Wikipedia

Talk:Mindjet

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified (January 2018)
Learn more about this page

Proposal to bring this article up-to-date

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

I've recently been working on behalf of Mindjet to update this article. Although the article was created earlier this year by my colleague User:WWB Too, the company has gone through a few major changes since then, and I was asked to update the information here. The main change is that the company's previous software products have been consolidated into a single product, now also called Mindjet.

So, in order to update the article to accurately reflect the current state of things, I'd like to propose the following changes:

  • Update the introductory paragraph to correctly reflect the name of Mindjet's current product:
Mindjet is a collaborative work management software company headquartered in San Francisco, California. Mindjet's software, also called Mindjet, is designed to visually and collaboratively manage information and tasks. As of December 2011, Mindjet had approximately two million users;[1] notable clients include Coca Cola, Disney, IBM and Walmart.
  • Likewise, update the infobox so that the "Products" correctly reflect that the only product that Mindjet now offers is also called Mindjet.
  • I'd also like to suggest adding information to the "Products and services" section, discussing the merger of Mindjet's various software products and updating verb tenses in the rest of it so that it is accurate. I've placed my new draft for this section in the collapse box below:
Revised Products and services section
Products and services
Mindjet develops collaborative work management software[2][3] for Microsoft Windows and Mac OS,[4] and for both Apple iOS and Android mobile devices.[5]

Until 2012, the company offered an array of different software programs focused on mind mapping, collaboration and project management.[6] The company's MindManager software allowed users to visually display information in mind maps using colors, words, images and spatial relationships.[7] The software could be used to plan and manage many kinds of information including business plans, speeches, research and presentations.[8] Following the acquisition of Cohuman in 2011, Mindjet launched Mindjet Connect, a cloud-based service for collaborative working, which allowed users to plan and track progress with others.[2][9]

In December 2011 Mindjet reported 350,000 downloads for its iOS app and 1.1 million downloads for its Android-based app.[5]

In September of 2012, Mindjet incorporated the functionality of its existing products, including MindManager, Mindjet Connect, and its mobile apps, into a single product named Mindjet.[10] At the same time, Mindjet also changed from a purchase-based model for their software to a subscription-based model.[6]

According to Mindjet, as of April 2012 the company's services were used by 83 percent of Fortune 100 companies.[11] Notable organizations and companies using Mindjet include the United States Coast Guard,[12] Hewlett-Packard,[13] Coca Cola, Walt Disney, IBM, Walmart[14] and Nationwide.[15]

