User:Bawolff/Edit COI Summary/10 per page (alphabetical)/23

Cannot transclude talk pages due to post expand include size limit. Please visit individual talk pages to see the discussion.

• Ian Darling
• Ian Macpherson, 3rd Baron Strathcarron
• Ibrokhim Abdurakhmonov
• Igbo people
• Incyte
• Informa
• Innovations for Poverty Action
• Instituto Superior de Ciências Policiais e Segurança Interna
• Intel Capital
• Intelligent agent

---

← Previous page Next page→

Ian Darling

Edit request: rewrite article to address résumé-style tone

Please replace the current article wikitext in full, from the opening line beginning

through the final category line , with the replacement wikitext below.

Extended content

After applying the replacement text, please remove from the maintenance template if you agree the rewritten article no longer reads like a résumé. I am not requesting direct removal of the COI tag unless an uninvolved editor determines it is appropriate.

I have a conflict of interest with this article, so I am not making the change directly. I am requesting review by an uninvolved editor.

The article is currently tagged as being written like a résumé and as having possible COI issues. I have prepared a proposed rewrite below that:

• removes first-paragraph résumé/list structure;
• reduces promotional and evaluative phrasing;
• consolidates biographical material into prose;
• keeps factual claims tied to the existing citations;
• removes some unsourced or weakly sourced detail;
• preserves the filmography, awards and honours sections in a more neutral format.

If an uninvolved editor considers the rewrite acceptable, could they please replace the article text with the version below and consider whether the résumé-style tag can be removed? I understand that the COI tag should remain or be removed only at the discretion of uninvolved editors.

Proposed replacement article text

For the British judge, see Ian Darling (judge).

Ian Darling AO
Born	Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
Occupations	Documentary film director Producer

Ian David Darling AO is an Australian documentary film director, producer and philanthropist. He is associated with Shark Island Productions and the Shark Island Institute in Sydney, Australia.

Darling's films as director or producer include Alone Across Australia, In The Company of Actors, The Oasis, Paul Kelly - Stories of Me, The Final Quarter and The Pool. He has also worked as an executive producer on films including 2040, The Bleeding Edge, Unrest, On the Record and Paper & Glue.

Outside film production, Darling has held roles with Documentary Australia, Good Pitch Australia, the Sydney Theatre Company and philanthropic organisations. He was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia in 2018 for service to documentary film production, the performing arts, education, community engagement and social welfare organisations through philanthropy.

=Ian Macpherson, 3rd Baron Strathcarron=

Edit request from article subject

I am the subject of this article. Please add the following entry to the "Media works" section:

• Andrea Moda Formula: The Legend of the Formula One Team Too Bad to Be True. Histria Books, 2026. ISBN 978-1-59211-814-4.

This is a routine bibliography addition, verified by the publisher's listing above. Thank you. Strathogram (talk) 08:48, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Ibrokhim Abdurakhmonov

Edit request: Add source for "25 years of independence" award 2016

Please add a source for this entry in the Awards section: "2016 – Breastplate "25 years of independence of Uzbekistan" for contribution to the development of science and technology in the country."

Source: Presidential Decree of the Republic of Uzbekistan No. UP-4850 dated 26.08.2016 "On awarding in connection with the twenty-fifth anniversary of independence of the Republic of Uzbekistan".

This official document verifies the award. I have a COI and will not edit directly. Thank you. Abror Kosimov (talk) 09:31, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

N Rejected: None of those awards appear to be independently notable in Wikipedia.  Spintendo  00:48, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback, Spintendo.

Understood regarding the awards. Could you advise —

should the Awards section be removed entirely, or

would you recommend keeping only awards with

independent media coverage?

I have a COI and will not edit directly. Abror Kosimov (talk) 10:44, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

Edit request: Remove two unsourced breastplate awards

Specifically, please remove these exact lines from the Awards section:

• 2016 – Breastplate "25 years of independence

of Uzbekistan" for contribution to the development of science and technology in the country. [citation needed]

• 2021 – Breastplate "30 years of Independence

of Uzbekistan" for contribution to the development of science and technology in the country. [citation needed]

Replace with: nothing (delete these lines entirely).

Edit request: Add source for "Honoured Innovator" award 2021

Please add a source for this entry in the Awards section: "2021 – State award of an "Honoured Innovator and Rationalizer" of the Republic of Uzbekistan"

Source: [https://president.uz/uz/lists/view/4569 Presidential Decree No. 4569 dated 25.08.2021]. President.uz. The decree lists: "Abdurakhmonov Ibrokhim Yulchievich - Minister of Innovative Development of the Republic of Uzbekistan" under the honorary title "Honoured Innovator and Rationalizer of the Republic of Uzbekistan".

I have a COI and will not edit directly. Thank you. Abror Kosimov (talk) 07:55, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Edit request: Fix name and add source for 2010 award

Please make the following change in the Awards section:

CURRENT TEXT:

• 2010 – State award "Kukrak Nishoni".

[citation needed]

REPLACE WITH:

• 2010 – "Uzbekiston belgisi" (Badge of Uzbekistan)

award by the Kamolot Youth Union of Uzbekistan. source

The current text has an incorrect award name. The correct name is "Uzbekiston belgisi" kokrak nishoni, confirmed by this independent source:

[https://ziyouz.uz/yangiliklar/professor-ibrohim-abdurahmonov-tadbirini-topish-vaqti-keldi/ Professor Ibrokhim Abdurakhmonov interview]. Ziyouz.uz. 23 February 2017.

The article explicitly states: "Uzbekiston belgisi kokrak nishoni (2010)".

I have a COI and will not edit directly. Thank you. Abror Kosimov (talk) 08:46, 6 July 2026 (UTC)

Igbo people

Proposed Nkpokiti addition to Performing arts

Disclosure: I have a personal and ancestral connection to Umunze, which is named in this request. I am requesting independent review rather than editing the protected article directly.

Specific changes requested:

1. In the first sentence of the Performing arts subsection, change dance troops to dance troupes.
2. After the sentence ending “with each rhythm from the indigenous instruments indicating a movement to the dancer”, add:

Nkpokiti is an Igbo cultural dance associated with Umunze. The reverse of Nigeria's ₦5 note depicts Nkpokiti dancers.

Reason: This adds a concise example to the existing coverage of Igbo dance. The Umunze association and Igbo classification are supported by independent academic sources, while the currency detail is supported by the Central Bank of Nigeria.

Nuance007 (talk) 04:43, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Incyte

Updated "History" section

I'm Erik and I work at Incyte. I'm excited to collaborate with you all! Due to my conflict of interest, I am here with a request.

