User:Bawolff/Edit COI Summary/10 per page (newest first)/38

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

• Wyss Foundation
• Sentiment analysis
• Construction robots
• BELIMO Holding
• Kovas
• Dover Corporation
• Devilish Presley
• Ballarat Clarendon College
• Blancco Technology Group
• Wilh. Wilhelmsen

---

← Previous page Next page→

Wyss Foundation

Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering

On behalf of the Wyss Foundation, I propose adding mention of the organization's funding of the Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering. There are several recently published sources confirming the project, including Harvard. I propose adding:

• In 2019, Wyss contributed $131 million via the foundation to Harvard University's Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering.

References

This seems like a straightforward update, but I don't edit the main space directly so I'm seeking assistance from another editor to review and update the article on my behalf. Thanks for your consideration. Inkian Jason (talk) 20:16, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for updating the article. Inkian Jason (talk) 15:23, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Proposed edits to Conservation subsection

Hello! I'm here on behalf of the Wyss Foundation with an edit request. On August 28, an IP address editor added new text to the Conservation subsection. The new text claims that the Campaign for Nature is "highly criticized by indigenous rights groups, human rights organizations and the environmental movement" and is supported by two citations—a June post on a website called Open Democracy and a March article from the New York Times. Neither of these sources make any reference to the Wyss Foundation or Campaign for Nature. Both do, though, detail criticisms of the 30x30 initiative more generally.

It seems like a separate article about 30x30 would be a better place to detail endorsements and criticisms of the plan. That said, I can understand why some mention of criticisms would seem relevant here, so I've attempted to revise this paragraph so that more context is present about the Wyss Foundation's support for Indigenous-led conservation efforts. I have also replaced citations that linked to the Wyss Foundation website with third-party, reliable sources. Can someone please review this revised paragraph and, if they feel it meets Wikipedia requirements and improves the Wyss Foundation article, make the update?

New paragraph

In 2018, the Wyss Foundation launched the Wyss Campaign for Nature, pledging that it would donate $1 billion to the project. The campaign aims to protect 30% of the world's surface by 2030. The campaign is backed by the National Geographic Society and other international conservation organizations. The 30x30 plan has been criticized by some indigenous rights activists for potentially dispossessing human inhabitants from historically occupied land. Other tribal organizations and leaders have endorsed the initiative, however. The Wyss Foundation has financially supported Indigenous-led conservation efforts, including the effort to establish the Qat'Muk Central Purcell Mountains Indigenous Protected and Conserved Area in British Columbia, the Dehcho First Nations-led management plan for the Edéhzhíe National Wildlife Area in the Northwest Territories, and the Indigenous-led Gayini conservation project, a sustainable conservation area in Australia’s Murray Darling Basin. The foundation also supported the retirement of oil and gas leases within the Badger-Two Medicine area of the Lewis and Clark National Forest in support of a Blackfeet-led "Traditional Cultural District".

References

Thank you. ZH for Wyss Foundation (talk) 18:18, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

ZH, I answered you on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Protected areas talk page why I am unable to help despite my commitment to Indigenous conservation efforts. I also want to mention here that to remove criticism from this article to a new one may run the risk of violating WP:NPOV and WP:WEIGHT. Netherzone (talk) 18:18, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for following up here, too, Netherzone. I've replied in full at the WikiProject but did want to underscore here that my request above is definitely not to remove criticism. I am okay with including criticism so long as it is clear what the criticism was about. The language on the page now says that the Foundation's Campaign for Nature was "highly criticized by indigenous rights groups, human rights organizations and the environmental movement." But neither of the sources cited make any reference to the Wyss Foundation or Campaign for Nature, though both do detail criticisms of the 30x30 initiative more generally. If the other details in my draft are considered promotional, then I understand not including them, but could the wording about the criticism still be addressed? ZH for Wyss Foundation (talk) 20:34, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

I did some work on this in the article. Novellasyes (talk) 22:45, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Novellasyes. The edits resolve my concerns about the text, so I have marked this request as being answered. Many thanks. ZH for Wyss Foundation (talk) 17:55, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Proposed edits to infobox

Hello! I'm here on behalf of the Wyss Foundation with another edit request. Looking at other foundation pages on Wikipedia, I noticed that there is more information about the Wyss Foundation that can be included in the infobox table to give readers a quick reference for key facts.

The items I'd like to ask editors to add are:

1. The organization's logo: I've uploaded it to Wikipedia here File:Wyss Foundation logo.png
2. Type: Private foundation, non-profit
3. Legal status: 501(c)(3)
4. Purpose: Conservation, education, advocacy
5. Area served: Worldwide

References

Aside from the type and legal status, the other details are covered in the overall Wikipedia article, so I have not provided specific references for them. Can someone please review and make these additions if they are appropriate?

Thank you. ZH for Wyss Foundation (talk) 15:48, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Partly done: (please ping on reply) Happy Editing--IAmChaos

 Not done for now: Pending a rationale for use. See the image page which states: Please add a detailed non-free use rationale for each article the image is used in, which must also declare compliance with the other parts of the non-free content criteria, as well as the source of the work and copyright information. See the image page for more links and information. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 05:00, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

@ZH for Wyss Foundation: The proposed image above has been deleted, so I am closing this request as answered. If you would like to propose another image, or upload this image with the appropriate rationale, please open a new request below and a reviewer will determine if it should be included in the article. Z1720 (talk) 13:08, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Follow-up for logo

Hello! I am here on behalf of the Wyss Foundation with a follow-up to my last edit request. Thanks so much to IAmChaos for making the infobox changes, and thanks to Z1720 for the nudge about the logo.

The logo is re-uploaded and I've taken care to fill in the fair use rationale: File:Wyss Foundation logo.png

The note about the rationale on the image page seems to be pro-forma and it looks like someone needs to review the image and confirm that the rationale is complete. I noticed last time that if it hasn't been added to an article then it gets deleted very quickly. Could someone please review the image and add it to the article so that it doesn't get deleted again?

Also, can the Purpose parameter be added to the infobox, with the following listed: Conservation, education, advocacy

Can someone please review and make these additions if they are appropriate?

Thank you. ZH for Wyss Foundation (talk) 20:23, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Notes for this edit request:

• Added the logo to the page after checking the rationale.
•  Not done the Purpose parameter, as a source was not provided, and purpose is not explicitly stated in the article.

Closing edit request as answered. Z1720 (talk) 21:30, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Question about second paragraph

Hi there. I work at the Wyss Foundation and I have a question about the second paragraph in the introduction section.

My understanding is that the introduction of a Wikipedia article is intended to summarize key points from the body of the article. I asked Mathglot, Tarlby, and other editors at the Wikipedia Teahouse, and they confirmed that this is correct.

The second paragraph in this article's introduction currently concerns a separate organization, the Berger Action Fund.

Although the Berger Action Fund and the Wyss Foundation are affiliated, they are in fact different organizations. It thus doesn't make sense to have half of the introduction to the Wyss Foundation Wikipedia entry be about a different entity, especially as the information about Berger is never referenced again in the body of the article.

Could editors move this material to the Political advocacy section, maybe as the fourth paragraph? The information about Berger's relationship with Wyss could then be briefly summarized in the introduction. (Maybe: "The Wyss Foundation has an associated 501(c)(4) advocacy group called the Berger Action Fund that shares facilities and staff and has faced scrutiny.")

Thank you for reviewing this request. Please let me know if you have any questions. I'll try to answer as soon as I can. ZH for Wyss Foundation (talk) 21:51, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

This makes total sense to me, and I've implemented your request. Any other editor may contest it, if they wish. If so, please ping me so I can read the rationale. Thanks, MediaKyle (talk) 23:57, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for looking into this, MediaKyle. ZH for Wyss Foundation (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Why is the Wyss Foundation having any say in this article? ~2026-53805-7 (talk) 12:15, 16 February 2026 (UTC)

Edit Requests for March 2026

I have suggestions for correcting inaccuracies on this page. I have a WP:COI as an employee of the Wyss Foundation and am submitting these suggestions for review by independent editors.

1. What I think should be changed:

In the Political Advocacy section, beneath “The Hub Project” subsection, please replace the first sentence of the first paragraph:

Change from:

In 2015, the Wyss Foundation funded the establishment of The Hub Project, which seeks to help the Democratic Party be more effective at conveying their arguments through the news media and directly to voters, and to shift "...the public debate and policy positions of core decision makers".

Change to:

In 2015, the Wyss Foundation funded the establishment of The Hub Project. According to a 2021 article in The New York Times, the group was created partly to shape media coverage to help Democratic causes, and its 2015 business plan said it would work behind the scenes to “dramatically shift the public debate and policy positions of core decision makers.”

Why: The cited NYT source does not support this wording. The article doesn’t state that The Hub Project seeks to help the Democratic Party, which is a formal organization. Instead, it states that the group formed “partly to shape media coverage to help Democratic causes.” Converting “Democratic causes” to the “Democratic Party” with no supporting source constitutes WP:OR. The suggested replacement accurately reflects the scope of The Hub Project’s work as described in the source. This is a very serious error. There are major legal limitations around directly supporting political parties and Wikipedia, unlike the NYT, is not properly making this distinction.

2. What I think should be changed:

In the Political Advocacy section, beneath “The Hub Project” subsection, please replace the second sentence of the first paragraph:

Change from:

The Hub Project is part of Arabella Advisors, a leading vehicle for funneling "dark money" on the political left.

Change to:

The Hub Project is part of a network of funds managed by Arabella Advisors that the New York Times characterized as a major channel for “dark money” spending on the political left.