References

  1. ^ Marshall Kirkpatrick (14 November 2011). "Could Mind-Maps Make SharePoint More Lovable?". ReadWriteWeb. Retrieved 19 April 2012.
  2. ^ a b Cite error: The named reference Bradley was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ Kurt Marko (3 January 2012). "Apps Need Collaboration At Core". InformationWeek. Retrieved 26 April 2012.
  4. ^ Cite error: The named reference Roush was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ a b Robin Wauters (13 December 2011). "Mindjet Buys Thinking Space, Launches Mind Mapping App For Android". TechCrunch. Retrieved 19 April 2012.
  6. ^ a b Matthew Finnegan (21 September, 2012). "Mindjet woos channel with simplified software sales approach". ChannelBiz.co.uk. Retrieved 19 October, 2012. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= and |date= (help)
  7. ^ Cite error: The named reference Colkin was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  8. ^ James Fallows (20 March 2005). "To-Do List: Shop, Pay Bills, Organize Brain". The New York Times. Retrieved 19 April 2012.
  9. ^ Jonathan Blum (19 September 2011). "Mindjet Connect Helps Small Businesses Visualize and Manage Projects". Entrepreneur. Retrieved 19 April 2012.
  10. ^ Joanne Carew (10 October, 2012). "Mindjet showcases integrated solution". ITWeb.co.za. Retrieved 19 October, 2012. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= and |date= (help)
  11. ^ Fiona Graham (16 April 2012). "Pretty pictures: Can images stop data overload?". BBC News. Retrieved 26 April 2012.
  12. ^ Benjamin Pimentel (2 May 2005). "This is no PowerPoint presentation". The San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved 19 April 2012.
  13. ^ J. Bonasia (16 August 2007). "Makers Of Mind-Mapping Software Visualize Success". Investor's Business Daily. Retrieved 19 April 2012.
  14. ^ Glen Chapman (8 October 2009). "Mindjet boosts online collaboration with Catalyst". Times of Oman. Agence France Presse. Retrieved 19 April 2012.
  15. ^ Michael Totty (11 December 2007). "Operation Overload". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 19 April 2012.
Markup for section
Mindjet develops [[Collaborative software|collaborative]] [[Project management software|work management software]]<ref name=Bradley/><ref name=Marko>{{cite news |title=Apps Need Collaboration At Core |author=Kurt Marko |url=http://www.informationweek.com/news/telecom/unified_communications/232301205 |date=3 January 2012 |work=InformationWeek |accessdate=26 April 2012}}</ref> for [[Microsoft Windows]] and [[Mac OS]],<ref name=Roush/> and for both [[iOS|Apple iOS]] and [[Android (operating system)|Android]] mobile devices.<ref name=Wauters>{{cite news |title=Mindjet Buys Thinking Space, Launches Mind Mapping App For Android |author=Robin Wauters |url=http://techcrunch.com/2011/12/13/mindjet-buys-thinking-space-launches-mind-mapping-app-for-android/ |newspaper=TechCrunch |date=13 December 2011 |accessdate=19 April 2012}}</ref> Until 2012, the company offered an array of different software programs focused on [[mind map|mind mapping]], collaboration and project management.<ref name=Finnegan>{{cite web |url=http://www.channelbiz.co.uk/2012/09/21/mindjet-woos-channel-with-simplified-software-sales-approach/ |title=Mindjet woos channel with simplified software sales approach |author=Matthew Finnegan |date=21 September, 2012 |work=ChannelBiz.co.uk |accessdate=19 October, 2012}}</ref> The company's [[MindManager]] software allowed users to visually display information in mind maps using colors, words, images and spatial relationships.<ref name=Colkin/> The software could be used to plan and manage many kinds of information including business plans, speeches, research and presentations.<ref name=Fallows>{{cite news |title=To-Do List: Shop, Pay Bills, Organize Brain |author=James Fallows |url=http://w3.nexis.com/new/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4FRT-1WG0-TW8F-G2RP&csi=6742&oc=00240&perma=true |newspaper=The New York Times |date=20 March 2005 |accessdate=19 April 2012}}</ref> Following the acquisition of Cohuman in 2011, Mindjet launched Mindjet Connect, a [[Cloud computing|cloud-based]] service for collaborative working, which allowed users to plan and track progress with others.<ref name=Bradley/><ref name=Blum>{{cite news |title=Mindjet Connect Helps Small Businesses Visualize and Manage Projects |author=Jonathan Blum |url=http://www.entrepreneur.com/blog/220343 |newspaper=Entrepreneur |date=19 September 2011 |accessdate=19 April 2012}}</ref> In December 2011 Mindjet reported 350,000 downloads for its [[iOS]] [[application software|app]] and 1.1 million downloads for its Android-based app.<ref name=Wauters/> In September of 2012, Mindjet incorporated the functionality of its existing products, including MindManager, Mindjet Connect, and its mobile apps, into a single product named [[MindManager|Mindjet]].<ref name=Carew>{{cite web |url=http://www.itweb.co.za/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=59183:Mindjet-showcases-integrated-solution&catid=69 |title=Mindjet showcases integrated solution |author=Joanne Carew |date=10 October, 2012 |work=ITWeb.co.za |accessdate=19 October, 2012}}</ref> At the same time, Mindjet also changed from a purchase-based model for their software to a subscription-based model.<ref name=Finnegan/> According to Mindjet, {{as of|2012|04|lc=y}} the company's services were used by 83 percent of [[Fortune 500|Fortune 100]] companies.<ref>{{cite news |title=Pretty pictures: Can images stop data overload? |author=Fiona Graham |url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17682294 |work=BBC News |date=16 April 2012 |accessdate=26 April 2012}}</ref> Notable organizations and companies using Mindjet include the [[United States Coast Guard]],<ref name=Pimentel>{{cite news |title=This is no PowerPoint presentation |author=Benjamin Pimentel |url=http://w3.nexis.com/new/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4G2X-7YY0-00G9-20K8&csi=8172&oc=00240&perma=true |newspaper=The San Francisco Chronicle |date=2 May 2005 |accessdate=19 April 2012}}</ref> [[Hewlett-Packard]],<ref name=Bonasia>{{cite news |title=Makers Of Mind-Mapping Software Visualize Success |author=J. Bonasia |url=http://w3.nexis.com/new/docview/getDocForCuiReq?lni=4PF4-WT20-TX4P-W4YR&csi=8204&oc=00240&perma=true |newspaper=Investor's Business Daily |date=16 August 2007 |accessdate=19 April 2012}}</ref> [[The Coca-Cola Company|Coca Cola]], [[The Walt Disney Company|Walt Disney]], [[IBM]], [[Walmart]]<ref>{{cite news |title=Mindjet boosts online collaboration with Catalyst |author=Glen Chapman |url=http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5jAtF77pDeYcjJL7H5N3Z7ykx4n3w |agency=Agence France Presse |work=Times of Oman |date=8 October 2009 |accessdate=19 April 2012}}</ref> and [[Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company|Nationwide]].<ref name=Totty>{{cite news |title=Operation Overload |author=Michael Totty |url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119717614248818493.html |newspaper=The Wall Street Journal |date=11 December 2007 |accessdate=19 April 2012}}</ref>
  • Additionally, the company's logo is out of date. I have uploaded a new version of their logo here.