I'd like to request the wholesale replacement of the current History section on this article, with my proposed version. Half the citations in the current section are press releases or non-reliable sources, and the section itself doesn't really tell the story of Incyte's company history; it bounces from 2025 to 2015 to 2020 to 2021. The current section only really highlights two milestones in Incyte's history, and lacks a ton of context that is included in reliable sourcing. This proposed version tells that history more completely, while also improving the sourcing throughout.

Replace

In June 2025, Incyte named Bill Meury president, CEO, and a member of the board of directors. He replaced Hervé Hoppenot, who retired after 11 years of service.

In September 2015, the company announced it had gained exclusive development and commercial right pertaining to Jiangsu Hengrui Medicine Co., Ltd's anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody, SHR-1210, in a deal worth $795+ million.

In January 2020, Incyte signed a collaboration and license agreement for the global development and commercialization of tafasitamab with MorphoSys. On March 3, 2020, the agreement received antitrust clearance and thus became effective.

Incyte established a European headquarters in Morges, Switzerland, in 2021.

References

with this proposed content:

Incyte Corporation was founded by Roy A. Whitfield on April 8, 1991, in Palo Alto, California, as a genomics company. It became a public company in 1993. Subsequently, scientists and chemists were recruited from DuPont to work for Incyte. Incyte moved its headquarters to Delaware, and acquired Maxia Pharmaceuticals in 2003.

In November 2013, Incyte announced its relocation to new headquarters in Wilmington, Delaware, completing the move by the end of 2014. Hervé Hoppenot became CEO in January 2014.

In 2017, the company became part of the S&P 500 Index, which tracks the 500 most widely held U.S. stocks.

In 2015, Incyte established its European headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland, and later moved this headquarters in 2021. The company expanded its Delaware headquarters, including the addition of a major research and development facility, in 2022. That same year, Incyte acquired Villaris Therapeutics, and Escient Pharmaceuticals in 2024.

For 2025, the company reported $5.141 billion in revenue, $6.957 billion in assets and $1.286 billion in net income. Incyte is publicly traded on the NASDAQ under the symbol INCY. Incyte now operates out of North America, Asia, and Europe. Bill Meury became CEO in 2025. Meury replaced Hoppenot, who retired after 11 years in the position.

References

Let me know if anyone has questions here, and thanks INCY Erik (talk) 15:43, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Informa

Article Lead Request

Hello there,

I am acting on behalf of Informa and have some suggested changes to the lead.

What are my changes: The current first sentence of the lead does not accurately reflect what Informa does, so I have suggested a more accurate version.

In addition, can the introduction feature the operating divisions rather than examples of the notable brands owned by Informa?

This would help readers better understand the structure of the company - while the brands are notable, they don't illustrate what Informa does as a company. Listing the divisions also more accurately indicates the nature of the relationship between Informa's divisions and brands - Taylor & Francis for example is its own division which CRC Press and Routledge both sit within, but the current phrasing implies they sit alongside each other.

I plan to suggest some more content in the body of the article to better cover what each division does and use notable examples of brands within each to clarify this, but for this request I'm focusing on the introduction.

Finally, can the number of employees be updated to 14,000 (and the relevant figure corrected within the infobox)?

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

Informa plc is a British publishing, business intelligence, and exhibitions group based in London, England. UK-founded multinational events, digital products, specialist media and academic publishing business. It is listed on the London Stock Exchange and is a constituent of the FTSE 100 Index.

One of the world's largest business events' organisers, it has offices in 30 countries and around 12,000 14,000 employees. Informa owns numerous brands including Fan Expo, VidCon, Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity, CRC Press, Routledge, and Taylor & Francis. Informa comprises five operating divisions: Informa Markets, Informa Connect, Informa Festivals, Informa TechTarget and Taylor & Francis.

References

Thanks in advance! HisNamesJim (talk) 14:56, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Not done: A majority of the requested changes are currently written in a promotional tone. Please review WP:Neutral point of view and ensure you follow this before submitting any edit requests. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 01:13, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you @Valorrr for your feedback. Would you please mind indicating the language you feel in my request which is written in a promotional tone? HisNamesJim (talk) 09:50, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

One of the world's largest business events' organisers, along with some others. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 13:45, 10 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Valorrr. I understand that that could seem promotional but I disagree in cases where it is an objective statement.

Objectively, Informa is one of the world's largest companies in the organisation of business events' - this is supported by the Times article where it says: "Informa, formed in 1998 via the merger of IBC Group and Lloyd’s of London Press, is the largest organiser of trade shows in the world."

Other Wikipedia articles where the subject is the largest within their specific industry will also use "largest" within the article lead as a basic introduction to the subject i.e. airlines (American Airlines) - "largest airline in the world in terms of passengers carried and daily flights", banking (Goldman Sachs) - "second-largest investment bank in the world by revenue".

I appreciate I do have a COI so would you mind reopening the request so we could get a second opinion? I see that Pac Veten and Dormskirk have recently been active with updates to the article - would either of you have an opinion on my suggestions?

HisNamesJim (talk) 16:40, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Sorry but "One of the world's largest business events' organisers, along with some others" sounds promotional to me. Dormskirk (talk) 16:45, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Very, and we need NPOV. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 16:47, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

One of the world's largest business events' organisers
That was the text, but I said "among some others" to state there is some more. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 16:48, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

The tone sounds promotional to me also. Is there a way to quantify the statement for neutrality? For example, "Informa has x% of the global market for trade shows" or "Informa is among the top Y international vendors for trade shows"? Pac Veten (talk) 16:54, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Or better, "Informa is among the top Y international vendors for trade shows (by revenue)." Pac Veten (talk) 17:06, 11 June 2025 (UTC)

Thank you Valorrr, Dormskirk and Pac Veten for your feedback. Very helpful for someone new to Wikipedia.

Pac Veten, as you have suggested, could the phrasing be altered to:

"Informa is the world's largest exhibition organizer by revenue..." as supported by these Exhibition News and Trade Shows New Network articles.

Additionally, what about other parts of the request? Are the changes suggested acceptable or does the language have to be adjusted?

1. Changes to the "lead" sentence to better reflect what Informa does.

2. Changing the last sentence to feature the operating divisions of Informa rather than examples of the notable brands owned by Informa.

Listing the divisions more accurately indicates the nature of the relationship between Informa's divisions and brands - Taylor & Francis for example is its own division which CRC Press and Routledge are brands within, but the current phrasing implies they sit alongside each other.