Why: Subjective language like “funneling” has been rewritten in a neutral manner and I’ve attributed “dark money” directly to the source.

3. In the Political advocacy section, please delete the first paragraph:

The organisation funds Democratic Party political causes through Arabella Advisors and its related entities.

Why: The cited NYT source does not support this wording. The NYT article doesn’t state that the Wyss Foundation funds any organization that is part of the Democratic Party, which is a formal organization. Instead, it states that the groups it funds help “Democratic causes” and help “advance progressive policy initiatives and the Democrats who support them.” Converting “Democratic causes” to the “Democratic Party” with no supporting source constitutes WP:OR. This is a very serious error. There are major legal limitations around directly supporting political parties and Wikipedia, unlike the NYT, is not properly making this distinction.

4. What I think should be changed:

In the Lead section, please replace the second sentence of the first paragraph:

Change from:

The Wyss Foundation funds conservation efforts as well as Democratic Party political causes through Arabella Advisors and its related entities.

Change to:

The Wyss Foundation funds conservation efforts as well as progressive causes through Arabella Advisors and its related entities.

Why: As discussed in items 1 and 3, the Democratic Party is not named in the New York Times article. Wikipedia is conflating causes with support for a formal political party. This should be corrected in the Lead, just as in the body of the article.

Thank you for reviewing. JQDC (talk) 17:59, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

References

Not being American, I have no skin in the game, but the articles do talk quite a lot about supporting Democrats, so does this not favour the Democrat Party? (I will leave US editors to apply their judgement to these requests.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 05:25, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

I had the same thought when I first saw this. Marquardtika, could I trouble you for your opinion? This has been open for awhile now. MediaKyle (talk) 19:35, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

I don't think we should implement this COI request. The NYT says "The organization, called The Hub Project, was started in 2015 by one of Mr. Wyss’s charitable organizations, the Wyss Foundation, partly to shape media coverage to help Democratic causes." Also "Hansjörg Wyss, who recently dropped his bid to buy Tribune Publishing, has been a leading source of difficult-to-trace money to groups associated with Democrats" and "Newly obtained tax filings show that two of Mr. Wyss’s organizations, a foundation and a nonprofit fund, donated $208 million from 2016 through early last year to three other nonprofit funds that doled out money to a wide array of groups that backed progressive causes and helped Democrats in their efforts to win the White House and control of Congress last year." The NYT is clearly saying he is giving money to groups supporting the Democratic Party, not just "democratic causes". Marquardtika (talk) 13:10, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Sentiment analysis

Proposed addition: Literary and narrative analysis subsection

Disclosure: As noted on my user page (User:J2000ai#Conflict of interest), I have a conflict of interest regarding the Sentiment analysis article as co-developer of SentimentArcs and co-author (with Katherine Elkins) of related publications, including The Shapes of Stories: Sentiment Analysis for Narrative (Cambridge University Press, 2022). I will not edit the article directly and am proposing this via talk page per WP:COI.

I suggest adding the following new subsection to cover literary and narrative uses of sentiment analysis, an emerging application area documented in peer-reviewed sources and mainstream coverage (e.g., The Atlantic, MIT Technology Review). This would fit well as a new ==== Literary and narrative analysis ==== level-4 subsection, potentially under an existing "Applications"-related area (e.g., expanding from "Application in recommender systems" or as a standalone if no broad "Applications" section exists yet; the current article structure has application-focused content in sections like Web 2.0 and recommender systems, so this complements them by addressing computational literary criticism).

Proposed text (to insert as ==== Literary and narrative analysis ====):

Literary and narrative analysis

Sentiment analysis has been applied to literary studies to trace how emotional valence changes across the arc of a narrative, rather than classifying a document's overall polarity. Reagan et al. (2016) used sentiment analysis on over 1,300 Project Gutenberg novels to identify six core emotional trajectories that recur across fiction, a finding covered in The Atlantic and MIT Technology Review. Beginning in 2019, Katherine Elkins and Jon Chun applied diachronic sentiment analysis to literary texts using a hybrid computational and close reading approach, demonstrating that novels traditionally considered plotless exhibit underlying emotional structures. Chun developed SentimentArcs, the first comprehensive ensemble framework for diachronic sentiment analysis, combining over three dozen sentiment models, and Elkins developed the methodology for applying SentimentArcs to literature in The Shapes of Stories: Sentiment Analysis for Narrative (Cambridge University Press, 2022). The methodology has since been extended to political speeches, film, social media narratives, and fairy tales. A 2023 critical survey in Digital Humanities Quarterly examined the growing use of sentiment analysis tools in literary studies, evaluating six representative methods and their applicability to literary texts.

Thanks for considering this addition. J2000ai (talk) 15:37, 23 March 2026 (UTC) J2000ai (talk) 15:37, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

Construction robots

COI edit request: expansion of "Earthmoving" section

Before submitting this request, I substantially expanded all the article (diff). I did not edit the Earthmoving section directly due to my conflict of interest with one of the companies mentioned — Bedrock Robotics. I am now asking an independent editor to review this proposed addition to the Earthmoving section – a balanced overview covering all major market players.

Proposed expanded text for Earthmoving

• In 2008, Komatsu Limited deployed the FrontRunner Autonomous Haulage System (AHS) at the Gabriela Mistral copper mine operated by Codelco in Chile — the world's first commercial autonomous haulage deployment. Driverless dump trucks equipped with GPS, radar, and collision detection transported material without human operators.

• Between 2019 and 2021, Mortenson Construction and Black & Veatch were among the first construction contractors to deploy autonomous excavation technology on commercial projects, using systems developed by Built Robotics. Mortenson used the technology for wind turbine foundation excavation in Colorado. Black & Veatch deployed autonomous excavators on a solar energy project in Florida, digging 1,000 linear feet of trenches.

• In 2025, Sundt Construction carried out mass excavation at a 130-acre industrial site in Arizona: Caterpillar excavators equipped with retrofit kits developed by Bedrock Robotics — comprising LiDAR, cameras, and onboard computing systems — operated autonomously, moving over 65,000 cubic yards of earth and rock. This was described as the industry's largest-known supervised autonomy deployment at the time.

References

Wiki Markup (to copy + paste)

* In 2008, [[Komatsu Limited]] deployed the FrontRunner Autonomous Haulage System (AHS) at the Gabriela Mistral copper mine operated by [[Codelco]] in Chile — the world's first commercial autonomous haulage deployment. Driverless dump trucks equipped with GPS, radar, and collision detection transported material without human operators.<ref>{{Cite web |no-tracking=true|title=Komatsu FrontRunner hits milestone |url=https://www.miningmagazine.com/fleets/news/1351723/komatsu-frontrunner-hits-milestone |work=Mining Magazine |date=2018-11-23 |access-date=2026-03-22}}</ref>

* Between 2019 and 2021, [[Mortenson Construction]] and [[Black & Veatch]] were among the first construction contractors to deploy autonomous excavation technology on commercial projects, using systems developed by [[Built Robotics]]. Mortenson used the technology for wind turbine foundation excavation in Colorado. Black & Veatch deployed autonomous excavators on a solar energy project in Florida, digging 1,000 linear feet of trenches.<ref>{{Cite news |no-tracking=true|last=Liebeskind |first=Ken |title=Construction Jobs Accelerate With Autonomous Robot Use |url=https://www.constructionequipmentguide.com/construction-jobs-accelerate-with-autonomous-robot-use/51398 |work=Construction Equipment Guide |date=2021-02-25 |access-date=2026-03-22}}</ref>

* In 2025, Sundt Construction carried out mass excavation at a 130-acre industrial site in Arizona: [[Caterpillar Inc.|Caterpillar]] excavators equipped with retrofit kits developed by Bedrock Robotics — comprising LiDAR, cameras, and onboard computing systems — operated autonomously, moving over 65,000 cubic yards of earth and rock. <ref>{{Cite web |no-tracking=true|title=Bedrock Robotics Moves Earth with Autonomous Excavators |url=https://www.enr.com/articles/62211-bedrock-robotics-moves-earth-with-autonomous-excavators |work=Engineering News-Record |date=2025-12-15 |access-date=2026-03-22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260322091304/https://www.enr.com/articles/62211-bedrock-robotics-moves-earth-with-autonomous-excavators |archive-date=2026-03-22}}</ref> This was described as the industry's largest-known supervised autonomy deployment at the time.<ref>{{Cite web |no-tracking=true|last=Waldschmidt |first=Jordanne |title=Bedrock Robotics Deploys Industry's Largest Supervised Autonomous Excavator Test |url=https://www.equipmentworld.com/equipment-controls/autonomous/article/15772863/bedrock-robotics-leads-major-autonomous-excavation-push |work=Equipment World |date=2025-12-03 |access-date=2026-03-22 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260212111317/https://www.equipmentworld.com/equipment-controls/autonomous/article/15772863/bedrock-robotics-leads-major-autonomous-excavation-push |archive-date=2026-02-12}}</ref>

Thank you for your time and consideration! Alexandra Goncharik ^-sms- 10:17, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

@Nirmaljoshi: Hello Nirmaljoshi, Would you have time to review an edit request above? You appear to be the creator this article and my fellow-participant in WikiProject Engineering, so I decided to ping you. I recently expanded the article substantially, restructuring all sections and adding sourced coverage of notable deployments.

