16:00, 4 August 2016 (UTC)


 * "By removing the products from the infobox" --> ✅ Restored CorporateM (Talk) 20:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
 * "Also, by not... specifically spelling them out [products] by type if not also by name, you risk missing some" --> ✅ Comprehensive list of product categories added CorporateM (Talk) 20:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
 * "I recommend a single products section, broken down into Firewalls, Software and Other" --> ✅ CorporateM (Talk) 20:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)
 * "it's also unclear to me that these products are significant enough to warrant the thorough historical treatment you give them." --> ✅ Trimmed substantially. CorporateM (Talk) 21:19, 4 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for merging the draft Tim! FYI for any readers here, there is more discussion about this page here. Per my usual, I've gone ahead and nominated the page for Good Article review. I think a few things, like the long list of products in the infobox, are a bit promotional, but I'm happy to roll with whatever the GA reviewer feels is most sensible whenever they get around to it. Minor quips aside, the article is obviously better than the prior version by leaps and bounds, even more so thanks to Tim's feedback and effort. CorporateM (Talk) 20:27, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

COI tagging
I just removed the COI tag on top of the article. Per Template:COI, "Do not use this tag unless there are significant or substantial problems with the article's neutrality as a result of the contributor's involvement. Like the other tags, this tag is not meant to be a badge of shame or to "warn the reader" about the identities of the editors." Since I'm helping User:CorporateM, who has disclosed a COI, I don't want to be accused myself of having a COI. Also, the COI tag requires that the specific edits that are problematic be highlighted - that wasn't done here.Timtempleton (talk) 00:58, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree, the Template:COI tag was not appropriate. I'm going to keep the GA review on hold for another day or two in order to give  a chance to elaborate on specific problems with the article.  FalconK (talk) 01:41, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * The specific problem is that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an advertising platform, and it is unethical to serve an advertisement to readers unaware that the authors have WP:COI. I don't want to contribute to Wikipedia anymore if this is tolerated. Citobun (talk) 13:32, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm definitely not arguing with you on this, but what specific words or passages constitute an advertisement? FalconK (talk) 07:15, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

COI Edit Requests
Hi, I work for Fortinet, and I’d like to request some updates to this article: * Revise "revenue, income, assets, equity, and employees sections" of infobox, replacing current list with: Revenue US $1.49 billion (2017); Operating income US$ 109.8 million (2017); Net income US $31.4 million (2017); Total assets US $2.26 billion (2017); Total equity US $589.38 million (2017); Employees 5,066 (2017). url=http://investor.fortinet.com/node/12901/html

I won’t edit directly due to my COI. Thank you for your help! Johnwikiwelton (talk) 12:35, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I work for Fortinet, and I’d like to request some updates to this article:
 * Revise "Products" parameter of infobox, replacing currently list with . I tried to reduce the use of jargon and combine related products to make this more intelligible to lay readers.   partially done, but did you mean to end with the term "sandbox"? And should the comma after UTM be removed? Please clarify so this can be answered Jaking01 (talk) 12:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi! Apologies for my delayed response. To clarify, yes "sandbox" is part of the product name. And no, the comment after UTM should stay; there are multiple types of firewalls for different market segments, e.g. FortiGate UTM, FortiGate enterprise, and FortiGate carrier firewalls. Thanks again for your help! Johnwikiwelton (talk) 04:32, 18 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Add to end of "Recent history" section:     done Jaking01 (talk) 12:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Add to end of "FortiGate" section:     section no longer exists Jaking01 (talk) 12:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Add to end of "Other products" section:
 * section no longer exists Jaking01 (talk) 12:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * section no longer exists Jaking01 (talk) 12:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

I won’t edit directly due to my COI. Thank you for your help! Johnwikiwelton (talk) 16:46, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fortinet. 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/20160919203527/http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS25907015 to http://www.idc.com/getdoc.jsp?containerId=prUS25907015

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) 16:20, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

revised COI edit requests
Hi, posting a new request for clarity's sake.
 * Revise "Products" parameter of infobox, replacing currently list with . To confirm, "sandbox" is part of the product name. And the comma after UTM is intentional; there are multiple types of firewalls for different market segments, e.g. FortiGate UTM, FortiGate enterprise, and FortiGate carrier firewalls.
 * Update infobox with latest financial figures:

As mentioned above, I work for Fortinet, so I won't edit directly. Thanks for your help! Johnwikiwelton (talk) 20:32, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Reply quotebox with inserted reviewer decisions and feedback 29-APR-2018
Below you will see where text from your request has been quoted with individual advisory messages placed underneath, either accepting, declining or otherwise commenting upon your proposal(s). Please see the enclosed notes for additional information about each request. Also note areas where additional clarification was required, or where implementation could not be achieved. When the necessary changes to the wiki markup found within the edit request are completed and all information requested is ready to be provided to the reviewer, please change the edit request template to read from ans=yes to ans=no. The portions of your edit request which were not completed will then be implemented at that time. Thank you! 0.70em 07:22, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Updated Products list
Fortinet Security Fabric FortiGate UTM firewalls FortiGate enterprise firewalls FortiGate carrier firewalls Internal segmentation firewalls Endpoint security Secure Access WiFi applications SIEM FortiWeb Web application firewalls Email security DDoS Identity access management WAN VPN FortiSandbox
 * Information on the sandbox product offering is here.
 * Thanks, ! 96.45.36.182 (talk) 15:51, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

✅ 0.725em 22:34, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

COI Edit Request
Please replace the 1st 2 paragraphs in the "History, Early History" section with these 2 paragraphs or similar wording. Ken and Michael Xie founded Appligation, Inc. in Sunnyvale, Ca in 2000. Previously, Ken Xie co-founded and led NetScreen which was acquired by Juniper Networks. Michael Xie had served as Vice President of Engineering for ServGate Technologies. Appligation, Inc. was renamed to ApSecure, Inc., then FortiNet, Inc., and finally to Fortinet, Inc. in 2003, based on the phrase “Fortified Networks”. The company’s early focus was on the unified threat management market []. Fortinet introduced its first product, FortiGate, in 2002. The company acquired database security and auditing company IPLocks in 2008 and the intellectual property and assets of Ethernet switching company Woven Systems in 2009. The company went public with an IPO in November 2009. Media reports show 12.6 million new and existing shares were sold, and the company raised $156 million in new capital on the first day of trading. We are aware of the concerns raised for Fortinet’s “tagged” page and are interested in helping make and suggest adjustments to address the concerns and respect Wikipedia best practices. Although we welcome helpful contributions from the Wikpedia community, we will make suggestions for changes to remove any hint of bias we hope will be acceptable. JasmineLozanoFortinet (talk) 19:56, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Specific text to be added or removed:
 * Reason for the change:

COI Edit Request
Please add the following text and reference to Recent History: In September 2021, Fortinet pledged to train 1 million people in support of President Joe Biden's call to action to American technology companies to address the talent shortage in cybersecurity On August 25, 2021 President Joe Biden asked American technology companies to help train more cybersecurity people, Companies responding to the call include Google, IBM, and Microsoft. Per the article cited above, Fortinet pledged to train 1 million people over the next 5 years. JasmineLozanoFortinet (talk) 19:53, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Specific text to be added or removed:
 * Reason for the change:

COI Edit Request for Warning Tag
I have a conflict of interest with this article. I work for the Fortinet Communications Team.

Fortinet is not currently paying anyone to edit the article, and has not requested or authorized any employees to edit the article on behalf of the company. In accordance with the Wikipedia guidelines against outing editors, we have made no attempt to contact any recent contributors to determine their relationship or motives in editing the article. JasmineLozanoFortinet (talk) 22:09, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Specific text to be added or removed: Removal of the Undisclosed Paid Editing tag
 * Reason for the change: Per the guideline cited below, this Talk page was not updated with any supporting comments or justication. A previous paid editing relationship is disclosed above per Wikipedia guidelines. Previous edit requests also disclosed conflicts of interest. We believe appopropriate notification was already in place.
 * References supporting change: [|Undisclosed paid] guideline