3. Updating the number of employees to 14,000.

Thanks again for your guidance. HisNamesJim (talk) 11:08, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I found the original lead sentence (with "business intelligence") more concrete and descriptive. The proposed new sentence may fit better with a corporate mission statement, but the context seems different here. Perhaps it would work to add an explicit sentence for the mission statement?

Similarly, the original list of brands (including CRC) seems helpful and evocative, while the list of divisions lacks flavor for a general audience, somehow. Why not include both--keep the original content, and then add a new description of Informa's operating divisions separately? Each list would provide a different kind of useful information. Pac Veten (talk) 16:28, 12 June 2025 (UTC)

Partly done: See comments. CNMall41 (talk) 21:22, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Article Lead Request 2

Hello there,

Following the feedback received from Pac Veten, I have reposted my request to change the article lead to make it clearer for interested editors.

• Would it be possible to add phrasing to the second paragraph of the introduction which indicates Informa is the world's largest exhibition organizer by revenue, one of the reasons why the company is notable within its industry.

• Can I suggest a sentence outlining the operating divisions of the company. This would make the introduction a better summary of the company and help clarify the relationship between Informa's divisions and brands.

• Can the introduction be updated to reflect Informa's current business operations, specifically as follows:

• By using the term "UK-founded" rather than "British", and "Multinational events" to clarify that the company hosts functions globally, not only domestically.

• Informa no longer offers "business intelligence" services while "digital products", "specialist media" and "academic publishing business" represent the company's current operations more accurately. Informa, for example, is only involved with "academic publishing" rather than "publishing" generally through its Taylor & Francis division.

• Finally, can the number of employees be updated to 14,000 (and the relevant figure corrected within the infobox).

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

Informa plc is a British publishing, business intelligence, and exhibitions group based in London, England. UK-founded multinational events, digital products, specialist media and academic publishing business. It is listed on the London Stock Exchange and is a constituent of the FTSE 100 Index.

Informa is the world's largest exhibition organizer by revenue. It has offices in 30 countries and around 12,000 14,000 employees. Informa owns numerous brands including Fan Expo, VidCon, Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity, CRC Press, Routledge, and Taylor & Francis. Informa comprises five operating divisions: Informa Markets, Informa Connect, Informa Festivals, Informa TechTarget and Taylor & Francis.

References

Thank you again for considering my request! HisNamesJim (talk) 14:58, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

This draft looks more neutral, to my eye, but some additional changes would be helpful:

- Where the company was founded is less important than what it does; the company is something like a conglomerate; and bold font is needed only for the company name. So I would suggest something like this for the first sentence, pending further changes: "Informa plc is a multinational conglomerate that is active in the areas of events, digital products, specialist media and academic publishing; the company was founded in the UK."

- The terms "digital products" and "specialist media" do not refer to concrete industries or fields that would be familiar to most readers. What are possible substitutes for these terms, which would be more widely known?

- Do the terms "events" and "exhibitions" refer to the same things? If so, it may be helpful to use a consistent term.

- Where are Informa's major offices located? For example, would "in the London and Boston areas" be sufficient to give a general idea?

- How many brands does Informa have? The word "numerous" implies between 8 and dozens . . .

- What does each Informa division do, in a few words each?

Hopefully these are useful comments, if detailed. Pac Veten (talk) 18:06, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Similarly, if the 14,000 employees are located mainly in the US and the UK, it would be useful to include that clarification. Pac Veten (talk) 18:21, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Pac Veten. Sorry for taking a while to get back to you.

I very much appreciate your detailed comments, which I've responded to in turn below. Just to clarify, I use bold to indicate my changes which I should have made clearer to you so apologies for any confusion!

1. I agree with your adjusted lead sentence. I suggest using the alternate term digital goods instead of "digital products" and "niche media" instead of "specialist media". Similar to my point regarding the alteration from "publishing" to "academic publishing", I feel it is important to readers to clarify that Informa does not publish mainstream media.

2. Events and exhibitions from my understanding are different, so it would be better to specify given their relevance here. Events are broader while exhibitions are more focused and subject-specific; for example the wider event of Cannes Film Festival will host exhibitions within the wider event itself.

3. For the lead at least, I do not see the value in adding where the company's major offices are located and it probably approaches WP:DIRECTORY territory, but others may disagree.

4. Informa does indeed have dozens of brands, too many to comprehensively list and this may fluctuate over time as well (I would like to tackle the brands section in a future request so it isn't too unwieldy), and this is why I'm keen to include the Divisions. I would not object to the beginning of this sentence being altered to read, "Some of Informa's most notable brands include..."

5. I am currently in the process of drafting changes to the "Operations" section which it would be great if you would like to offer your feedback on once I have submitted it! This will include an explanation of the five divisions - it might be appropriate to include this in the lead as well but in any case we can decide that once this first conversation is concluded to keep the Talk page organised.

6. I cannot find any independent reliable third-party references which include the employee split and would rather leave it out as this will continually change.

Look forward to hearing your feedback and thank you! HisNamesJim (talk) 16:55, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Hi @HisNamesJim. I appreciate your latest thoughts--my comments are below.

1. The phrase "digital goods" is not standard for a general audience, so I think that it's still important to find common words to describe Informa's services. Such phrasing should be independent of any marketing strategy.

2. OK

3. Most Wikipedia articles about important companies indicate where their major offices are located. This information should be included for Informa as well.

4. It would be appropriate to replace the promotional word "numerous" with an approximate quantification of the number of brands that Informa owns. On the basis of your comments above, perhaps that would be "approximately fifty" in this case?

5. There are two options around treating divisions in the lead section. The first option is to attach a couple of words to each division as description; the second option is to remove the divisions from the lead section entirely, deferring this material for a later section, as you proposed. The current division listing in the lead section is opaque and does not add any value for a reader.

6. OK--item 3 above may be sufficient to substitute for item 6 here.

Hopefully these comments are useful in moving towards the next iteration. Pac Veten (talk) 18:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)

Article Lead Request

Hi there. Following helpful feedback from editors, I would like to repost a request to change the article lead.

• Can the introduction be updated to reflect Informa's current business operations, specifically as follows:

• By using the term "UK-founded" rather than "British", and "Multinational events" to clarify that the company hosts functions globally, not only domestically.

• The phrasing "based in London" changed to "headquartered in London" so it is clearer that Informa has offices in other locations.

• Informa no longer offers "business intelligence" services while "business-to-business digital services and media" and "academic publishing business" represent the company's current operations more accurately. Informa, for example, is only involved with "academic publishing" rather than "publishing" generally through its Taylor & Francis division, while its digital services and media products are focused on the business-to-business sector.