Because of my COI with regards to this article, I'm hoping someone could review these proposed revisions to be sure that they comply with Wikipedia's standards, and, if everything looks okay, move them into place, and include the updated logo when they do.

In addition to this article, I am also working on more substantial revisions to the article for Mindjet's software, which was previously called MindManager but is now also called Mindjet. For the time being, I've left wikilinks in this article for the company pointed to MindManager; once that page has been updated and renamed, however, I'll likely be back here to request that the links in this article be updated.

I've watchlisted this page, so if you have any questions or concerns about these revisions, please feel free to post them here or on my talk page. Thanks, looking forward to your feedback! ChrisPond (Talk · COI) 16:12, 16 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hi Chris, thanks for the well-structured request. I just have a few comments to make and i'll number them for convenience.
1. I should note first off that i'd very much prefer that one or two other users agree to this change other than myself before its implemented. To make sure there's consensus and all that. To that end, in order to speed up people commenting here, I would suggest leaving a message with some relevant Wikiprojects, such as Wikiproject Computing and Wikiproject Companies, which are both listed and linked up above.
2. In regard to the introductory paragraph request, I notice that the last sentence has two tenses. It uses "had", but then it uses "include". Since we're talking about a product currently in use, I would suggest using present tense for it and changing "had" to "has" would fix that issue. Minor grammar quibble, I know.
3. In regard to the Products section in the infobox, we really want to list all major products, past and present. Perhaps adding Mindjet and then putting "(defunct)" or something to that effect next to the other too would be appropriate. What do you think would be best? Extra notation: I see now that Mindjet includes the other products now. Hmm.,..that makes it more complicated. Maybe make it say "Mindjet (includes MindManager and Mindjet Connect)"? Would that work?
4. I've gone ahead and put in the new logo. Thanks for providing that.
I think that's everything. SilverserenC 06:21, 18 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
Hi Silverseren, thanks so much for your attention to this, and for getting the new logo moved over! I'll reply to your comments point by point.
1. I'm certainly fine with establishing some sort of consensus here, rather than having you move things unilaterally. I posted a message over at WP:Companies when I posted here, but it doesn't look like anyone from there has been able to take a look. I've followed your advice and posted another request for neutral editors over at WP:Software just now.
2. The tense issue in the first paragraph is a bit odd, I agree. How about:
Mindjet is a collaborative work management software company headquartered in San Francisco, California. Mindjet's software, also called Mindjet, is designed to visually and collaboratively manage information and tasks. As of December 2011, Mindjet had approximately two million users,[1] including notable clients such as Coca Cola, Disney, IBM and Walmart.
3. What to do with the "former" products is indeed confusing, given that they've been merged into a single product and not exactly discontinued. I like your suggestion, but maybe "Mindjet (previously sold as MindManager and Mindjet Connect)" instead? I think this better captures the fact that Mindjet is the only current product, and not a package of the other two pieces of software.
Thanks again for taking a look at this! ChrisPond (Talk · COI) 14:19, 20 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
I just looked over the proposed changes, and in my opinion they are an improvement, so I decided to be WP:BOLD and make the change. Note: I have no connection whatsoever with the product or the company. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:29, 30 November 2012 (UTC)Reply
Awesome, thanks so much for taking a look at this—it's very much appreciated! ChrisPond (Talk · COI) 22:56, 2 December 2012 (UTC)Reply

re illegitimate edits

edit
Latest comment: 11 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

One an editor has made an edit, it's a donation to the Wikipedia and can't be withdrawn by anyone without consensus, if the withdrawal is challenged.