 * I have discussed the SPI investigation with my team. We understand that 2 accounts were blocked as a result of the investigation, and those accounts made contributions to the Fortinet article. In the interest of moving forward transparently and maintaining compliance with Wikipedia policy, I will leave some COI requests for changes to the paragraphs those accounts changed. I will make 1 request at a time so the task seems manageable to any interested editors. We’re seeking proactive help from the Wikipedia community in improving the article’s neutral point of view. I’ll appreciate any suggestions people leave below this comment for specific changes. Thank you.JasmineLozanoFortinet (talk) 23:25, 19 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Two accounts? Sockpuppet_investigations/VentureKit/Archive lists over a dozen, likely associated with a PR firm hired by Fortinet.
 * Furthermore, there are other accounts that were not blocked (because the edits were a long time ago), such as edits from your Director of Media Communications in 2011. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:13, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Article Rewrite Request
We have been studying other COI edit requests on Wikipedia and found the COI edit request on Talk: Annual_Reviews_(publisher) offers a model we’d like to try to improve this article. Fortinet acknowledges that a sock puppet investigation led to the warning being placed on the Wikipedia article about our company because 2 accounts that made contributions to the article were flagged by that investigation. When we requested that the warning be lifted, the request reviewer indicated there were still too many recent suspicious edits. Company management has asked employees not to modify this page even though they may have the best of intentions. But we have no way of identifying who the flagged contributors or others may be. In the interest of moving forward, we hope editors will review and comment on a proposed rewrite I have shared in my sandbox page here. We reviewed Wikipedia’s policy pages for Conflict of Interest editing to write this draft. We’re inviting comments from other editors with the hope they’ll assist in improving the article to ensure that it complies with Wikipedia’s standards and eliminate any doubt about self-promotion. The proposed draft is based on the text of the existing article but reorganizes the information in a better structure we feel is neutral in POV. We made no attempt to remove any controversial or negative information. The proposed draft is well-sourced from reliable, neutral sources. I will not edit the article directly, but am seeking consensus on a new rewrite that ensures the article meets Wikipedia guidelines and standards. JasmineLozanoFortinet (talk) 21:52, 11 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Sorry, no. That edit request you reference is a mess and the wrong way to go about doing it. Taking an article that has had some contributions from employees, and instead of suggesting improvements, replacing it with a complete rewrite by a company employee makes no sense. The entire edit request has an underlying presumption of the company wanting editorial control of a Wikipedia article. That is not going to happen. What is so hard about requesting incremental improvements? ~Anachronist (talk) 01:00, 13 November 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi Anachronist,


 * Thank you for answering our request for help, and I understand your point.


 * The goal with these COI edit requests has been to attract unbiased editors to help clean up the article, per the undisclosed paid warning. Had we known about the sock puppet edits when they were made in, we could have made or proposed Uncontroversial reversals of their contributions. But as so many contributions have been made since then, the article has become much more complicated. Asking our employees not to edit the article was an additional good faith step. We didn’t realize the editing would drop off so quickly.


 * Of the 3 COI Edit requests I’ve posted prior to this one, 2 were passed over for several months. The backlog has now grown to over 200 requests. That's why we thought an alternative approach would be more productive for the article.


 * Would you be open to helping clean up the article as the “Undisclosed Paid Editing” warning recommends? Do you know of any other editors who would be open to helping clean up the article?


 * Thank you for any advice. JasmineLozanoFortinet (talk) 18:20, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

New COI Edit Request
Please change the following data in the Infobox: Number of employees: 9700 The company has experienced substantial growth since December 31, 2020. JasmineLozanoFortinet (talk) 21:05, 1 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Specific text to be updated:
 * Reason for the change:


 * ❌ reference has not been provided. Please provide a reference that can verify this information. Z1720 (talk) 15:37, 9 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Thank you for reviewing our COI Edit request. The source for the employee count remains the same as in the article, the Fortinet About page. We apologize for the oversight. JasmineLozanoFortinet (talk) 21:09, 10 December 2021 (UTC)


 * I am taking over COI edit requests from Jasmine. Was the link she provided adequate for completing this request?Johnwikiwelton (talk) 21:52, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