• May the final sentence be updated by:

• Changing "numerous" in regards to the amount of brands to "hundreds" so that there is an approximate quantification.

• Adding several more notable brands (highlighted in bold) with Wikilinks to their relevant articles.

• Finally, can the number of employees be updated to 14,000 (and the relevant figure corrected within the infobox).

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

Informa plc is a British publishing, business intelligence, and exhibitions group based in London, England. UK-founded multinational events, business-to-business digital services and media, and academic publishing business headquartered in London, England. It is listed on the London Stock Exchange and is a constituent of the FTSE 100 Index.

It has offices in 30 countries and around 12,000 14,000 employees. Informa owns numerous hundreds of brands including Fan Expo, VidCon, Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity, Monaco Yacht Show, World of Concrete, Dubai Airshow, Farm Progress, CRC Press, Routledge, and Taylor & Francis.

References

Thank you! HisNamesJim (talk) 10:25, 29 July 2025 (UTC)

@HisNamesJim:, responding to these requests individually since it is more than a single request. Give me time to sum everything up. Not everything is responded to in the order in which you requested.

1. 12,000 -> 14,000, this was implemented based on the primary source. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:09, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

2. British -> U.K. founded , not done. The first sentence of the MOS:LEAD describes where the company is located, not necessarily where it operates. See Facebook for example ("American social media and social networking service owned by the American technology conglomerate Meta"). --CNMall41 (talk) 21:14, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

3. based in -> headquarters, this was updated. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:15, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

4. numerous -> hundreds, not done. The lead needs to be a summary of the body. While the body lists many of the brands, it would be WP:OR to say "hundreds" unless there is a sentence in the "Brands" section which says "hundreds." That sentence would also need to be supported by a reliable source. I was going to do that change in order to change the lead, but I cannot find a reliable secondary source that says "hundreds." --CNMall41 (talk) 21:17, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

5. service types - not done. Again, the lead needs to be a summary of the body and currently what is written should not be there unless reliably sourced. If you have a good secondary source that shows what they currently offer, ping me here and I can add a sentence to the operations section and then change the lead to reflect your request. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:19, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

6. additional brands - not done. There are currently six which I feel is already too many for a summary based on the rule of three. You are asking that to be increased to 10 which is way too many in my opinion. --CNMall41 (talk) 21:21, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi again. Thanks much for the update and for incorporating the previous feedback. This version looks significantly more informative and neutral—so I'd suggest that only two tasks remain. The first task is to subdivide the long list of brands according to the general categories provided above to describe the overall business. The second task is to copy edit the resulting full text. Since I belong to the Guild of Copy Editors, it would be natural for me to take on the second task. Would you mind taking on the first task? Pac Veten (talk) 23:56, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me @Pac Veten, and for all of your previous feedback. For now, I think I am going with CNMall41's suggestion that I focus on requesting changes to the main article body before returning back to the lead. HisNamesJim (talk) 11:56, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Since the most recent proposed text above is the outcome of this long group discussion (to date), how should it be inserted as the article lead now - would you like to take care of that, or would you prefer me to handle it? Pac Veten (talk) 14:43, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

Long discussion is not necessary consensus. As stated above, the lead is a summary of the body. The question should be what, if anything, should be placed into the body. The lead can then be discussed after. It's a cart before the horse issue to build the lead without having the information in the body. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:08, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you @CNMall41 for your thorough feedback! I agree with the points raised. My next request is going to focus on the "Operations" section and suggest language which clarifies what the different divisions of the company do.

Would you also please update the approximate number of employees within the lead so that it matches the infobox. Thank you! HisNamesJim (talk) 11:52, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

I will. However, I am not sure it is even suitable for the lead so would not object if another editor removed. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:08, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Yes, the total number of employees in a corporation is very appropriate for a lead section. Pac Veten (talk) 18:36, 13 September 2025 (UTC)

Operations Request

Thank you @CNMall41 and @Pac Veten for offering your feedback.

As mentioned in my last request, I would like to put forwards some language and updates within the "Operations" section which clarifies the different divisions within Informa.

I hope this will then be reflected within the lead to better summarise the company's operations.

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

Informa is organized into five operating divisions:

• Three divisions are B2B events-focused:

• Informa Connect, which is focused on content-led events. Brands include Fan Expo, MegaCon and The Bride Show.

• Informa Festivals, which has experience-led events. Brands include Black Hat Briefings, Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity and Game Developers Conference.

• Informa Markets, which focuses on transaction-led events. Brands include Dubai Airshow, Farm Progress and World of Concrete.

• Informa TechTarget is Informa’s digital services business. This consists of media brands and technology sites including Computer Weekly, Game Developer and Industry Dive.

• Taylor & Francis is an academic book and journal publisher. Brands include F1000, Dove Medical Press and Routledge.

The company also has a Global Support division.

In June 2021, John Rishton was appointed as chairman, replacing Derek Mapp.

References

Thank you again for reviewing! HisNamesJim (talk) 11:36, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. Here's my feedback:

- The new content looks OK overall. Please remove the word "led"—it may have a marketing connotation, but it unfortunately won't be meaningful to the average reader.

- Please indicate Informa's revenue breakdown by region and division, per Informa's 2024 annual report. This material should be easy to write up.

- In the lead section, please summarize or quote Informa's mission statement. This information helps to characterize the corporation for a new reader.

On reflection, the proposed article changes appear to have a larger problem, which will need addressing. Significant portions of the proposed new text (for lead and operations) appear to be taken directly from Informa's 2024 annual report. For compliance with Wikipedia's guidelines on plagiarism, I would suggest reviewing those guidelines and then adjusting the new text appropriately. Possible solutions include paraphrase and quotation, and inline citation in any case. These guidelines are available at WP:PLAG. Pac Veten (talk) 14:41, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

@Pac Veten:, I am going to dissent here. Why would it be appropriate to break down the company's revenue by region according to its annual report? Or, to include its mission statement? Are either of these worthy of inclusion? This seems to be the opposite of neutral tone. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:52, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

First, it's useful to repeat the previous feedback that's not covered by the most recent post. The second bullet below is particularly important, in light of the conflict-of-interest considerations that prompted this talk thread.

- The new content looks OK overall. Please remove the word "led"—it may have a marketing connotation, but it unfortunately won't be meaningful to the average reader.

