Talk:Business Insider: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:45, 2 February 2023

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Business Insider article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Websites: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

MrMarioNateRuizJr (talk · contribs) has been paid by Business Insider. Their editing has included contributions to this article. Discloses as the head of communications for Business Insider here.

Owned by?

Who are the owners? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.240.212.1 (talk) 07:51, 8 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"edgy"

"each with an "edgy" commentary." What does this mean? No explanation, examples, citation or other info is given about this statement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.63.231.189 (talk) 18:51, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Full stop with contemporary vernacular that is often dated and regional. Encyclopedic, please. 2600:8803:9001:6900:ECCC:48D2:26E8:C16A (talk) 23:27, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edits from Business Insider PR person

Business Insider is a leading business site with deep financial, media, tech and other industry verticals. The flagship vertical, Silicon Alley Insider (SAI), launched on July 19, 2007, led by DoubleClick founder Kevin Ryan and former top-ranked Wall Street analyst Henry Blodget. One year after launch, additional verticals joined Silicon Alley Insider, including Clusterstock, Money Game, The Wire, and more. Its newsroom currently employs a staff of 50, and the site reported a profit for the first time ever in the 4th quarter of 2010. In June 2012 it had monthly unique visitor count to the website of 5.4 million. Business Insider hosts noted industry conferences including Ignition, which explores the successful and emerging business models of digital media; Ignition West; Social Media ROI, which covers how brands use social media; and Mobile Advertising. In February 2012, Business Insider launched BI Intelligence, a subscription research service that provides in-depth insight, data, and analysis of the mobile industry. The site each year publishes editorial franchises such as the “Digital 100: The World's Most Valuable Private Tech Companies.”

(MrMarioNateRuizJr (talk) 20:39, 4 January 2013 (UTC)MrMarioNateRuizJr)[reply]

I've already reverted this wording twice as too promotional and you removed references when you added it. Words like "leading", "flagship", "noted", "successful", etc. are promotional. Jargon such as "verticals" is not helpful to Wikipedia readers. I will let another editor address your request. 72Dino (talk) 20:49, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for posting 2x - was an error. Thanks for your suggestions. I've edited again to include them all:

Business Insider is a business site with deep financial, media, tech and other industry verticals. The site first launched as Silicon Alley Insider (SAI) on July 19, 2007, led by former top-ranked Wall Street analyst Henry Blodget and Doubleclick founder and former C.E.O. Kevin P. Ryan. One year after launch, additional sections joined SAI, including Clusterstock, Money Game, The Wire, and more. The site relaunched under the Business Insider name in February, 2009. Its newsroom currently employs a staff of 50, and the site reported a profit for the first time ever in the 4th quarter of 2010.^{[Edits from 1]} In November 2012 it had monthly unique visitor count to the website of 8.9 million, according to comScore. Business Insider hosts industry conferences including Ignition, which explores the emerging business models of digital media; Ignition West; Social Media ROI, which covers how brands use social media; and Mobile Advertising. In February 2012, Business Insider launched BI Intelligence, a subscription research service that provides in-depth insight, data, and analysis of the mobile industry. The site each year publishes editorial franchises such as the “Digital 100: The World's Most Valuable Private Tech Companies.”

Notes

^ "Business Insider Turns A $2,127 Profit On $4.8 Million In Revenue". TechCrunch. March 7, 2011.

MrMarioNateRuizJr (talk) 21:10, 4 January 2013 (UTC)MrMarioNateRuizJr Previous comment slightly reformatted so notes appear above the signature line. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:12, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering how I can get an editor to consider my suggestions from two weeks ago. ThanksMrMarioNateRuizJr (talk) 21:22, 25 January 2013 (UTC)MrMarioNateRuizJr[reply]

Edit by PR for Business Insider

The site editors vary greatly in background. Henry Blodget is the CEO and Editor-In-Chief, a Yale graduate who previously worked on Wall Street before being barred from the securities industry following an SEC censure.^{[Edit by 1]} Deputy editor Joe Weisenthal has worked as an analyst and writer for a series of dotcoms.^{[Edit by 2]} Deputy editor Nicholas Carlson previously worked at Internet.com and Gawker Media's Silicon Valley gossip blog, Valleywag.com. Senior editor Jim Edwards was previously managing editor at Adweek.

(note: Blodget was not convicted of fraud but was censured by the SEC. Please note his wiki page. I've also added the name of Jim Edwards.)

^ "The Securities and Exchange Commission, NASD and the New York Stock Exchange Permanently Bar Henry Blodget From the Securities Industry and Require $4 Million Payment" (Press release). U.S. Securites and Exchange Commission. April 28, 2003.
^ Binyamin Appelbaum (May 10, 2012). "Joe Weisenthal vs. the 24-Hour News Cycle". New York Times.

MrMarioNateRuizJr (talk) 21:19, 4 January 2013 (UTC)MrMarioNateRuizJr Previous comment slightly reformatted so notes appear above the signature line. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 00:12, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I immediately made the change to remove any mention of a conviction as this is a WP:BLP issue. I used the wording "censured" and "barred" as that was in the SEC press release. By the way, you are making the right move by making these suggested edits on the talk page. Be patient as I'm not sure how frequently this article is seen by other editors. 72Dino (talk) 21:28, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bothersome

Spam comments from 2013 and 2015 nuked. L3X1 (distænt write) )evidence( 18:59, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox: website or newspaper

There's an RfC on whether a news website should use {{Infobox website}} or {{Infobox newspaper}}: Talk:The Times of Israel#RfC on infobox. --Triggerhippie4 (talk) 14:02, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Establishment?