Your original references to Japanese articles, books, and research sent me down an unexpected path: I ended up finding 1988 symposium proceedings describing the MARK robot, which was already finishing concrete floors autonomously in 1984 — the year I was born. Amazing! I tracked down the original PDF from the IAARC archive and added it to the article.

Thank you for laying the foundation! No pressure at all regarding my request. I just thought you might find it interesting. Alexandra Goncharik ^-sms- 10:42, 22 March 2026 (UTC)

BELIMO Holding

Add logo

I would like to add the Belimo logo that it looks like all the other pages but it somehow doesn't work. I tried it with this: | Logo =

It does work in German but not in English...

• What I think should be changed: The History section, after the sentence "The company was founded in 1975 as BELIMO Automation AG in the Swiss town of Gossau, Zürich". Add a sentence: In January 1975, Walter Burkhalter, Heinz Hutte, Walter Linsi, and Karl Stocker had a meeting where they decided to establish Belimo. The founders had worked together at Magnet Regelsystem GmbH (MRS) in Stuttgart, Germany.
• Why it should be changed: To supplement information on Belimo's founders.
• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

Tminhng (talk) 18:22, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Done Discourses on Livvy (talk · contribs) 19:27, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

References

• What I think should be changed: Adding 3 sentences

1. After the sentence "In the meantime, BELIMO Automation AG became a public company in 1995.", please add: In 1997, Belimo assembled its 10-millionth actuator and co-founder Heinz Hutte retires from all duties at age 65.

2. After the sentence "In 1998, the company's name was changed to BELIMO Holding AG.", please add: In 1999, co-founder and CEO Walter Burkhalter retires at the age of 66. He is succeeded by Dr. Andreas Steiner from the company ABB.

3. After the sentence "International expansion continued into the 2000s, with the establishment of subsidiaries in Singapore, Poland, Sweden, Australia, India and China.", please add: In 2000, the Technology department was founded as a corporate division headed by Peter Schmidlin.

• Why it should be changed: Adding historical context to the lives of Belimo's co-founders (Heinz Hutte, Walter Burkhalter) and organizational structure changes since Belimo's founding.
• References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

Tminhng (talk) 20:20, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

References

Kovas

Requested updates — outdated article (2020+)

Hello — I am disclosing that I have a connection to the subject of this article per WP:COI. The article has not been updated since approximately 2020 and is missing several verifiable facts, including a major award, multiple credits, and an inaccurate infobox. I am providing suggested changes below with reliable sources for each. I am requesting that a neutral editor review and apply these at their discretion.

1. Infobox — Occupations are inaccurate

Current: Rapper, actor, record producer

Suggested: Film and television composer, record producer, songwriter, recording artist, voice actor

Rationale: KOVAS's primary professional activity since 2018 has been film and television scoring, with 38 episodes of On My Block (Netflix), The Crossover (Disney+), Lil Kev (BET+), and numerous other series and films. The current infobox does not list "composer" at all. "Rapper" is not accurate to his current or primary career.

Source: IMDb — KOVAS, musicbykovas.com/projects

---

2. Lead paragraph — Rewrite to reflect current career

Current opening:

Kovasciar Myvette (born August 1, 1985), known professionally as KOVAS, is an American songwriter, record producer, music composer, and recording artist of Spanish and French descent (Central America and Morocco).

Suggested opening:

Kovasciar Myvette (born August 1, 1985), known professionally as KOVAS, is an American composer, record producer, songwriter, and recording artist of Central American, Moroccan, French, and Spanish heritage, raised in Brooklyn, New York. He is known for his work as a film and television composer, with credits including the Netflix series On My Block (38 episodes) and Freeridge, the Disney+ series The Crossover (which won a Children's and Family Emmy Award in 2023), and the BET+ animated series Lil Kev. He won a Clio Award in 2017 for his work on a Dunkin' Donuts campaign.

Sources:

• Emmy Award: Television Academy — Winners Database (search "The Crossover" 2023)
• Clio Award: Clio Awards — KOVAS winner page (already cited as Ref [2])
• On My Block 38 episodes: IMDb
• Heritage correction: IMDb Bio

---

3. Emmy Award — Completely missing

The article does not mention that The Crossover (Disney+), for which KOVAS composed the score, won a Children's and Family Emmy Award in 2023 for Outstanding Young Adult or Children's Series. The series also received additional Emmy nominations.

Suggested addition (Awards section or body):

In 2023, the Disney+ series The Crossover, for which KOVAS composed the score, won a Children's and Family Emmy Award for Outstanding Young Adult or Children's Series. The series received multiple Emmy nominations.

Note: This is an award won by the show. KOVAS composed the score. Do NOT phrase as "KOVAS won an Emmy" — the award was for the series, not individual music composition.

Source: Television Academy — Winners Database

---

4. NAACP Award — Completely missing

The Paramount+ film Fantasy Football, for which KOVAS composed the score, won an NAACP Image Award.

Suggested addition:

The Paramount+ film Fantasy Football (2022), scored by KOVAS, won an NAACP Image Award.

Note: The NAACP Award was won by the film/director. KOVAS composed the score. Do NOT phrase as "KOVAS won an NAACP Award."

Source: NAACP Image Awards — official records / ceremony coverage

---

5. After Jackie — Emmy-Nominated Documentary (missing from accolades)

The History Channel documentary After Jackie (2022), for which KOVAS composed the score, received an Emmy nomination.

Suggested addition:

After Jackie (2022), a History Channel documentary scored by KOVAS, received an Emmy Award nomination.

Note: The Emmy nomination was for the documentary as a production. KOVAS composed the score.

Source: IMDb — After Jackie

---

6. Missing film and television credits (2021–2025)

The following verifiable credits are absent from the article:

Title	Network/Platform	Year	Role	Source
The Crossover	Disney+	2023	Composer	IMDb
Freeridge	Netflix	2023	Composer	IMDb
Boo, Bitch	Netflix	2022	Composer	IMDb
Lil Kev	BET+	2025	Composer	IMDb
After Jackie	History Channel	2022	Composer	IMDb (Emmy-nominated documentary)
Triumph: Jesse Owens	UNINTERRUPTED	2024	Composer, Music Supervisor	IMDb
Real Stories of Basketball	Vice TV	2024	Composer	IMDb
Empire Waist	Film	2024	Composer	IMDb
30 for 30	ESPN	2025	Additional Music	IMDb
Fantasy Football	Paramount+	2022	Composer	IMDb

All credits are verifiable via IMDb (already cited on the article).

---

7. GTA IV voice acting — Missing

KOVAS provided a voice role in the video game Grand Theft Auto IV (Rockstar Games, 2008). This is not mentioned on the article.

Source: IMDb — KOVAS

---

8. Taylor Swift VMA — Clarify year and award

Current: "He scored the music for the opening music sequence of Taylor Swift's 'I Knew You Were Trouble' MTV VMA Award-winning music video"

Suggested: "He scored the opening music sequence for Taylor Swift's 'I Knew You Were Trouble' music video, which won Best Female Video at the 2013 MTV Video Music Awards."

Rationale: Adding the year and correct award category (Best Female Video, not Video of the Year) provides accurate context.

---

9. CoverGirl campaigns — Third campaign missing

The article mentions CoverGirl commercials featuring Queen Latifah and Drew Barrymore directed by Hype Williams. A third campaign featuring Pink, Janelle Monáe, and Sofia Vergara, also directed by Hype Williams, is not mentioned.

Source: IMDb — KOVAS

---

10. Captain Phillips — Add context

Current: "His song 'Up in Here' is featured on the Chocolate Swim, Cartoon Network's Adult Swim compilation as well as the Oscar nominated film Captain Phillips."

Suggested: "His song 'Up in Here' appears on the soundtrack of Captain Phillips (2013), the Academy Award-nominated film directed by Paul Greengrass and starring Tom Hanks."

Rationale: Proper formatting and context for a major film credit.

---

11. Heritage description — Minor fix

Current: "of Spanish and French descent (Central America and Morocco)"

Suggested: "of Central American, Moroccan, French, and Spanish heritage, raised in Brooklyn, New York"

Rationale: The current phrasing is grammatically awkward and doesn't clearly communicate the full heritage.

---

12. ASCAP membership

KOVAS is a member of ASCAP (performing rights organization). This is standard biographical information for composers on Wikipedia.

Source: ASCAP ACE Repertory (searchable)

---

Thank you for reviewing these suggested changes. All sources cited are either already referenced on the article (IMDb, Clio Awards) or are verifiable official databases (Television Academy, NAACP Image Awards, ASCAP). I have not edited the article directly per COI guidelines.

NovJulie (talk) 01:53, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

--- NovJulie (talk) 01:53, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Dover Corporation

Suggested Rewrite of Dover Corporation Page

Jkrzysik (talk) 20:19, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I reviewed, modified and moved content to article in these edits: original draft by user Jkrzysik, modifications by me, incorporated into article (et seq.). Comments are welcome. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:35, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Suggested Updates to Dover Corporation opening paragraph

Wikipedia Editing Team,

On behalf of Dover Corporation I am requesting edits to the opening paragraph of the article to improve its accuracy and update the references. Please see the suggested edits and references below.

First Paragraph:

1. Current Sentence: Dover Corporation is an American conglomerate manufacturer of industrial products.[6] →a. Suggested Reference Update:

2. Current Sentence: Founded in 1955 in New York City,[1] Dover is now based in Downers Grove, Illinois,[6] and employs more than 26,000 people worldwide.[1] →a. Suggested sentence: Founded in 1955, Dover is now based in Downers Grove, Illinois, and employs more than 23,000 people worldwide. →b.