- On reflection, the proposed article changes appear to have a larger problem, which will need addressing. Significant portions of the proposed new text (for lead and operations) appear to be taken directly from Informa's 2024 annual report. For compliance with Wikipedia's guidelines on plagiarism, I would suggest reviewing those guidelines and then adjusting the new text appropriately. Possible solutions include paraphrase and quotation, and inline citation in any case. These guidelines are available at WP:PLAG.

Second, here's the previous feedback that's covered by the most recent post:

- Please indicate Informa's revenue breakdown by region and division, per Informa's 2024 annual report. This material should be easy to write up.

- In the lead section, please summarize or quote Informa's mission statement. This information helps to characterize the corporation for a new reader.

The preceding two bullets are simply topics of general interest, which make them appropriate for Wikipedia readers. I agree that if the article were long, and length considerations prompted a consideration of triage, we might want to consider which topics to exclude. Since the article is so short (so far), it makes sense to amplify the content, to give a richer perspective on the corporation.

On this subject, including an explicit mission statement is actually a way to amplify neutrality, by indicating the corporation's goals and point of view. Newspapers often do something similar, as a way to increase trust with readers. So it's a great point that you raised, and hopefully it gives us an opportunity to build this trust with Wikipedia readers. Pac Veten (talk) 18:13, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

It is not about trust necessarily. It is about writing something from a WP:NPOV. Wikipedia is not a WP:SOAPBOX for the company to reiterate its financials. Think WP:READERSFIRST. No one is coming to Wikipedia to get that information. At this point, there would need to be consensus to implement those suggestions as I do not believe they adhere to the points I stated above. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:47, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

In the previous sections, there was discussion about promotional tone. Maybe ping those editors to see if they would be willing to opine.--CNMall41 (talk) 18:49, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

First, it's useful to repeat the previous feedback that's not covered by the most recent post. The second bullet below is particularly important, in light of the conflict-of-interest considerations that prompted this talk thread.

- The new content looks OK overall. Please remove the word "led"—it may have a marketing connotation, but it unfortunately won't be meaningful to the average reader.

- On reflection, the proposed article changes appear to have a larger problem, which will need addressing. Significant portions of the proposed new text (for lead and operations) appear to be taken directly from Informa's 2024 annual report. For compliance with Wikipedia's guidelines on plagiarism, I would suggest reviewing those guidelines and then adjusting the new text appropriately. Possible solutions include paraphrase and quotation, and inline citation in any case. These guidelines are available at WP:PLAG.

Second, here are some comments about the most recent post:

- A company's financials are not promotional - typically the opposite, more an objective measure. Were you envisioning a soapbox of some sort for this article?

- Given the large, international audience for Wikipedia, any claims about "no one" being interested in information are likely to be disproven quickly. This is actually an excellent reason for including more information in an article, rather than less (up to the point of saturation, as previously mentioned).

- Finally, if the corporate contributor in a conflict-of-interest situation is requesting the article's discussion to follow the corporation's guidance, this seems problematic. Broad inclusion of community interest seems better, per Wikipedia's guidelines and norms. This observation would suggest continuing to expand the article's content (up to the point of saturation, as previously mentioned). Pac Veten (talk) 19:40, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

If this discussion is unable to resolve the conflict of interest that was flagged, would it be best to end the proposal process for now? Input from editors with significant experience on Wikipedia may be particularly valuable here. Pac Veten (talk) 19:42, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

I'm getting a bit confused. I have no interest in pushing the revenue and mission statement points suggested here.

This request is focused on introducing descriptions within the "Operations" section, where the divisions are already listed, but not explained. This action is not intended to "follow the corporation's guidance", just to indicate an accurate definition.

This is because, at the moment, there is no explanation of the divisions, just the names and a long list of brands with nothing to indicate what groups them.

I'm happy to remove the "led" wording from the definitions - it just means that the word before is the main focus of the event, if that helps in finding an alternative.

As we are getting away from the original request, I agree it would be great if an experienced editor could offer their feedback - maybe one who has edited the article before in the past year or so such as Dormskirk, VulcanSphere, or Shortride. HisNamesJim (talk) 14:54, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. I think the article looks good as it is. It lists the divisions in the operations section and then splits the brands by division in the brands section. Just my opinion. Dormskirk (talk) 15:12, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

I agree with Dormskirk's view, thanks for the ping. Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:27, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

It's useful to repeat the previous feedback that's not covered by the most recent post. The second bullet below is particularly important, in light of the conflict-of-interest considerations that prompted this talk thread.

- On reflection, the proposed article changes appear to have a larger problem, which will need addressing. Significant portions of the proposed new text (for lead and operations) appear to be taken directly from Informa's 2024 annual report. For compliance with Wikipedia's guidelines on plagiarism, I would suggest reviewing those guidelines and then adjusting the new text appropriately. Possible solutions include paraphrase and quotation, and inline citation in any case. These guidelines are available at WP:PLAG.

Pac Veten (talk) 16:40, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

It is actually not useful at this point to "repeat the previous feedback" as you have done so quite a few times. Those involved in the discussion are well aware. As far as "it would be great if an experienced editor could offer their feedback" I guess I should not have assumed that I was an experienced editor in the company-related article space. I am also puzzled by "would it be best to end the proposal process for now" as that would be the OP's decision if they want to end the discussion. I'm sorry to sound so blunt but you seem to be moving the topic of discussion. If you are advocating for the introductory or advertorial material, you will need to start a thread to get consensus. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:52, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Can you please point me to the reply that addressed plagiarism from the company's annual report? I might have missed that post. Pac Veten (talk) 16:57, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Not sure what you are referring to. I did not say anything about plagiarism. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:54, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Plagiarism has been mentioned twice in the comments above. It will be good to get the group's thoughts on that. Pac Veten (talk) 21:38, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

It has been mentioned four times. By you. It is not relevant. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:04, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Is it the group's opinion that copying text from a company's annual report does not raise any questions around WP:PLAG? Pac Veten (talk) 21:12, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks all for your feedback. It appears a consensus cannot be agreed on whether the descriptions of the divisions should be added so I will now close the request. HisNamesJim (talk) 10:57, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

History Section Request

Hi there.

I would like to suggest several changes to the "History" section, which is currently difficult to navigate, gives undue weight to certain historic events, while omitting several more recent notable happenings.

To begin with, to improve navigability for readers, may I suggest a timeframe which will divide the section into two.

This would consist of two sub-headings, one between 1998 (when Informa was formed) to 2013 and one from 2014 (coinciding with when Stephen Carter began his role as CEO) to the present.