Was Business Insider launched in 2007 or 2009? The article is self-contradictory. Skull33 (talk) 10:41, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move to insider?

What are your thought about this announcement? GreaterPonce665 ^(TALK) 20:10, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GreaterPonce665, Has this been covered in secondary sources? If so, a move to Insider (website) (currently redirecting to Insider Inc.) or Insider (news organization) would seem reasonable. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 20:41, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GreaterPonce665 and AleatoryPonderings, I forgot to look at the talk page before instigating a requested move, but anyway it's in the pipeline now and you may like to comment. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:42, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Centre-left bias?

Are you kidding me? Business Insider is a publication that regularly argues for shrinking welfare states and increasing pension ages. I suggest the link that alleged a centre-left bias be removed as it is clearly a centre-right, and pretty clearly at that, publication. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.159.134 (talk) 18:58, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 18 April 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 04:17, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Business Insider → ? – I'm not sure what should happen here, but there does not appear to be an entity actually called Business Insider, so perhaps should be merged with Insider, Inc. In any case, the two articles contradict each other and cause confusion. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:38, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. It seems to me that this article is primarily about the website or online service called Business Insider, which is owned by a company called Insider Inc., not a separate entity per se. https://www.businessinsider.com/ remains at a separate website domain name than https://www.insider.com/ And despite what the company's CEO stated in 2021, it seems to me that independent, reliable secondary sources still seem to treat "Business Insider" as a more common name for the website. So the structure should be similar to something like the Facebook service versus the separate article on its company Meta Platforms. Any contradiction or redundancy between the two articles could be cleaned up without a page move or a merge. But again, I would need to evidence of whether there is enough independent, reliable secondary sources that no longer use "Business Insider" as a common name for the website. Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:37, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, this reminds me of a recent discussion regarding Teespring. WP:COMMONNAME applies. Any merger proposal with Insider Inc. should be addressed per WP:MERGE, not here. 162 etc. (talk) 16:26, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose They still seemingly use Business Insider everywhere but the actual logo, so I don't think there is much that needs changing here outside of the screenshot, which is a bit outdated. --Quiz shows 22:57, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "Business Insider" is the WP:COMMONNAME and uncontroversial. >>> Extorc.talk 19:58, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per above votes. Kpddg ^(talk) 15:35, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Greenwald?

I move to remove the Glenn Greenwald line. I don't understand why it is terribly relevant, and seems to be here to promote Greenwald's site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TAPwiki (talk • contribs) 12:34, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's criticism of the organization from a notable figure in journalism. Can you explain why that wouldn't be relevant? MrOllie (talk) 12:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Business Insider was lumped in with other sites. Also, Greenwald maybe notable, but that does not mean his opinion is notable. It should be acknowledged that Greenwald is a well known Trumpist, appearing on Tucker and other shows repeatedly; he is not what I would call a balanced source. TAPwiki (talk) 18:57, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Despite what you might read in some alarmist editorials, Wikipedia does not actually disqualify sources or authors based solely on their political leanings. MrOllie (talk) 19:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Considerations for Separating The Entities

Wikidata seems to see the both Insider and Business Insider as unique, noteworthy entities - As far as my research goes, it can be clearly noted that while the two are related (e.g. they are owned by Insider Inc.), they cover different content; with one being focused on "business" content, and the other on more "lifestyle" content. Insider is presently a disambiguous page, so the conversation from Talk:Business Insider#Requested move 18 April 2022 is technically incorrect; while the domains share a single genesis, all three have unique WikiData entries, additionally the two aforementioned domains are split and host unique content.

Just trying to make sure we are presenting the most current, up-to-date information here. Ronin.abv (talk) 16:45, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[post-1] "Business Insider Turns A $2,127 Profit On $4.8 Million In Revenue". TechCrunch. March 7, 2011.

[2] "The Securities and Exchange Commission, NASD and the New York Stock Exchange Permanently Bar Henry Blodget From the Securities Industry and Require $4 Million Payment" (Press release). U.S. Securites and Exchange Commission. April 28, 2003.

[3] Binyamin Appelbaum (May 10, 2012). "Joe Weisenthal vs. the 24-Hour News Cycle". New York Times.

[Edits from 1]

[Edit by 1]

[Edit by 2]

@@ Line 86: / Line 86: @@
 ::Business Insider was lumped in with other sites.  Also, Greenwald maybe notable, but that does not mean his opinion is notable.  It should be acknowledged that Greenwald is a well known Trumpist, appearing on Tucker and other shows repeatedly; he is not what I would call a balanced source. [[User:TAPwiki|TAPwiki]] ([[User talk:TAPwiki|talk]]) 18:57, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
 :::Despite what you might read in some alarmist editorials, Wikipedia does not actually disqualify sources or authors based solely on their political leanings. [[User:MrOllie|MrOllie]] ([[User talk:MrOllie|talk]]) 19:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
+== Considerations for Separating The Entities ==
+Wikidata seems to see the both [https://www.insider.com Insider] and [https://www.insider.com Business Insider] as unique, noteworthy entities - As far as my research goes, it can be clearly noted that while the two are related (e.g. they are owned by [[Insider Inc.]]), they cover different content; with one being focused on "business" content, and the other on more "lifestyle" content. [[Insider]] is presently a disambiguous page, so the conversation from [[Talk:Business Insider#Requested move 18 April 2022]] is technically incorrect; while the domains share a single genesis, all three have unique WikiData entries, additionally the two aforementioned domains are split and host unique content.
+Just trying to make sure we are presenting the most current, up-to-date information here. [[User:Ronin.abv|Ronin.abv]] ([[User talk:Ronin.abv|talk]]) 16:45, 2 February 2023 (UTC)