3. Current Sentence: As of 2014, Dover's business was divided into three segments: Engineered Systems, Fluids, and Refrigeration and Food Equipment.[6] →a. Suggested sentence: As of 2021, Dover's business was divided into five segments: Engineered Products, Fueling Solutions, Imaging & Identification, Pumps & Process Solutions and Refrigeration & Food Equipment. →b.

4. Current Sentence: Each segment holds operating companies that are run like independent companies. →a. Remove this sentence as no published reference can be found to support it.

5. Current Sentence: Dover is a constituent of the S&P 500 index and trades on the New York Stock Exchange under "DOV". →a. Suggested Reference Update:

6. Current Sentence: Dover is ranked 360th on the Fortune 500.[5] →a. Suggested sentence: Dover was ranked 433rd in the 2020 Fortune 500. →b.

7. Current Sentence: The company relocated its headquarters to Illinois from New York in mid-2010.[8] →a. Suggested Reference Update:

Please let me know if you have any questions or require any clarification.

Kindest Regards,

Lisa Moloney, Global Communications Manager OPW, A Dover Company

LisaMoloney (talk) 18:38, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: Obvious PR. Quetstar (talk) 04:06, 30 June 2021 (UTC)

References

Requested updates to the financials in Dover's infobox

Wikipedia Editing Team,

On behalf of Dover Corporation I am requesting an update to the financials in Dover's infobox. The numbers listed there are from 2014 and 2013, and below I have provided the numbers from Dover's latest Form 10-K filing with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.

Bawolff/Edit COI Summary/10 per page (newest first)/38

Revenue	US$6,683.760 million (2020) US$7,136.397 million (2019)
Operating income	US$932.987 million (2020) US$974.894 million (2019)
Net income	US$683.451 million (2020) US$677.918 million (2019)
Total assets	US$9,152.074 million (2020) US$8,669.477 million (2019)
Total equity	US$3,385.773 million (2020) US$3,032.660 million (2019)

Please let me know if you have any questions or require any clarification.

Lisa Moloney, Global Communications Manager OPW, A Dover Company

LisaMoloney (talk) 13:39, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I wanted to see if our submission of updated financials was in the correct format or if there is anything else I can do to help provide clarification.

Lisa Moloney, Global Communications Manager OPW, A Dover Company

LisaMoloney (talk) 23:29, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done Rounded up, however. PK650 (talk) 09:22, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much for making this update. I just took over communications from Lisa and have posted a new request below. I'm hoping that the way I've structured this one is easier to follow. Would really appreciate any feedback you can provide. Thanks! SVeatch (talk) 18:06, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

References

Revisions to introduction

Hello editors! I am an employee of the Dover Corporation and am taking over Wikipedia communications from Lisa Moloney, who placed several requests in this space over the past two years. Like Lisa, I will be proposing requests for editors to review rather than making edits (due to my COI). I am going to try to format these requests differently, however. Looking over everything now, I think Lisa's requests were probably difficult to follow. To that end, I have prepared a revised version of the introduction below that I would love for editors to take a look at. This one captures most of the suggestions Lisa proposed in a previous request, but is hopefully easier to digest:

Revised introduction

Dover Corporation is an American conglomerate manufacturer of industrial products. The Downers Grove, Illinois-based company was founded in 1955. As of 2021, Dover's business was divided into five segments: Engineered Products, Fueling Solutions, Imaging & Identification, Pumps & Process Solutions and Refrigeration & Food Equipment. Dover is a constituent of the S&P 500 index and trades on the New York Stock Exchange under "DOV". The company relocated its headquarters to Illinois from New York in mid-2010. Dover was ranked 429th in the 2020 Fortune 500.

References

As you can see, this new intro is similar to the existing introduction. Here's a redline showing my edits vs the existing introduction:

Redline to show changes

Dover Corporation is an American conglomerate manufacturer of industrial products. Founded in 1955 in New York City, Dover is now based in Downers Grove, Illinois, and employs more than 26,000 people worldwide. The Downers Grove, Illinois-based company was founded in 1955. As of 20142021, Dover's business was divided into three five segments: Engineered Systems, Fluids, and Refrigeration and Food EquipmentEngineered Products, Fueling Solutions, Imaging & Identification, Pumps & Process Solutions and Refrigeration & Food Equipment. By 2020, there were five segments, with Imaging and Identification and Pumps and Process having been added. Each segment holds operating companies that are run like independent companies. Dover is a constituent of the S&P 500 index and trades on the New York Stock Exchange under "DOV". Dover was ranked 429th in the 2020 Fortune 500. The company relocated its headquarters to Illinois from New York in mid-2010.

References

The revision is similar to the existing introduction. The changes I've made are either to remove unnecessary sources and details, or bring information up-to-date as follows:

• Removed the source for the first sentence, as this is not needed.
• Slightly reworded the second sentence, as there is no source suggesting Dover was founded in New York City.
• Streamlined the next two sentences.
• Removed the mention of the number of employees. This changes fairly frequently; it seems best to just update the infobox table (see below).
• Removed the fifth sentence ("Each segment holds operating companies that are run like independent companies") as there's no support for this claim.
• Updated the citation for the company moving to Illinois, since the link was broken.

Finally, please can the number of employees in the infobox be updated to 24,000 which is our current employee figure listed on our website ()?

Please let me know if you have any questions about this request, which I hope can be easily implemented. SVeatch (talk) 18:05, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

User:PK650: I realized I did not tag you in the thank you note above, so apologies if you did not see that and thank you. Are you able to review this request? Any feedback you can provide would be very welcome. Thanks! SVeatch (talk) 17:55, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi. I'll try to have a look this week. PK650 (talk) 23:13, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

 Partly done: Thank you for your patience. The employment figure was changed to 23,000, according to the Forbes profile. PK650 (talk) 04:28, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

User:PK650: Thanks for your help so far. Just a few follow-up questions for you:

• I'm not sure if you saw, but it looks like there's a coding issue in the introduction now and one of the citations is appearing as part of the text. Are you able to fix that?
• Also, can you change the year for the employee number in the infobox as it is still showing as 2017?
• Lastly, I had included some new citations for the introduction in my draft above, I wanted to make sure you saw those? Especially the new citation for the company moving location: the existing link used now is broken and right now it goes to a totally different news article.

Thanks! SVeatch (talk) 15:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Hopefully that took care of it. Which citation is missing? PK650 (talk) 04:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you and sorry I missed your reply earlier. The new citation is this one: Which is to replace the citation at the end of the introduction. Thanks! SVeatch (talk) 15:11, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Revisions to History

Hello editors! I'd like to state again for transparency: I am an employee of the Dover Corporation and am making requests for editors to review rather than making edits due to my COI. This request is regarding History, where there are two specific changes needed for clarification and to include recent major events from the last several years.

1. The sentences about DE-STA-CO and Alberta Oil Tool need a slight edit to remove the mention of Dover Artificial Lift. This company no longer exists so it's confusing to refer to it in the text to say that Alberta Oil Tool is "now part of Dover Artificial Lift".

Redline to show changes

In 1962, Dover made two notable acquisitions: Detroit Stamping Company, now DE-STA-CO, specializing in the design and manufacturing of clamping, gripping, transferring, and robotic tooling; and Alberta Oil Tool, now part of Dover Artificial Lift.

2. At the end of History, there are two details that can be added based on our media coverage, that would reflect major changes at Dover Corp. Below, I've prepared the sentences and citations:

New History sentences

In May 2018, Richard J. Tobin took over as president and CEO of Dover, after previously serving as the company's director. In May 2018, Dover spun off most of its Energy segment, including all of the upstream energy businesses, into a standalone publicly traded company, Apergy.

References

Please let me know if you have any questions about this. SVeatch (talk) 19:54, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

User:PK650: Thanks again for your help above. Checking to see if you would be able to review this request too? Also, making sure you saw that I shared details of the citation to add for the introduction above. Thanks! SVeatch (talk) 21:24, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Partly done: I've gone ahead with the second point. I will need sourcing to alter the first bit, however. We should also consider altering the corresponding Wikipedia article too. Thank you, PK650 (talk) 23:27, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for adding those details and the new citation for the introduction, User:PK650. For Dover Artificial Lift, the company no longer exists as it was part of Dover's upstream energy business that was spun off as the new company, Apergy.