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

1998 to 2013

Informa itself was created in 1998 by the merger of IBC Group plc (formerly International Business Communications) and LLP Group plc (publisher of Lloyd's List).

[...]

In December 2013, Informa acquired the assets of Elsevier Business Intelligence (EBI) from Reed Elsevier. The EBI business unit includes such publications as The Pink Sheet, The Gray Sheet, IN VIVO, Start-Up, and the Strategic Transactions database along with a series of notable conferences. The EBI assets combined with Scrip, Datamonitor and several other publications formed the newly created Pharma Intelligence division of Informa Business Information.

2014 to present

In January 2014, Carter became CEO of Informa plc. In September 2017, Informa announced that it would be acquiring Dove Medical Press.

[...]

Thank you all for looking into my request! HisNamesJim (talk) 15:46, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

Done. Dormskirk (talk) 15:56, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

History Section Request 2

Really appreciate it Dormskirk for implementing the sub-headings!

My next request for the "History" section focuses on revising the second half of the "1998 to 2013" sub-section.

Currently undue weight is given to certain events, while others covered do not meet Wikipedia's criteria on notability. Could I please suggest:

• The paragraph in relation to the proposed 2008 merger with United Business Media (UBM) is simplified.

• Undue weight is given to mentioning alternative third-party attempts in acquiring Informa which are unconnected to talks with UBM.

• Language surrounding talks ending due to an increase in share price, cited using an Independent article, is according to "sources close to UBM" so is not independently verifiable. The sentence referring to this should be removed.

• Removal of the "Informaworld" discontinued domain paragraph.

• It is not appropriate for inclusion within a "History" section, does not meet Wikipedia's criteria on notability and is supported by primary sources.

• Removal of the sentence regarding Hobby Star Marketing.

• The sentence is currently unreferenced, and while limited press does exist about the company's acquisition by Informa, it is not notable enough to warrant inclusion on the article.

• Simplification of the paragraph regarding the acquisition of assets of Elsevier Business Intelligence (EBI) from Reed Elsevier to a single sentence.

• Like the UBM paragraph, while the acquisition is somewhat notable, listing the various publications as part of the deal is undue weight.

In addition, indicated in bold, may a sentence be added:

• Stating that Informa was redomiciled to the UK in 2014.

• Providing background context to Stephen Carter’s appointment as CEO in first joining Informa as a non-executive director in 2010.

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

1998 to 2013

[...]

On 8 June 2008, The Sunday Telegraph revealed that United Business Media (UBM) had proposed a merger with Informa to create a media group worth over £3 billion. The talks were confirmed by Informa in a press release that same day, but described as "preliminary". Previously on 13 May The Times had reported that the Carlyle Group and Apax Partners were considering bidding for the company. On 17 June talks with UBM ended. because of the rapid rise in Informa's stock price after the public disclosure of the potential merger. On 26 June a private equity consortium consisting of Providence Equity Partners, the Carlyle Group and Hellman & Friedman proposed a takeover bid offering 506 pence per share.

In May 2009 the company announced that it would restructure its business to be incorporated in Jersey but tax resident in Switzerland. In 2014, Informa was redomiciled in the UK.

The discontinued domain Informaworld provided subscribers with more than half a million journal articles and 13,000 e-books from all its imprints. In June 2011 the journals and e-books transferred to a new website, Taylor & Francis Online. Abstracting and indexing databases and bibliographic databases were to move from Informaworld to Taylor & Francis Online at a later date.

In July 2013, the company announced that Peter Rigby would retire at the end of 2013 to be replaced as CEO by Stephen Carter, who was first appointed a non-executive director in 2010. Also in 2013, Informa acquired the Canadian company Hobby Star Marketing, who ran the Fan Expo Canada and Toronto Comicon comic book conventions. Informa has since acquired other conventions and placed them under the auspices of their Fan Expo HQ brand, including Dallas Comic Con and MegaCon.

In December 2013, Informa acquired the assets of Elsevier Business Intelligence (EBI) from Reed Elsevier. The EBI business unit includes such publications as The Pink Sheet, The Gray Sheet, IN VIVO, Start-Up, and the Strategic Transactions database along with a series of notable conferences. The EBI assets combined with Scrip, Datamonitor and several other publications formed the newly created Pharma Intelligence division of Informa Business Information.

References

Thanks all looking into my request. HisNamesJim (talk) 14:58, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

These changes look reasonable to me but I will let other editors comment. Dormskirk (talk) 15:07, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Dormskirk and hope you have had a good weekend!

I appreciate that the site functions as a collaborative project, however, if these changes seem reasonable to you, could they be implemented? Aware that this request has been open for a month and this would help reduce the queue of pending COI requests, which has grown considerably over the past couple of weeks and might be getting overwhelming for the editors who regularly help out in that area. Thanks again! HisNamesJim (talk) 16:22, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

Now done. Dormskirk (talk) 16:35, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

History Section Request 3

Thanks again @Dormskirk for implementing my last suggested changes.

My next request for the "History" section focuses on revising the first half of the "1998 to 2013" sub-section, focusing on events between 1998-2007.

Could I please suggest:

• For the paragraph referring to business dealings involving Informa between 1998-2006 to be tidied. It currently:

• Is hard to follow.

• Uses incorrect tenses.

• Includes tangential information i.e. the cost of acquiring IIR Holdings, Springer's share price offer to purchase Informa.

• I have also added a new citation to support Informa's rejection of Springer's offer as the Forbes article leads to a dead link.

• Removal of the paragraph about Richard Hooper's replacement by Peter Rigby.

• The Forbes references which are used to cite this paragraph are dead links, and unavailable on the Wayback Machine. There is limited third-party press reporting on this change, which perhaps indicates it is does meet Wikipedia's notability criteria.

• Additionally, I cannot find reliable and verified mention of these positional changes creating controversy with the UK's Combined Code on Corporate Governance, which may be synthesis by a historic editor.

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

1998 to 2013

Informa itself was created in 1998 by the merger of IBC Group plc (formerly International Business Communications) and LLP Group plc (publisher of Lloyd's List). Since then Informa has expanded considerably, including a 2003 purchase of PJB publisher PJB, 2004 merger with the publishing company Taylor & Francis and a 2005 acquisition of IIR Holdings, a human capital development company, for £768 million. In 2004, Informa merged with academic publisher Taylor & Francis, followed in 2005 with the acquisition of IIR Holdings.

In October 2006, the company was approached by Springer Science and Business Media in a takeover bid, but in early November the Informa board rejected the 630p per share offer. as too low.