COI Edit Request - Biden Initiative
Please add the following text and reference to Recent History: In September 2021, Fortinet pledged to train 1 million people in support of President Joe Biden's call to action to American technology companies to address the talent shortage in cybersecurity On August 25, 2021 President Joe Biden asked American technology companies to help train more cybersecurity people, Companies responding to the call include Google, IBM, and Microsoft. Per the article cited above, Fortinet pledged to train 1 million people over the next 5 years. JasmineLozanoFortinet (talk) 21:44, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Specific text to be added or removed:
 * Reason for the change:
 * ✅ with edits. Heartmusic678 (talk) 16:53, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for reviewing our COI Edit request. Johnwikiwelton (talk) 22:06, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You're welcome :D. Heartmusic678 (talk) 11:22, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

COI Edit - Recent History Addition
In the “Recent History” section, please include the following text. Johnwikiwelton (talk) 20:09, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Specific text to be added or removed: Fortinet acquired application security company Sken.Ai in 2021 to offer continuous application security testing . Fortinet acquired automated incident management company Panopta in 2022.
 * Reason for the change: To document a corporate acquisition.
 * References supporting change: [Fortinet : Acquires Application Security Innovator Sken.ai to Accelerate DevSecOps] and [Fortinet Buys Network Monitoring Player Panopta To Aid Uptime]


 * Small request in line with the rest of the article. Accepted. WilsonP NYC (talk) 19:55, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you! @WilsonP NYC Johnwikiwelton (talk) 01:48, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Closing request as answered, per above. Z1720 (talk) 00:51, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

COI Edit Request - [MITRE Attack Flow project]
Please add the following text and reference to Accomplishments in cybersecurity: In March 2022 Fortinet was one of several security vendors participating in the MITRE Corporation's Attack Flow project which created "a data format describing adversary behavior sequences to help identify cyberthreat choke points" SDXCentral interviewed Ingrid Skoog of MITRE Engenuity’s Center for Threat-Informed Defense and Derek Manky of Fortinet's FortiGuard Labs about the project's scope. Johnwikiwelton (talk) 14:51, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Specific text to be added or removed:
 * Reason for the change:

* ✅ with minor copyedit. Rray (talk) 14:06, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

Bruh
Who deleted my stuff? It is real that fortiguard/fortinet blocks games 113.254.69.211 (talk) 15:42, 27 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Fortinet, the company, has nothing to do with your being blocked. That decision is made by whatever organization whose network you're trying to use. It would happen with any firewall product. In any event, such uses are not appropriate for inclusion in articles about the companies that manufacture these products.Michael Martinez (talk) 16:58, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * You got a message on your talk page explaining why your content was removed. You might want to review that. Rray (talk) 17:15, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

COI Edit Request - [New AI and ML threat services for customers]
Please add the following text and reference to Recent History: NetworkWorld reported that Fortinet introduced new AI and ML-based security services utilizing telemetry from its global network. Network World senior editor Michael Cooney reviewed Fortinet's FortiOS 7.2 release, calling out the addition of AI and ML capabilities. Johnwikiwelton (talk) 00:59, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Specific text to be added or removed:
 * Reason for the change:


 * ✅ Rray (talk) 04:16, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

COI Edit Request - [Change number of employees in Info Box]
Johnwikiwelton (talk) 00:02, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Specific text to be added or removed: Change number of employees in Info Box to 11,508
 * Reason for the change: Current number is out-of-date
 * References supporting change: https://www.fortinet.com/corporate/about-us/about-us
 * Done. Updated the number to current (as of November 2022) number reported on the About Us page.Michael Martinez (talk) 15:43, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Controversies
I looked here to find information on Fortinet since my school has it and blocks all game (I mainly played sudoku and minesweeper and they're blocked) but then I saw that stuff that would probably go into a controversy section aren't in one. And that there also isn't even a controversy category. I looked through the edits and noticed that the category was added in 2019 but later was removed on April 27th, 2020.‎ Only one section of the category got moved (this being the lawsuit) while the other was deleted. I see no reason for there not to be a controversy category. GunnerZ818 ApplesAreYummy818 17:50, 20 January 2023 (UTC)


 * The fact schools are using Fortinet's and other companies' products to block access to games isn't controversial. And the firewall vendors don't have any say in what the end-users do with their products. Do you have something else in mind? Michael Martinez (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2023 (UTC)