Talk:Peregrine Systems
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of Business and Economics WikiProject. | |
| Stub | rated as stub-Class on the assessment scale | |
| ??? | This article has not yet received an importance rating on the assessment scale. | |
"Peregrine has sustained a rich tradition of delivering solutions with superior functionality to a broad segment of the global enterprise customer market. "
- That line does not sound NPOV to me - it reads more like an advertisement. Can we reword this to make it more encyclopedic/informative and less marketing oriented? -Armaced 21:46, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
"Our asset and service management offerings – ranging from Asset..." Since when does Wikipedia offer asset and service management solutions? This line is obviously taken directly from Peregrine's website. In fact, here is the link [1]. This page is supposed to inform readers of the existence of Peregrine Systems, and perhaps their place in the market or their history. It is not supposed to be an advertisement for the company. I know it is a subtle difference between informitive and persuasive, but this article isn't even making an effort. -Armaced 15:52, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] URL is broken
The URL pointing to http://www.sandreas.de/wiki/index.php/Main_Page is broken
try www.sandreas.de , wikipedia is now inside
[edit] Helpdesk Software
Not sure, but Helpdesk software is in my opinion the wrong wording , because Servicecenter is focused on supporting ITIL Service Management ...
[edit] Content Quality
This page seems rather blatantly targetted at the financial fraud of the company rather than the company itself. I would think that Peregrine's contributions would also include mention of things like Remedy, Tivoli, Harbinger, Loran, and all the other companies that were purchased.
Instead the content seems focused on the quasi-libel. For example "Peregrine's leadership was compelled to cover up their schemes, all the while selling off their Peregrine stock" : as far as I know, only the financial misdeeds have been prosecuted, not the SEC investigations.
I'd definitely flag this article as in dispute: it appears to be written from the point of view of someone who lost their job or their savings in the Peregrine fiasco which, while large, was NOT the reason Arthur Andersen failed.
Agreed that this article seems to violate the NPOV policy. Bc183 01:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