In early 2007, chairman Richard Hooper announced his retirement in May and, after consulting with major shareholders, the company moved chief executive Peter Rigby to chairman, and managing director David Gilbertson to Rigby's former post. Informa explained Rigby's move by the need to maintain management stability, although it generated some controversy because it did not follow the advice of the UK's Combined Code on Corporate Governance.

References

Thanks again for all looking into my request. HisNamesJim (talk) 17:33, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi - I would prefer to retain the first sentence as it is as it seems to contain some important historical information about the background of the two companies. I am OK to substitute your sentence on Taylor & Francis and IRR. I am also content to trim the paragraph about the Springer bid. I would prefer to retain the first sentence about the change of management, but would be OK to drop the second sentence if other editors do not object. Dormskirk (talk) 18:29, 26 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi @Dormskirk and hope you have had a good start to the year. Your suggestions seem sensible to me.

Would you be happy to implement the changes in light of the continued backlog with the COI queue and lack of response here? Thanks for considering and for your feedback so far! HisNamesJim (talk) 16:29, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Done. Dormskirk (talk) 17:17, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

History Section Request 4

Hi there and thank you Dormskirk for reviewing my last request.

My next request involves revising the first half of the "2014 to present" subsection, covering the period 2014-2022.

• Could I please suggest the addition of notable events including:

• Informa's entry to the FTSE100 in 2016.

• Well-publicised business dealings including acquisitions i.e. Penton in September 2016 and divestments i.e. the company's intelligence businesses in early 2022.

• The company's response to the Covid pandemic.

• The change in company chairman in June 2021.

• I have also found three replacement citations for:

• The Dove Medical Press acquisition,

• The sale of UBM Life Sciences,

• The launch of Omdia as the ones on the live article are broken links.

• Removal of tangential information about the launch of Omdia.

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

In January 2014, Carter became CEO of Informa plc. In 2016 Informa entered the FTSE 100.

In September 2016, Informa acquired Penton followed by Yachting Promotions Inc. in March 2017.

In September 2017, Informa announced that it would be acquiring Dove Medical Press.

In January 2018, Informa announced its intent to acquire UBM plc as part of its strategy to expand in North America and Asia. The transaction was completed in June 2018.

In 2019, Informa sold the former UBM Life Sciences to MJH Associates. Later in 2019, Informa traded its Agriculture Intelligence unit to IHS Markit in exchange for most of IHS Markit's Technology, Media and Telecoms division. Also in 2019, Informa sold the former Penton design & engineering, manufacturing, energy, buildings, and commercial vehicle divisions, and the former UBM Automotive, to Endeavor Business Media.

In January 2020 Informa acquired F1000 Research Limited.

In February 2020, Informa launched Omdia by consolidating its portfolio of market analyst companies, Ovum Ltd, Heavy Reading, Tractica, and the majority of IHS Markit's technology, media and telecommunications research business, into a unified brand. The combined research offering includes more than 400 analysts and consultants covering 150 technology markets. Collectively, Omdia issues over 3,000 research reports annually.

Informa's in-person events were impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic, with many in-person events being cancelled or postponed. Informa's response included a move to virtual events and a focus on its subscription-based and digital products.

In June 2021, John Rishton was appointed as chairman, replacing Derek Mapp.

In December 2021 Informa announced a programme to divest its intelligence businesses. In February 2022, Informa sold its Informa Pharma Intelligence unit to investment fund, Warburg Pincus for $2.6 billion. Following the sale of their intelligence unit, Informa launched a share buyback programme.

It also sold Lloyd's List and EPFR to Montagu Private Equity in 2022.

References

Thanks to those looking into my request! HisNamesJim (talk) 14:20, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Looks OK to me but I will let other editors comment. Dormskirk (talk) 14:50, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi Dormskirk and hope you are well.

Considering the continued backlog and lack of further input, would you feel comfortable actioning the changes? Thanks for considering and appreciate the time you always take to review my requests! HisNamesJim (talk) 12:15, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Done. Dormskirk (talk) 14:35, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

History Section Request 5

Hi there and thank you once again Dormskirk for your continued feedback.

My next request involves adding details related to notable acquisitions/partnerships covering the period 2022 to present. These cover:

• Partnerships in Saudi Arabia and Dubai.

• Acquisition of Winsight.

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

It also sold Lloyd's List and EPFR to Montagu Private Equity in 2022.

In November 2022, Informa launched a joint venture, Tahaluf, partnered with the Saudi Federation for Cybersecurity, Programming and Drones (SAFCSP). In July 2023, Saudi Arabia's Events Investment Fund acquired a stake in Tahaluf.

In March 2023, in a cash and shares deal, Informa acquired the Irish Tarsus Group from Charterhouse Capital Partners for a reported GBP 790m.

In May 2023, Informa acquired catering industry events and media group Winsight.

In January 2024, Informa announced that it would merge the digital business of Informa Tech with TechTarget. The resulting company would keep the TechTarget name with Informa holding 57% stake and the existing TechTarget shareholders holding 43% stake in the merged TechTarget. The merger was completed with the business became Informa TechTarget in December 2024.

In June 2024, Informa closed two UK-based titles: Digital TV Europe and Television Business International.

In July 2024, the company reached a deal to acquire media and events company Ascential for approximately £1.2 billion. The transaction was completed in October 2024.

In January 2026, Informa confirmed its partnership agreement with Dubai World Trade Centre creating a new business inD.

References

Thanks for considering my request! HisNamesJim (talk) 16:09, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Much of the above is unsourced and needs further work. Dormskirk (talk) 16:11, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi Dormskirk and apologies for any misunderstanding.

I only added in the references for information which I was proposing to be added, however have now also added those on the existing "live" page. Thanks again for reviewing! HisNamesJim (talk) 16:22, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

That looks better, thanks. I will let others take a look. Dormskirk (talk) 16:34, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Reply 20-JUN-2026

  H:WIKILINKs requested  

1. Additional meaningfulness would be brought to the reader by having knowledge that these other associations—Tahaluf, Saudi Federation for Cybersecurity, Programming and Drones, Saudi Arabia's Events Investment Fund, Digital TV Europe, Television Business International and Dubai World Trade Center—are independently notable in Wikipedia. Without such knowledge, its inclusion here runs the risk of raising issues related to WP:COATRACK and WP:CHERRY.
2. To assuage those concerns, kindly provide the H:WIKILINKs for Tahaluf, Saudi Federation for Cybersecurity, Programming and Drones, Saudi Arabia's Events Investment Fund, Digital TV Europe, Television Business International and Dubai World Trade Center.
3. When ready to proceed with the requested information, kindly change the {{Edit COI}} template's answer parameter to read from |ans=y to |ans=n.

