Talk:Maxim Integrated/Archives/2013

Delisting
Why was MXIM delisted? 16:34, 24 October 2007 (UTC) Failure to file the required financial reports. Financials for several years are being revised due to options backdating issues. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.62.253.20 (talk) 07:13, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Update: MXIM's 2008-09-30 press release "Maxim Completes Restatement of Financial Statements" is located at http://pdfserv.maxim-ic.com/en/pr/Restatement_093008.pdf 72.1.148.76 (talk) 18:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Relisting
MXIM is re-listed on NASDAQ as of October 8, 2008. http://www.nasdaq.com/reference/200810/market_close_100808.stm 72.1.148.76 (talk) 19:00, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Locations
Do we really need to record every location where Maxim has a physical presence in this article? This seems unnecessary.216.239.124.44 (talk) 17:44, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Stock Option Backdating
Why is this section being removed? It is relevant, well-sourced information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.185.135 (talk) 08:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

It is not relevant to an encyclopedic article about a high-technology company. It is a recent news event--now over, as the company has been relisted--with no real significance within the company's 25 year history. It really is nothing more than a footnote in the company's history, and deserves to be treated as such. It does not deserve a special heading, nor the prominence of its current placement within this article.98.207.117.198 (talk) 15:50, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I must respectfully disagree with you. It was a major event in the company's history representing over 2 years of investigation. I would argue that it does deserve its own section. That said, other things in Maxim's history deserve their own sections as well, but I lack the knowledge to write them. It is certainly not a mere footnote in the company's history- the stock option issue affected thousands of employees and investors, resulted in legal action against the company and its officers, and shareholder actions that are still ongoing.69.181.185.135 (talk) 17:57, 19 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Yes, if there are independent sources then the event should be discussed in a neutral manner. Please leave it in. W Nowicki (talk) 16:57, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Not an advertisement

 * professionals who believed that the market needed a well-managed, innovative supplier of high-quality analog and mixed-signal ICs...

Sorry for introducing the grammatical error before. But this sounds like WP:PEACOCK applies. Nobody is going to say "founded by random people who wanted a company run with normal incompetence to make mediocre products like everybody else" so it provides no information at all. It is just promotion.


 * Today, the company has over 6500 ICs in 29 product categories.
 * Its product portfolio includes over 6500 ICs in 29 major product categories...

Repeating this twice sounds like WP:UNDUE and WP:DATED. Why repeat it twice in such a short article? By the time a reader reads the article they might have 28 or 30 categories, so a date and reference would be needed.

I will try again to eliminate the redundancy and advertising without introducing errors.

Actually, their product page http://www.maxim-ic.com/products/ now lists 31 categories. Not about to count them all up, but cannot find where the 6500 number comes from. Since a company this large and diversified releases hundreds of different parts per year, I vote it would be better to just give a general indication of that, e.g. "thousands of products in a wide variety of categories". W Nowicki (talk) 18:04, 27 April 2011 (UTC)