Talk:Velodyne Lidar

Untitled
It looks like there's a dispute on whether to add a paragraph dealing with Velodyne's legal campaign against online resellers. It was added, reverted, re-added, and re-reverted, all without anything in the Talk page.

I feel like a paragraph including this would be appropriate - I don't think anyone can complain about the negativity given the ridiculously positive tone of the rest of the article - but not in its current form. The main problem is that no sources are cited for the claims made. Saying something like "as of the time of this writing, no company can be found under that DBA name" smacks of original research (and if it's not, the statement is useless unless we know who was conducting such a search.) "against many customers" - how many? "consumers are warned" - by whom?

It is my opinion that this paragraph should be rewritten properly, with sources and clear factual statements, before it is re-added. Ztrem (talk) 18:19, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Advertisement - is this page even needed?
As stated above by Ztrem, this entire article feels like an advert. It may list the entire company's history, but as it stands, they don't seem to have had much of an impact historically, and nothing particularly groundbreaking or revolutionary appears to be stated. That they took part in a contest and then didn't take part in it any more really doesn't seem worthy of having its own article, and the rest just seems to be padded out with bullshit claims that don't warrant interest. The only references are to the history of the company. The rest of it reads like a collection of facts turned into highly opinionated drivel, and entirely unimportant.

My point is, has this company actually achieved anything of note (besides "revolutionising" and "defining standards") to even require an article on Wikipedia? --  Scar  † Contributions  † 13:48, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Looking at it, it seems like it is a notable company (especially the LiDAR division). It seems to be the go-to technology for corporations working on mapping and those working on self-driving cars. The problem was just that the article was so self-adulatory that it made it seem like it was overcompensating for a lack of notability. I've just done an extensive rewrite of the article. It's a lot shorter, and hopefully much better. It still needs work, but I think the article should stay. I'm going to delete the proposal for deletion for now. If I'm off-base, let me know. Plandu (talk) 14:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Name of article
Should this be Velodyne or Velodyne LiDAR? It's a bit schizophrenic now. Timtempleton (talk) 19:31, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi ! Just giving you (and anyone else who might be editing) a heads up that I'm currently working on a proposal to split this article into two, reflecting the fact that Velodyne LiDAR was spun off as a separate company last year. I have a COI—I work for a communications firm that represents Velodyne—so I'll be bringing all the info to this talk page for the community to review. Stay tuned! Mary Gaulke (talk) 16:12, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. It was a bit confusing. Timtempleton (talk) 20:44, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

COI edit request: Split article
Hi! I work for a communications firm that represents Velodyne, and I'd like to suggest that this article be split into two articles: One for Velodyne LiDAR, and one for Velodyne. This would reflect a formal split in the company that occurred last year.

New Velodyne LiDAR article
Using the current LiDAR-related contents of the current article, I've mocked up a new Velodyne LiDAR article in my sandbox. I've also made several updates to what's currently in the article:
 * Added sources for unreferenced information, and revised wording in a few cases to reflect the sources more accurately (notably re: the Smithsonian donation and Velodyne's involvement in DARPA's autonomous car races).
 * Added COO and number of employees to infobox.
 * Updated lead with industry context, and replaced reference to Waymo with a more holistic reference to Velodyne LiDAR's use in the autonomous car industry in general.
 * In this History section, added details and source on Velodyne LiDAR getting spun off from Velodyne as a separate company.
 * Also in the History section, added more recent information about construction of new facilities.
 * Split part of the History section into new "Technology" and "Major customers and partners" sections.
 * Added information to "Technology" section regarding the sensors' capabilities, recent developments in low-cost solid-state sensors, and the Velarray sensor announced in April.
 * Added clarification around Google/Alphabet/Waymo nomenclature and note that Alphabet no longer uses Velodyne sensors to "Major customers and partners" section.
 * Added two photos.
 * The logo also needs to be updated, but I've held off on that as logos uploaded to Wikipedia have to be used in an article within 7 days or get deleted, and I don't know how long it will take to get a response to this request. When the time comes, the logo is available here, or I'm happy to upload myself with the proper justification templates.

Updating the Velodyne article
I suggest these updates to the existing Velodyne article:
 * Rename article from "Velodyne LiDAR" to "Velodyne"
 * Remove LiDAR references from infobox and update the site URL to www.velodyneacoustics.com and www.velodynemarine.com
 * In infobox, update President to Marta Thoma Hall
 * Remove LiDAR references from the lead, and add
 * Remove LiDAR subsection from Company History section
 * Remove first part of Company History section as redundant to Audio subsection
 * Add Marine subsection to Company History section:


 * Remove "External links" section as redundant of infobox

Due to my COI, I won't be editing the article directly, and would appreciate any help or feedback. , also tagging you here, since we'd discussed this a few months ago. Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 17:27, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Got your ping. Let me review.  One quick comment - on the draft User:MaryGaulke/sandbox/Velodyne LiDAR, you might remove the second sentence. "Research reports regularly note Velodyne as a leading company in LiDAR." I know it's directly taken from the media coverage, but it's likely to get unwanted attention for being promotional. If it's attacked for notability, you can then point to the info in the discussion. TimTempleton (talk)  (cont)  01:40, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Good point—I've removed it. Appreciate your time! Mary Gaulke (talk) 04:55, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ I added the info, and uploaded a new logo. Figuring out how to list two URLs was tricky.  I removed all the pricing info for the LiDAR article because it was too promotional. Sources look good - are both companies at the same address still? TimTempleton (talk)  (cont)  01:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help! Good catch on the addresses; Velodyne LiDAR is actually in San Jose, not Morgan Hill. I've updated the redirect for Velodyne Acoustics so we should be squared away there. Mary Gaulke (talk) 16:47, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Velodyne Inc.
Has the original company or  (or any other company) ever been officially named ""? If so, which company was it? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:52, 18 February 2022 (UTC)