There are a few different sources to confirm this: this Wall Street Journal article mentions Dover Artificial Lift as part of the group of companies that Dover was planning to sell or spin off, and this Houston Chronicle article mentions Dover Artificial Lift being one of the energy companies included in the spin off that was already located in the new location for Apergy. Our press release is the source that states most clearly that Dover Artificial lift was part of the energy business that became Apergy. Is this sourcing enough to make the update to the History and help with updating the Dover Artificial Lift page? Thanks! SVeatch (talk) 18:37, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

The Houston Chronicle was good enough. Hopefully that took care of it. Thanks, PK650 (talk) 01:21, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, User:PK650. That looks good. I'm hoping to be back soon with a suggestion for the Segments and operating companies section, as I'm aware that the content there needs some work. If you'd be able to help with that request, that would be great. Thanks! SVeatch (talk) 18:08, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Revisions to Segments and operating companies

Hello editors! Stating again for transparency: I am an employee of Dover Corporation and am making requests for editors to review rather than making edits due to my COI. This request is regarding Segments and operating companies, where the whole section requires attention to address issues raised in the warning message at the top of the page, as well as changes in Dover's business. I have prepared a revised version for review:

Revised Segments and operating companies

Dover Corporation is divided into five operating segments: Engineered Products, Clean Energy and Fueling, Imaging and Identification, Pumps and Process Solutions, and Climate and Sustainability Technologies. The Engineered Products segment provides products, software, and services for different markets, including aerospace and defense, aftermarket vehicle services, industrial automation, and waste disposal. This segment includes six operating companies: Destaco, Environmental Solutions Group, Microwave Products Group, OK International, TWG, and Vehicle Service Group. The Clean Energy and Fueling segment provides products, services, software, and equipment for retail fueling and clean energy, vehicle wash solutions, and adjacent markets. This segment includes two operating companies: Dover Fueling Solutions and OPW. The Imaging and Identification segment supplies equipment and services to the marking and coding, product traceability, and digital textile printing markets. This segment includes two operating companies: Dover Digital Printing and Markem-Imaje. The Pumps and Process Solutions segment manufactures specialty products for the safe handling of fluids across the chemical, hygienic, biopharma, oil and gas, and industrial markets. This segment includes four operating companies: CPC, Dover Precision Components, MAAG Group, and PSG. The Climate and Sustainability Technologies segment provides energy-efficient equipment and systems to the commercial refrigeration, beverage packaging equipment, and heating and cooling markets. This segment includes three operating companies: Belvac, Dover Food Retail, and SWEP.

References

This revision significantly streamlines the information, which looks like it might have been based heavily on our past descriptions of the segments so I have not presented a redline. The differences between the revision and the current Segments and operating companies is as follows:

• The revision reduces the content of the section to a basic high level description
• The details are updated based on the latest changes made by Dover, including the two new segment names, following the divestitures last year and changes in Dover's businesses
• The revised version adds secondary sourcing to help confirm the information, rather than relying only on Dover's website and reports

I am requesting that all of the existing Segments and operating companies, including the subsections, be replaced with what I have drafted above. My hope is that this helps to address the "multiple issues" raised in the warning at the top of the page regarding advertising content and sourcing.

Additionally, please can the introduction be updated to reflect the recently announced change to our segments? Specifically can "Fueling Solutions" be replaced by "Clean Energy and Fueling", and "Refrigeration & Food Equipment" be replaced by "Climate and Sustainability Technologies" in the introduction (citation:)? Sorry that this request comes so soon after the introduction had been updated.

Please let me know if you have any questions about this request. SVeatch (talk) 18:55, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

User:PK650: Is there any possibility you can review this request? This one should help with resolving the warning tag on the page. Thanks! SVeatch (talk) 21:40, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

I'll have a look when next available. PK650 (talk) 00:56, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

 Partly done: Sorry for the time this took. I am concerned with removing the subsections you requested, as that would entail deleting relevant historical information. Would there be any way you could draft a modified version of those existing segment subsections to reflect the company's recent developments? For example, we could simply change what's old to the past tense, and provide relevant sourcing to elicit such an update while removing what was always irrelevant or poorly worded (which I think might've been what the original tagger was hinting at). PK650 (talk) 03:51, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, User:PK650. I understand your concerns, and I am working on drafting a modified version for the existing segment subsections and hope to be back in touch very soon. Thanks again. SVeatch (talk) 17:45, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Subsections

}}

Hi User:PK650, thank you again for updating the page with my last request and your feedback about the subsections. I've been taking some time to look at drafting how you suggested, but I am running into issues with sourcing and deciding which details count as relevant. The content of the subsections is sourced to primary sources, and there are not any secondary sources that clarify what happened with the segments and operating companies.The first paragraph of the Segments and operating companies section does summarize the changes in organization over time, so I wonder if that's sufficient?

The one subsection for which there was a major change that was covered by sources is one covering the Energy segment details. In the History, there is already a mention of the spin off of most of the segment. To add to that content, the following could be included to mention the specific companies that were included in the spin off, using the sources that are already used for the spin-off sentence:

The spin off included Dover Artificial Lift, Dover Energy Automation, and US Synthetic.

If that was added to the History, can the Energy segment subsection then be removed? SVeatch (talk) 17:20, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi again. In my opinion the article would still be worse off if we did it that way... PK650 (talk) 05:18, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for this note User:PK650. Can you let me know which details from the Energy section you think need to be kept? That might help me figure out how to approach this.

From my perspective, it's confusing to keep the section heading because this segment no longer exists. The History section explains the spin off, and then the start of the Segments and operating companies section does give a run down of the changes in segments over time, including the new paragraph which notes the current segments. It seems like the only thing that would be lost would be a mention of the operating companies spun off, which is why I've proposed the sentence above to add to the History.

I've added the request template just in case other editors might have feedback here. I also wanted to point out that there's something strange in the banner at the top of the page: should that be deleted? SVeatch (talk) 14:52, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps a compromise would be to separate old segments from newly-named ones, e.g. creating two subsections? PK650 (talk) 08:04, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

To help any editors who might stop by to review this, I'm restating the request in a clearer format:

Request: Can editors consider:

1. Adding the following line to the History, following the existing sentence final sentence of that section that explains the spin-off of Dover's Energy business: The spin off included Dover Artificial Lift, Dover Energy Automation, and US Synthetic.
2. Removing all of the Energy subsection under Segments and operating companies

Reasoning: The current Energy section is based on primary sources and describes a segment of the company that no longer exists. I have not been able to find good secondary sources to describe the past segment. I'm suggesting adding details of the spun-off operating companies to the History using media sources, and then removing the Energy subsection so that the article has a mention of the historical companies that were part of the segment. The Segments and operating companies does mention that there was previously an Energy segment, and also notes the current organization of segments and operating companies (so the companies that were part of Energy but weren't spun off are noted with their new segment).

Thanks for looking at this. User:Z1720: Thank you for fixing the references, are you able to give any feedback on this? SVeatch (talk) 19:17, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

 Not done for now: Please establish a consensus with editors engaged in the subject area before using the {{Request edit}} template for this proposed change. Thinker78 (talk) 20:13, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

References

Revisions to financials in infobox

Hello editors! I'd like to state again for transparency: I am an employee of the Dover Corporation and am making requests for editors to review rather than making edits due to my COI. I am requesting an update to the financials in Dover's infobox. The numbers listed there are from 2021, and below I have provided the numbers from Dover's latest Form 10-K filing with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (see the box to the right).

Bawolff/Edit COI Summary/10 per page (newest first)/38

Revenue	US$8.51 billion (2022) US$7.91 billion (2021)
Operating income	US$1.38 billion (2022) US$1.28 billion (2021)
Net income	US$1.07 billion (2022) US$1.12 billion (2021)
Total assets	US$10.90 billion (2022) US$10.40 billion (2021)
Total equity	US$4.29 billion (2022) US$4.19 billion (2021)

User:PK650: Since you’ve helped update this page in the past, I’m wondering if you can review my latest requested edits. Thanks in advance.

Please let me know if you have any questions about this request.

SVeatch (talk) 18:04, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

@SVeatch Can you quote the relevant parts of the reference? I tried finding "8.51" in it with no luck. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 01:00, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

@Thinker78, the relevant financial numbers that correlate to the changes I have requested can be found on page 30 in the "Consolidated Results of Operations" chart of the 2022 Dover Corporation 10-K I referenced above. In 2022, Dover specifically had $8,508,088,000 in revenue, so I rounded to $8.51 billion. Please let me know if you have any additional questions. Thank you, SVeatch (talk) 13:58, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

@SVeatch The reference for total assets and equity maybe should be different because it may be a different page, I believe 63, if Im not mistaken. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 22:37, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

@Thinker78 you are correct. In 2022, Dover Corporation had $10,896,519,000 in total assets and that can be found on page 63 of the Dover Corporation Annual Report. Please let me know if I need to confirm anything else. I appreciate your help and support with this matter. SVeatch (talk) 13:41, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

@SVeatch I modified the title of the reference to match the document, added reference of p63, and access date. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 03:05, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Thinker78 thank you so much. When can we expect the article to reflect the changes? SVeatch (talk) 13:39, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

 Implemented, SVeatch. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 23:49, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

@Thinker78 that is great news. Thank you for your support. SVeatch (talk) 13:36, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

Revisions to Infobox, Introduction and History

Hello editors! I'd like to state again for transparency: I am an employee of the Dover Corporation and am making requests for editors to review rather than making edits due to my COI.

A. I am requesting an update to the financials in Dover's infobox. The numbers listed there are from 2022, and below I have provided the numbers from Dover's latest Form 10-K filing with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (see infobox).

Bawolff/Edit COI Summary/10 per page (newest first)/38

Revenue	US$8.44 billion (2023) US$8.51 billion (2022)
Operating income	US$1.37 billion (2023) US$1.38 billion (2022)
Net income	US$1.06 billion (2023) US$1.07 billion (2022)
Total assets	US$11.35 billion (2023) US$10.90 billion (2022)
Total equity	US$5.11 billion (2023) US$4.29 billion (2022)

B. Additionally, in February 2024, Dover appointed its President and CEO, Richard J. Tobin, to the additional role of Chairman of the Board. In addition, the independent directors of the Board appointed Michael F. Johnston to the role of lead independent director. I am requesting that this update be added the Key people section in Dover’s infobox and to the end of the 2000s section under History.

C. And lastly, our position on the Fortune 500 list slightly changed in 2023 to 445. I am requesting that this update be made to the introduction of the page.

User:Thinker78: Since you’ve helped update this page in the past, I’m wondering if you can review my latest requested edits. Thanks in advance.

Please let me know if you have any questions about this request.