Obviously another editor cannot say "Reverting your edit -- the edit may have been perfectly fine, but I own this article, sorry, and only I or my agents may edit it" (we'll likely get there sooner or later, but we're still not there yet). If the "other editor" is actually the same editor who made the first edit, that makes little difference and the principle applies -- an editor cannot say "Reverting my edit -- the edit may have been perfectly fine, but I've discovered that another person owns this article, and only he or his agents may edit it". This is also a violation of WP:OWN, albeit a slightly more complicated one.

For one thing, supposing that self-reverts were treated differently than other reverts -- which they aren't and can't be by the terms of donation -- it seems clear that the opportunity for intimidation, bribery, and so forth would be introduced. We really don't want editors to be emailing other editors and saying "Although your edit was an improvement, my client doesn't like it. How much will you take to self-revert it?" We also don't allow editors to self-revert all their edits when the quit the Wikipedia, and so on.

According to this posting, this applies to this edit, so the edit violates WP:OWN and I've reverted it.

Courtesy is nice. Professional courtesy is quite a different thing, isn't welcome here, and isn't a legitimate reason for reverting an edit. Either the edit improved the article or it didn't. If editors want to argue that it didn't, on the merits, they may do so. Herostratus (talk) 04:23, 5 March 2013 (UTC)Reply

I was not the COI editor directly involved with this page, but I do work with User:ChrisPond off-wiki, and there's more discussion about Herostratus' note above on my user Talk page, for anyone who's interested in following up. And for what it's worth, neither Chris nor myself will be challenging the edits made to this page; on a content basis they strike me as perfectly legitimate. WWB Too (Talk · COI) 12:35, 5 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
User:WWB Too responded on his talk page, and my response to that is, well, first of all, no editors here are "competitors", in theory or practice, since we all have the same goal. Opening a Wikipedia page to edit it, regardless of one's motivation, implies an understanding and agreement that there is only one reason for doing that -- to improve -- and we're all on the same side in that. I hope. For the rest, I just reiterate and stand by my contention that all edits are donations and not necessarily withdrawable. By courtesy and custom this is sometimes allowed, but not always, and not if contested. Yes motivation does matter. "I am undoing my edit because I am quitting the Wikipedia and wish to withdraw my contribution" is an invalid edit reason. There are others. "I am redacting my talk-page insult of you because you have seen it and so its purpose is fulfilled, now I don't want others to easily see it" is another (which I think occurs sometimes), and "I am withdrawing my contribution because I'm trying to get a date with a certain girl editor and don't want to appear too much smarter than her" would be too (which is getting closer too the point here, of withdrawing an article edit solely for reasons bearing on the external relationships of the editors.) So I don't think an editor can "change his mind about an edit for any reason", and I'm fairly certain that I'm at least technically correct according to the terms of contribution ("If you contribute text directly to Wikipedia, you thereby license it to the public for reuse under CC-BY-SA and GFDL..."), and whether the withdrawal is done five minutes or five years after the contribution the principle is the same. The only argument against that courtesy and custom, which is a reasonable point, but not if contested I don't think.
Having established the principle, I don't have an material objection to the edit and withdraw my objection. Do what you will, as far as I'm concerned. Herostratus (talk) 15:02, 11 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
Hi there, Herostratus. I agree that because our goal should be improved Wikipedia articles, there would ideally be no competive basis, although in practice that may not quite be the case. Since David (CorporateM) has clients he represents clients and so do I, I think it would be inappropriate for him to be the impartial arbiter of one of my requests. Granted, that isn't what happened here, and since he seemed to be editing in a volunteer capacity, it's probably fine, although it does raise some interesting questions.
You raise a good point that an editor who quits the site cannot just take their edits with them, and I see the parallel here. I can see how David's reason for initially reverting himself amounted to a passive WP:OWNership situation, although he didn't see it that way at first, and nor did I. Had he reconsidered on the merits, I take it you would have left it as is. Fortunately, the edits I think are perfectly consistent with enWP guidelines. I'm sure at some point either ChrisPond or perhaps myself will have additional suggestions, as Mindjet grows and evolves, but for now I think we have consensus on the article. Cheers, WWB Too (Talk · COI) 13:46, 12 March 2013 (UTC)Reply
edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mindjet. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:07, 31 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

  1. ^ Marshall Kirkpatrick (14 November 2011). "Could Mind-Maps Make SharePoint More Lovable?". ReadWriteWeb. Retrieved 19 April 2012.
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mindjet&oldid=1249462109"