Talk:Skyfire (company)

2012
Substantial re-write of original article. Included notability including their awards and recognitions as well as history of the company. --Morning277 (talk) 12:23, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Alas, the promotional language and buzzwords like "solutions" do not belong as per the policy on neutral tone. I tried to work on it. I would guess they do software? Does not seem to actually manufacture phones or anything. W Nowicki (talk) 19:43, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Skyfire Web Browser
One article only is justified, and it is better to keep the one on the company. the browser is their most notable product, but they did have other products also.  DGG ( talk ) 01:38, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Skyfire (web browser)
One page, not two, is justified. The merge should be to the company; while the browser is their most important product,  there have been others merge should  DGG ( talk ) 01:41, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds good to me. In fact with the demise of the company, it might be the only notable thing left? W Nowicki (talk) 19:43, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The company is very much still alive, with offices in Mountain View, CA. It is now a division of Opera Software. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeerSamizdat (talk • contribs) 22:18, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Request merge
I am a Skyfire employee and have been assigned the task of engaging with the Wikipedia community to update our Wikipedia article so that it accurately reflects the most current and notable developments at our company. I will not edit the article myself and would appreciate the help of an independent editor. Full disclosure: my predecessor contracted Wiki-PR in June 2012 to make updates to the Skyfire articles, but that was before my time with Skyfire, so I do not have any details about the work that Wiki-PR performed. I have registered my company email address with this Wikipedia account in case anyone would like to verify my identity.

To start, I would like to request that the Skyfire (web browser) article be merged into the Skyfire (company) article. The three merger discussion participants seem to be in agreement, and no further comments have been added since March of this year. I have included proposed content for the merged content below. I have other requested edits as well, but will wait until a decision regarding the merger has been reached. Nguyen joe (talk) 23:12, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Skyfire Web Browser was a downloadable mobile web browser which rendered requested web pages on a proprietary server and relayed them to the browser on the end user's mobile phone, which then displayed the content. Skyfire web browser comprised two distinct generations of mobile browser technology. In Skyfire's first generation (1.x) browser, a web page was fully rendered by a server separate from the mobile device, similar to the operation of a thin client.[3] This approach is also used by Opera Mini. Skyfire's second generation (2.x) browser employed a hybrid approach, using a conventional rendering of web pages on the handheld device, but streaming video from Skyfire's servers.[4] One of the awards that Skyfire Web Browser has received is the Webby "People's Voice Award for Best Mobile Application" in 2009.[26] In 2010, it was recognized by PC World as the "World's Best Third-Party Android Browser"[27] and was named the "#2 Android App of All Time" by Tech Crunch.[33] In 2011, it was named the "Top iPad Utility" by Apple.[31] The Skyfire Web Browser was supported on iOS[1], Android, SymbianOS and Windows Mobile[2]devices before being discontinued in May 2014.
 * Skyfire Web Browser

This looks acceptable. I made the merge, removing duplication and improving the style a little. You also need a ref for the product being discontinued. And I suggest you take another look at the company article and shorten the product descriptions just a little.  DGG ( talk ) 17:21, 2 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Closing request edit: It appears that the "merger" has been accomplished. The web browser article is now a redirect to this article. (I have not examined the text in the proposed content section, which I assume DGG polished up.) – S. Rich (talk) 03:08, 12 September 2014 (UTC)