SVeatch (talk) 20:13, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Please follow the instructions at Template:Edit COI to make things more clear. Sincerely, Thinker78 (talk) 04:54, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

 Implemented by Thinker78 (talk) 23:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

@Thinker78 - Thank you for helping to get this page updated. Appreciate your support. SVeatch (talk) 19:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Edit Request: Business Divestitures & Fortune 500 Ranking Update

Conflict of Interest Disclosure:

I'd like to state again for transparency: I work for Dover Corporation and am submitting this request to ensure the page remains accurate and up to date. I am not making these edits myself in accordance with Wikipedia’s conflict of interest (COI) guidelines and welcome independent review from editors. 

What I think should be changed (including citations):

1. Update the History section to reflect recent divestitures: 
  - In April 2024, Dover Corporation completed the sale of its DESTACO business unit. ([PR Newswire](https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/dover-completes-sale-of-destaco-business-unit-302104732.html)) 
  - In October 2024, Dover completed the sale of its Environmental Solutions Group business. ([PR Newswire](https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/dover-completes-sale-of-environmental-solutions-group-business-302270545.html)) 

   Suggested wording:
  "In April 2024, Dover Corporation divested its DESTACO business unit. Later that year, in October 2024, the company also sold its Environmental Solutions Group business." 

2. Update the Segments section to reflect these divestitures by removing DESTACO and Environmental Solutions Group from the list of Dover’s active business units. 

3. Update Dover's Fortune 500 ranking from 445 to 448 for 2024. ([Fortune](https://fortune.com/company/dover/)) 

Why it should be changed: 
- The current History and Segments sections do not reflect these significant corporate changes. Updating them ensures that the page remains accurate and up to date. 
- Dover’s Fortune 500 ranking has changed in 2024, and updating it will ensure accuracy in the company’s profile. 

References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):
- PR Newswire. (April 2024). "Dover Completes Sale of DESTACO Business Unit." Retrieved from [PR Newswire](https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/dover-completes-sale-of-destaco-business-unit-302104732.html). 
- PR Newswire. (October 2024). "Dover Completes Sale of Environmental Solutions Group Business." Retrieved from [PR Newswire](https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/dover-completes-sale-of-environmental-solutions-group-business-302270545.html). 
- Fortune. (2024). "Dover Corporation Fortune 500 Ranking." Retrieved from [Fortune](https://fortune.com/company/dover/). 

User:Thinker78: Since you’ve helped update this page in the past, I’m wondering if you can review my latest requested edits. Thanks in advance.

SVeatch (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2025 (UTC) 

References

SVeatch (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2025 (UTC)

Done Hi @SVeatch, I found mostly better sourcing than PRNewswire for the divestitures and added it to the article. You may also wish to know that Thinker78 has been banned indefinitely from editing. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 06:50, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, @Sammi Brie. I appreciate your support with these requested edits. And I have noted the information on Thinker78. SVeatch (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Edit Request: Dover Corporation FY 2025 Financial Update & 2025 Fortune 500 Ranking

For transparency: I work for Dover Corporation and am submitting this request to ensure the page remains accurate and up to date. In accordance with Wikipedia’s conflict of interest (COI) guidelines, I am not making these edits directly and welcome independent editorial review.

Requested Changes

1. Update Financial Information in Infobox (FY Ended December 31, 2025)

The infobox currently reflects FY 2024 financial data. I am requesting that it be updated to reflect Dover’s audited financial results for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2025, as filed in its Form 10-K with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Proposed updated infobox content:

Bawolff/Edit COI Summary/10 per page (newest first)/38

Revenue	US$8.093 billion (2025) US$7.75 billion (2024)
Operating income	US$1.37 billion (2025) US$1.21 billion (2024)
Net income	US$1.09 billion (2025) US$2.70 billion (2024)
Total assets	US$13.42 billion (2025) US$12.5 billion (2024)
Total equity	US$7.41 billion (2025) US$6.95 billion (2024)

Rationale: Updating the infobox ensures the article reflects the most recent audited GAAP financial results filed with the SEC and maintains consistency with other publicly traded company pages.

2. Proposed Contextual Addition to “Financial performance” Section

To provide neutral context for the year-over-year net income change: “In its full-year 2025 results reported on January 29, 2026, Dover reported GAAP net income of US$1.09 billion, compared with US$2.70 billion in 2024, primarily reflecting the absence of a one-time gain recorded in the prior year related to the sale of De-Sta-Co.”"Dover Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2025 Results". Dover Corporation. January 29, 2026. Retrieved March 17, 2026.

Rationale: This provides factual, sourced context for the change in net income without editorializing and helps maintain neutrality and clarity for readers.

3. Update Fortune 500 Ranking (2025)

I am also requesting an update to Dover’s Fortune 500 ranking from 448 to 456 to reflect the 2025 list published by Fortune. Proposed revision (lead section):

“…the company ranked 456 on the 2025 Fortune 500 list.”

Reference:

Fortune. (2025). “Dover Corporation Fortune 500 Ranking.” Retrieved from: https://fortune.com/company/dover/

Rationale: The ranking has changed for 2025, and updating this ensures factual accuracy.

User:Sammi Brie: Since you previously assisted with updates to this article, I would appreciate your review of these requested edits when convenient. Thank you in advance.

References

--- SVeatch (talk) 19:27, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Following up on this request. The proposed updates are based on Dover's FY2025 Form 10-K and Fortune 500 listing. Happy to clarify anything if helpful. SVeatch (talk) 18:26, 27 April 2026 (UTC)

Devilish Presley

COI edit request

I am a member of the band and wish to ensure the accuracy of this article and it’s overall layout per WP:COI I have revised the entry to be strictly factually based on the provided sources. I've removed descriptive language to avoid 'original research' concerns.

DevilishPresleyHimself (talk) 14:12, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Comment: added section heading, and marked as significant. Also fixed formatting to not be indented fully. Axolitl (talk | contribs) 05:06, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

@DevilishPresleyHimself: This is too much info for someone to review, and the format makes it even harder. An independent reviewer will not be able to spend >3-4 hours reading through this to make the requested changes, while also reviewing to see what's changing in the current article. Anything added or deleted has to be checked. I recommend instead you look at this format guide that I put together. It shows the info in a nice easy before and after format, and lessens the work for reviewers by placing sources inline immediately after the text they are supposed to support, so editors can easily click on them to check each statement. Good luck. STEMinfo (talk) 01:44, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Please look at the new formatting I have added to aid the review!! DevilishPresleyHimself (talk) 22:30, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

I was told by Escape Orbit that I could not make any changes to the page under threat of being permanently banned? How can I do this.

OK I HOPE THIS ALRIGHT FOR AN INDEPENDENT REVIEWER NOW! ***NB*** The reason the old text is considerably shorter than the new, is due to how much the page has been butchered over the last few months, by trolls and others removing huge amounts of info. Everything I want added is verifiable by outside sources.

{{Text diff|Old text.

Ballarat Clarendon College

Possible neutral rewrite of controversy section

I work for Ballarat Clarendon College and therefore have a conflict of interest, so I am raising this on the Talk page rather than editing directly.

The current controversy section contains several direct quotations and journalistic phrasing taken from media reporting. I wonder if editors would consider condensing the section so that it summarises the reporting in a more neutral encyclopedic tone.

For example, something along the following lines:

In 2022, media outlets including the ABC and Herald Sun reported concerns raised by some parents and staff regarding workplace culture and student wellbeing at the College.[8][9] Allegations included pressure on staff, limitations on breaks, and concerns about aspects of the school environment.

One reported incident involved a teacher making inappropriate comments about students’ VCE essays, which drew criticism within the school community.[13] Media reports also noted concerns about the independence of internal investigations into these matters.[8]

Happy to hear other editors’ views.

Bcc Darren (talk) 08:03, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

there are an awful lot of people who work for BCC and are deleting/requesting changes to the controversy section. I will continue reverting deletions and unreasonable changes to the controversy section. Sgroey (talk) 00:44, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your response.

I understand the concern regarding multiple edits from accounts connected to the College, and I am not associated with the previous editor(s) who attempted to remove the content.

My intention is not to remove the controversy section, but to suggest a more concise and neutral summary in line with Wikipedia’s style (i.e. removing direct quotations and condensing the wording).

The proposed wording retains all referenced material and sources, but presents it in a more encyclopedic tone.

I would be very happy to work with you or other editors to agree on appropriate wording. Bcc Darren (talk) 21:45, 29 March 2026 (UTC)

Just following up on the above. I understand the concern about prior attempts to remove content. My proposed wording retains all referenced material and sources, and is intended only to condense the section and remove direct quotations.

If there are specific concerns with the proposed wording, I would be very happy to adjust it. Alternatively, if editors prefer, I am also happy for an independent editor to rewrite the section in a more concise encyclopedic tone.

Thank you. Bcc Darren (talk) 00:30, 8 April 2026 (UTC)

As there has been no objections for several days, I am requesting that an editor consider implementing the proposed rewrite of the controversy section outlined above.

Thank you Bcc Darren (talk) 22:14, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Note: The {{Edit request}} template is for requesting changes to protected pages. For conflict of interest edit requests, you should use {{Edit COI}} instead. I've gone ahead and changed this for you. Umby 🌕🐶 (talk) 23:25, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Blancco Technology Group

Requested update following merge (COI declared)

Hi, I have a declared conflict of interest with this topic. Since the merge of Blancco Ltd. into Blancco Technology Group, the article text no longer reflects the neutral, referenced draft that had previously been proposed here: User:Fairweather12/sandbox - Wikipedia. The content of the new page (e.g., stating that Blancco is a British company) is also not accurate.

