Talk:SparkFun Electronics

Rewrite
Please give me a chance to re-write before deleting it Lmc   169  16:48, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Please give me a chance to re-write the Spark Fun wikipedia page so that is it an acceptable wiiki entry. Lmc   169  17:04, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I've given it a go, there's not much there now, but all the non-NPOV text has been removed/replaced. --J. Atkins (talk - contribs) 10:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Lawsuit
You kids should put in some info about the LAWSUIT they were served. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.101.189.24 (talk) 00:42, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Notable?
While the company may be notable, that notability isn't demonstrated by the references at all. Can someone find some that meet WP:CORP? --Ronz (talk) 03:08, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Suggestions and CoI
I made some updates to the section on Free Day. After doing so and before going further I was advised to read up on CoI since I am the current director of information technology for SparkFun Electronics.

Being more knowledgeable about CoI on Wikipedia I'm taking it to the talk page. Apologies if my previous edits are viewed as inappropriate by anyone. I do have some suggestions on neutral improvements to this page, however (my only intention):


 * 1) Creation of an "Events" section to include:
 * 2) Free Days (updated per my previous edit)
 * 3) Autonomous Vehicle Competitions (references: SFE Recap of AVC I, SFE Recap of AVC II, SFE Recap of AVC III, Wired Article about AVC III)
 * 4) Failed events like Antimov and Robojoust make for interesting reading.
 * 5) An account of the Cease & Desist Letter from SPARC International and aftermath (SFE news post with letter, Related Consumerist article)
 * 6) Information regarding annual revenue and company size (CNN Money article with some numbers). Still looking around for sources outside of SparkFun that can used as references there.
 * 7) Presence at Maker Faires

If getting much more detailed on an organization's wiki page like this is inappropriate please say so and I'll not press this any further. Not sure what the protocol is here.

Frencil (talk) 20:34, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Frencil. Glad to have you here working on the article.
 * I removed the information on Free Day because it was very promotional in nature, and the only sources were from the company's website. What is needed is at least one independent, reliable source to demonstrate it's worth mention and to guide us on how to present it in a neutral manner.
 * For the Autonomous Vehicle Competitions you've listed one independent source: the Wired article, which is a simple and brief announcement. If no other sources are available, it suggests that a very brief mention might be warranted in the article.
 * Given the source from The Consumerist, I'd think that there should be some mention of the trademark dispute with SPARC.
 * As for revenue and company size, there's a list of good articles on businesses here (search for "businesses" that should give you examples on what information is typical for a business and how it's presented. --Ronz (talk) 21:57, 8 December 2011 (UTC)