Regards,  Spintendo  19:02, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for your input, and Wikilinks have been added. HisNamesJim (talk) 13:48, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi Dormskirk and Spintendo. Hope both of you are well. Now that I've carried out the formatting changes, is this request now okay to be actioned? Thank you. HisNamesJim (talk) 09:07, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

OK with me if Spintendo is content. Dormskirk (talk) 09:21, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Innovations for Poverty Action

Edit request

I am a communications staff member at Innovations for Poverty Action (IPA) suggesting the following changes to the organization's Wikipedia page.

1. Specific text to be added or removed: IPA has worked with over 400 academics to conduct over 900 evaluations in 52 countries.

Replace with: IPA has worked with over 1,800 researchers to conduct over 1,000 evaluations across Africa, Asia, and Latin America & the Caribbean.

Reason for the change: The current figures are outdated. The proposed text reflects the most recent statistics published by IPA in its 2025 Annual Report.

References supporting change: https://ipa.shorthandstories.com/2025-annual-report/

2. Specific text to be added or removed: in sectors including microfinance, education, health, peace and recovery, governance, agriculture, social protection, and small and medium enterprises.

Replace with: in sectors including financial inclusion, health, education, peace & recovery, social protection, and others.

Reason for the change: The proposed text updates the list of sectors to better reflect IPA's current primary areas of expertise, based on the organization's current Sectoral Expertise page.

References supporting change: https://poverty-action.org/sectoral-expertise

3. Specific text to be added or removed: IPA is headquartered in Washington, DC, and has offices in New York, Washington, D.C., as well as offices in Africa, Asia and South America.

Replace with: IPA has offices in New York and Washington, D.C., as well as offices in Africa, Asia, and Latin America and the Caribbean.

Reason for the change: The proposed text removes the reference to a single headquarters, as IPA no longer identifies any office as its headquarters. It also updates the regional description to reflect the organization's current geographic presence.

References supporting change: https://poverty-action.org/where-we-work

4. Specific text to be added or removed: As of 2021, the organization is led by executive director Annie Duflo and has conducted 677 studies in 51 countries throughout the world.

Replace with: As of 2026, the organization is led by executive director Annie Duflo

Reason for the change: The proposed text removes redundant information already included in the lead section and updates the reference year for the current executive director.

References supporting change: https://www.linkedin.com/in/annie-duflo-4187981/

5. Specific text to be added or removed: In 2017, IPA and the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab received a $16 million grant from the UK Department for International Development to research policies that promote peace and support communities in areas recovering from conflict.

Replace with: None.

Reason for the change: The proposed edit removes a dated, event-specific detail that, whilke accurate, is no longer necessary for the article's overview and helps keep the content concise.

References supporting change: N/A.

MEgusquiza (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Instituto Superior de Ciências Policiais e Segurança Interna

Request to restore sourced expanded version and update obsolete information

I disclose that I have a professional connection with the Instituto Superior de Ciências Policiais e Segurança Interna (ISCPSI).

On 10 May 2026, a substantially expanded and sourced version of this article was added. That version relied on public and verifiable sources, including the Diário da República, DGES, SIPA and official institutional sources. It corrected outdated information, including the current director, the legal status of the institute, its mission, courses and heraldry.

On 17 June 2026, that version was reverted with the edit summary “Rv AI”. I understand the concern, but the article content was based on cited public sources and was not intended as promotional material.

I request that an uninvolved editor review the sourced version at oldid=1353454135 and consider restoring it, either fully or section by section. At minimum, I request that the following outdated information be corrected:

• Replace the obsolete image with File:ISCPSI logo 2026.png.
• Replace “President Superintendente Abílio Pinto Vieira” with the current director, Chief Superintendent Luís Manuel Peça Farinha, supported by Despacho n.º 10152/2023.
• Correct the establishment date and legal background using the cited Diário da República sources.
• Restore the sourced sections on legal status, mission, police officer training, heraldry and director.

Thank you. David Gonçalo Barreiros dos Santos Gomes (talk) 10:21, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Partly done: The infobox changes are restored. The sections that were removed can be seen in this diff if another editor wants to review Aloneinthewild (talk) 14:33, 27 June 2026 (UTC)

COI edit request: legal status and mission

I disclose again that I have a professional connection with the Instituto Superior de Ciências Policiais e Segurança Interna (ISCPSI). Following the partial implementation of the previous COI edit request, I would like to submit a narrower request concerning only the legal status and mission of the institute. I am not asking for the full expanded version to be restored at this stage. The current article is very short and does not explain the institute’s legal status or statutory mission. The proposed addition below is based on public and verifiable sources already used in the previous version of the article, especially Decree-Law No. 275/2009, of 2 October, Decree-Law No. 13/2022, of 12 January, and the Directorate-General for Higher Education registry. Suggested section to add after the lead:

Intel Capital

Request: update "RunPod" styling to "Runpod" in portfolio list

The portfolio section mentions "RunPod". The company changed its brand styling to "Runpod" (lowercase p), which is how its official site (https://www.runpod.io) and current independent coverage style it, e.g. the June 2026 financing coverage: "Runpod Raises $100M Led by Summit Partners" (https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/runpod-raises-100m-led-by-summit-partners-to-accelerate-the-ai-developer-cloud-302808689.html). Per MOS:TM (follow the styling used by current independent reliable sources), please update the visible mention to "Runpod". The existing 2024 reference and its title should stay as they are. Disclosure: I am a Runpod employee, per WP:PAID. Thank you. Dan.stotts (talk) 14:23, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

Intelligent agent

Proposal: add book to Further reading section

Conflict of interest disclosure: I am the author of the book referenced below. Per Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, I am proposing this change here rather than editing the article directly. Proposed addition: I'd like to suggest adding the following to the "Further reading" section: * Nagasubramanian, Dhivya. Agentic AI for Engineers. Apress/Springer, 2026. ISBN 979-8-8688-2360-2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/979-8-8688-2361-9 Why this is relevant: The book covers [topic — e.g., "agentic AI system design, intelligent agents,percieve-reason-act loop, safety, and enterprise deployment patterns"], which falls within the scope of this article. Independent evidence of notability/relevance: ["The book has been adopted in to 266 libraries across the country https://search.worldcat.org/title/1584648098 " I'd appreciate any feedback from editors on whether this addition is appropriate. Happy to adjust the citation format or wording as needed. Rine7986 (talk) 02:43, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

---

← Previous page Next page→