I would appreciate it if an uninvolved editor could review that sandbox draft and update the article accordingly. There were no objections or negative feedback on the draft over the past several weeks.

Thank you! ~~~~ Fairweather12 (talk) 10:35, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

Not done for now: The proposed draft has a few issues:

• Removes all mentions of Regeneris alongside a number of good citations.
• Relies too heavily on non-reliable primary sources.
• Is promotional in tone. Encoded  Talk 💬 18:24, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

  Hi there, thanks for taking a look. I've reedited again to strip out any promotion and readded in the Regeneris history and some of those citations. hoping you can take a look again. Thanks! Fairweather12 (talk) 12:55, 22 December 2025 (UTC)

  Reopened request :) Thanks, Encoded  Talk 💬 21:43, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

 Not done The certifications section is too promotional and non-encyclopedic, per WP:NOTDIR. For certifications to be considered notable, we'd need someone writing about the company achieving the certifications. The HQ and product line need to be independently sourced. While there's usually no argument that a headquarters is where a company says it is, it's good practice to ensure that everything is backed up. If product info can't be sourced, that's an argument for saying it's not notable enough to be in an encyclopedia. Locations are easier. To get around independent sourcing shortfalls, I've just been suggesting we write "The company lists offices in ...", and for that we can use an about us or contact us page. STEMinfo (talk) 19:49, 4 July 2026 (UTC)

Wilh. Wilhelmsen

Request from Wilhelmsen to update the infobox

My name is Marius William Steen and I'm the Group Communications Manager at Wilhelmsen Group. I have created this Wikipedia user account to pursue updates to the Wilhelmsen article.

I am hoping that editors watching this page will update the Key people category in the infobox to note that Carl E Steen has replaced Diderik Schnitler as the board chair. The Wilhelmsen website and the CNBC Wilhelmsen profile both confirm this.

Thank you for reviewing this request. Marius at Wilhelmsen (talk) 17:10, 8 December 2025 (UTC)

Done Aston305 (complain/compliment) 16:36, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your help with this request, Aston305. Marius at Wilhelmsen (talk) 19:45, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Request from Wilhelmsen to update the History section

Hi, I'm Marius William Steen, the Group Communications Manager at Wilhelmsen Group, and I'm back with another request. I'm hoping that Wikipedia editors will be amenable to updating the article's History section. Wilhelmsen is a very old company (founded 165 years ago) and yet the History section is quite short at only four paragraphs and around 250 words. These four paragraphs are supported by a single citation.

I have put together an updated draft that covers the company's history from 1861 to the 1989 Partnair Crash. This draft is intended to replace the current four History paragraphs.

Revised History section

Early history

In October 1861, Morten Wilhelm Wilhelmsen and J.W. Balchen founded a ship brokerage in Tønsberg, Norway, a town on the western coast of the Oslofjord. In 1864 the partnership was dissolved and Wilhelmsen continued the business under his own name. The company's first vessel was the barque Mathilde in 1865. The fleet expanded over the next two decades, and by 1886 Wilhelmsen was Tønsberg's largest shipowner. Around that same time, Wilhelmsen's eldest son, Halfdan Wilhelmsen joined the firm and was instrumental in the company's move from sail ships to its first steamship. In late 1887, the company acquired the 1,800-ton freighter, Talabot. The steamship was a profitable investment for the Wilhelmsens and the letter "T" became synonymous with the company's naming tradition for its vessels.

Halfdan Wilhelmsen became a partner in 1890 and soon established the company's core business: international liner shipping. The company's first overseas line to Mexico started in 1907. By 1910, Wilhelmsen was the largest shipping firm in Norway and operated a fleet of 30 steamships. A year later, Wilhelmsen and shipping consortium partners established The Norwegian Africa and Australia Line.

In 1912, the company expanded into the tanker trade, building two new ships to carry oil from the United States to Europe.

World War I and interwar period

Wilhelmsen lost several ships to hostile actions during World War I. Most of the company's trampers sailed in US waters for American charterers, but a number of its U.K.-based tankers were requisitioned by the British government. Wilhelmsen temporarily restructured into a series of single-ship companies due to concerns that the entire fleet might be requisitioned.

After the war, the company relocated to Oslo, the center of the Scandinavian shipping industry. Halfdan Wilhelmsen died in 1923, and leadership of the company passed to his younger brother, "Captain" Wilhelm Wilhelmsen. Throughout the decade, Wilhelmsen operated liner services across Scandinavia and into ports in the United States, Africa, Australia, and Asia.

Between 1920 and 1940, the company acquired 59 cargo liners, making it the biggest shipowner in Norway. The business was dominated by liner shipping, as the company only possessed one tanker.

World War II and postwar reconstruction

At the outset of World War II, the Wilhelmsen fleet accounted for around 7 percent of Norway's total merchant fleet.The German occupation of Norway prevented the country's neutrality during World War II. The Norwegian Shipping and Trade Mission (Nortraship) was established in April 1940 by the Norwegian government in exile to nationalize and administer the Norwegian merchant fleet outside German-controlled areas. Nortraship used Wilhelmsen ships to support the Allied war effort, providing troop and ammunition transport across the European and Pacific theaters.

By the end of the war, 29 of Wilhelmsen's ships were lost, and 50 of its sailors were killed. In 1946, the company ordered 18 new vessels and resumed its overseas liner operations.

Wilhelm Wilhelmsen died in 1955, and Niels Werring took over as senior partner.

In 1961, Wilhelmsen owned 72 vessels and employed around 305 headquarters staff, 450 international agents, and 3,150 officers and merchant seamen. Wilhelm Wilhelmsen, the great-grandson of the company founder, became a partner in 1964.

Transition to modern liner services

The market for exporting and importing cars increased during the 1970s, as did the usage of roll-on/roll-off (RORO) ships, which are designed to carry wheeled cago. In 1969, Wilhelmsen, East Asiatic, and Transatlantic launched ScanAustral, a joint venture initially featuring five combination container and RORO vessels. That same year, Wilhelmsen, Fearnley & Eger, and A. F. Klaveness jointly established Barber Lines A/S to integrate liner services to the Far East. Wilhelmsen took full ownership of the company in 1975. That same year, Wilhelmsen founded Barber Ship Management, the predecessor to today's Wilhelmsen Ship Management business, in Hong Kong to support the Barber Blue Sea container route.

In 1971, Wilhelmsen, East Asiatic, Swedish East Asiatic Co, and Transatlantic founded the Scanservice group to provide a Far East container service from Gothenburg. After the Dutch shipping company Nedlloyd joined the alliance, the group was renamed ScanDutch. French shipping company Messageries Maritime and Malaysian shipping company Malaysian International Shipping Corporation later joined the consortium. ScanDutch operated from Copenhagen as a single shipping company with joint marketing and pricing.

Wilhelmsen began investing in offshore drilling platforms in the 1970s. After Norway opened the continental shelf north of the 62nd parallel for petroleum exploration, Wilhelmsen contracted Götaverken to build a semisubmersible drilling rig at a cost of around $85 million. By 1985, 64 percent of Wilhelmsen's profits were generated from offshore drilling-related business. A slump in the offshore industry in the late 1980s led the company to restructure around its core liner business.

In 1983, Barber Ship Management became a separate business division comprising Barber Ship Management in Hong Kong, Wilh Wilhelmsen Ship Management in Oslo, and Wilh Wilhelmsen Technical Consultants.

In 1988, Wilhelmsen exited from the ScanDutch consortium, selling its stake to Dutch Nedlloyd.

References

As you can see, I split my History draft into several subsections:

• Early history subsection
  • This section covers developments from 1861 to WWI. I cited a 1961 News of Norway article ("Norway's Largest Shipping Company Marks Centennial") repeatedly, as said article provides a useful overview of Wilhelmsen's early history.
• World War I and interwar period subsection
  • This section covers everything from WWI through 1940. I cited a TradeWinds article ("The birth of a shipping giant") several times here, along with the Wilh. Wilhelmsen 150 years book.
• World War II and postwar reconstruction subsection
  • This section covers 1941 to the late 1960s. Different sources provided different numbers about how many ships Wilhelmsen lost during the war. I went with 29, as that number is used in the Store norske leksikon entry about Wilhelmsen, and aligns with the list that appears on page 245 of the Wilh. Wilhelmsen 150 years book.
• Transition to modern liner services subsection
  • This section covers the 1970s and 1980s, stopping just before the Partnair crash. This section includes a number of developments that feel especially important in contextualizing current operations, e.g. the investments in offshore drilling platforms.

I used American English throughout, including in the citation date formatting, since that appears to be the standard on Wikipedia.

I suggest moving the Wilhelmsen family subsection out of the History section, as the content doesn't meaningfully relate to the company's history and would make more sense elsewhere in the article. Doing so would also allow the subsections above to flow into the 1989 Partnair Crash subsection.

Please let me know if this update is possible. I am happy to answer any questions regarding my draft and research. It looks like Egil created this article in 2006 and they might be interested in my proposed revisions. Marius at Wilhelmsen (talk) 19:50, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

• Not a review but the article has a {{Use dmy dates}} template, so when this is incorporated the dates should be parsed as day-month. Standards tend to be by-article for items that don't have MOS:TIES to a particular country. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 06:12, 24 January 2026 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the feedback, Sammi Brie. I went ahead and updated the draft citations to Day Month Year format. Any other suggestions you have would be much appreciated. I'm worried that finding a reviewing editor is going to be difficult because we are a Norwegian company. Marius at Wilhelmsen (talk) 05:29, 30 January 2026 (UTC)
• not a review but: The history section claims the first vessel Mathilde by 1885. And largest shipowner in Tønsberg by 1886. Checking your source (out of paywall) "However, the company was forged out of just one triple masted sailing vessel, Mathilde, back in 1865."Andrez1 (talk) 14:49, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

  The article itself states: "The company's first vessel was the barque Mathilde in 1886". The Norwegian (bokmål) wikipedia-page states:"Kjøpet av en andel i skipet «Mathilde» i 1864 markerte starten for rederidriften til selskapet".

  It is then 1864, 1865, 1885 and 1886 given as dates for the start of the shipping part by buying a share in the vessel? The whole ship? The mentioned 1885 and 1886 does not give any real meaning. (Exept for 1886 as the larges shipowner in Tønsberg, I have not seen on that detail) Andrez1 (talk) 13:18, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you for catching that, Andrez1. I corrected the date. Please let me know if you see anything else that needs updating. Marius at Wilhelmsen (talk) 22:25, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  Thanks for updating. As the article itself states: "The company's first vessel was the barque Mathilde in 1886"; that to does also need to be changed, and a reliable source shown. The "Tradewinds" of 03.06.1999 leads to a paywall "You need a subscription to read this story". The "Tradewinds" was then issued as printed copies each Friday. The 04.06.1999 may or may not have this article. Here it can be accessed in Norway, at least from norwegian public libraries.To give access to sources will make it possible both for a reviwer and future readers to check the information given. To quote what in the article that make it sensible to set 1865 (and not 1864, 1885 and 1886) as the start of the shipping activity could also help. Andrez1 (talk) 23:51, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

  Your first given source - "News of Norway. Washington D.C.: Royal Norwegian Governments Press. 19 October 1961. p. 139." - is accessibel and it gives support to your claim of "Mathilde" delivered in 1865.

  (your snl-source does however points it out to "Barken Mathilde ble innkjøpt i mai 1865, finansiert gjennom et partrederi," that may be a relevant detail. When was the ship commisioned (1864?), delivered (1865?), to whom (partsrederi). Was Mr. Wilhelmsen "bestyrende reder" (partrederi SNL.no) in that venture?)

  Your source "News of Norway", 1961, does give another interesting detail, "when Mr. Wilhelmsen came of age, the partnership was dissolved, and he started a shipping company of his own." As the Norwegian Myndighetsalder, Age of majority, until 1869 was 25 years, Mr Wilhelmsen born 1839, would reach that age in 1864. Is 1864 or 1865 then the year to claim the start of Company?

  And so on. Some of the sources praise the founding fathers for their alledged "foresightedness", the history section reduce this to a more edible "instrumental in the company's move". The article itself is not free from such praise and claim as a fact what is more likely someones evaluation in retrospect. - "Halfdan Wilhelmsen was forward thinking and realised that steamboats were the future, therefore in 1887 he bought the vessel Talabot." Andrez1 (talk) 16:44, 23 February 2026 (UTC)

  Appreciate the feedback Andrez1. I updated the citations throughout the draft to include the relevant quoted passages, especially for paywalled sources. You can see that two different sources confirm the 1865 date. I know you may have further questions and might make updates to the text based on your own research, but do you think what I've put together is ready to move to the article? Marius at Wilhelmsen (talk) 10:25, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

  Much better. I belive @Egil may act or not on your proposal. I have absolutely no influence on that.

  Under what flag and homeports have the ships sailed since the "Mathilde" of Tønsberg under Sildesalaten? What in the history is not told?

  I belive you have sailed into "urent farvann". Eventual "rough sea" can be explained by a "perfekt storm" where the "Tradewinds" have turned and "Providia" and "Fortuna" goes against you. To be less cryptic: attempted Reputation management may have given a rised attention to that.

  I do not imply you do, i have seen trusted people performing well-intentioned beauty pageantry and the management of listed companies begging for mercy.

  (Aker commissioned Solstad to write a 150th anniversary "novel" to mark the day in 1991. The kind of outside perspective it offers can be a good thing. I haven't read the book.)

  May be a way in would be to give access to credible sources and argue why and how the article should be changed. If the sources does not give a god reason for change, or the image they give are perceived as biased; it will be seen as an attempt to introduce a point of view.

  To detail: the sources given to the early days of Wihl. Wilhelmsen does however, in my view, gives a more complex image of what happend back in the days around 1865. (That Mr W.W. had been cooperating as an underage junior partner with Mr. Balchen from 1861, it would give a lot of experience, but at that time W.W. was not fully his own man.)

  The claim: - "In 1864 the partnership was dissolved and Wilhelmsen continued the business under his own name. The company's first vessel was the barque Mathilde in 1865." - can be seen as isolated supported by the given sources, but the same sources also brings more to the table that have to be clarified.

  (the cited (from News of Norway 1961) - "Three days later, when Mr. Wilhelmsen came of age, the partnership was dissolved and he started a shipping company of his own." - is both wrong, tre years later maybe? =1864 - and does not bring forward what kind of entity that "company" was. As i read the sources on 1864-65 there are 3 entities (maybe only 2), in play.

  1. Mr Wihl. Wihlhelmsen, coming of age in 1864, is from then able to doing business as his own man, abel to sign agreements and acting as a broker in Tønsberg. (this is not a company, more of a "enkeltmannsforetak" as of today, responsibel with all of his personal assets.)

  2. There could be established a Wihl. Wilhelmsen A/S where the shareholders have a responsibility limited to their share. Was such a company established in 1864-65?

  3. There was a joint venture, a "andelsrederi" established (1864-65?) where Wihl Wihlhelmsen (The personal Mr .1, or the possibel company A/S .2 ?) had an 2/7 part of the vessel "Mathilde. Here all part probably have full responsibility, also for losses (limited by share?).

  (The "Wilhelmsen continued the business under his own name." ponts to .1. "The company's first vessel was the barque Mathilde in 1865." points to 3.)

  From witch of these 3 units did the contemporary Wihl Wilhelmsen grow out of? Andrez1 (talk) 16:30, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

  Once again, I appreciate the feedback Andrez1. Unfortunately, I'm unable to answer all your questions, as the details you seek about the company's earliest days are not covered by published sources. I went ahead and tagged Egil on their user Talk page to let them know that the draft is ready for review. Thank you again for your help. Marius at Wilhelmsen (talk) 17:01, 25 February 2026 (UTC)

  And by "andelsrederi" (3. above), partrederi more correct; EN:WP does not seem to have an article on that, NO:WP and DA:WP and SNL.no does. here, here and here. The SNL-article is by far the best. Andrez1 (talk) 13:05, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

  Another source, with economic support from Wilh. Wihlhelmsen, claims "En bark, bygd i 1840, ble derfor kjøpt inn i 1865 og gitt navnet «Mathilde”." This may or may not be true. Here. Andrez1 (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

  With 125 year sailing this also goes into the father Abrahams who bought the old naval-ship Balder. Morten W.W ; " I mai 1865 hadde han overtatt part i barken «Mathilde» - som ble disponert av Wilh.Wilhelmsen!"

  This claims M.W.W (with a 2/7 part(from other source)) as "bestyrende reder" (see snl.no partsrederi) and that as the proper start of the shipping part of his/the business. Andrez1 (talk) 17:01, 26 February 2026 (UTC)

  I thought I'd ask about the current status of this request. Have the concerns mentioned in this discussion been resolved? Fiske (talk) 10:53, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you for checking in, Fiske. This request is about replacing the existing History section, which is almost entirely original research, with a more detailed treatment that supports each and every factual claim with a cited source. Those sources include industry news publications (TradeWinds, Seatrade Maritime News, Automotive Logistics), Norwegian news sources (News of Norway, Store norske leksikon), academic textbooks and reference works (Shipping and Globalization in the Post-War Era, Norwegian Shipping in the 20th Century, International Directory of Company Histories), and Wilhelmsen's published book of company history (which I cite sparingly and mostly for clarification about specific figures).

  The questions posed by Andrez1 concern matters that are outside the scope of this request. In some cases, of course, there are slight discrepancies in accounts of the company's earliest days. The truth is that the "correct answer" is ultimately unknowable, since we weren't there. We can only report what the sources say. And, again, I'm trying to improve this article by adding citations for each claim rather than relying on original research.

  I have pinged the creator of this article, Egil, for assistance multiple times (including on their Norwegian Wikipedia user page), but received no response. It appears they have retired from active Wikipedia editing. Any assistance you could provide here would be welcome! Marius at Wilhelmsen (talk) 19:12, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

  I can recommend the shipping company's 150th anniversary book, it answers the questions I have asked about the accuracy of the early history, including the arrangement with Balchen (who was a few years older) to be able to operate from 1861 despite being under the age of majority. 1861 makes sense as a shipbroker / maritime equipment supplier. 1865, as a managing director, with 2/7 of the shipping company (partsrederiet), as a shipowner. The story of Mathilde as a purchased "old" (built 1840) as well. It was not a new ship. The book also has a picture of the ship, considering photographing the book or finding the original to upload this to Commons (possibly locally on EN:WP) can also be done. This is information that is not in an inaccessible past, the library lists the book as: Kolltveit, Bård : Wilh. Wilhelmsen 150 ( 711589.998) Andrez1 (talk) 19:29, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

  Errata: 1861 makes sense as a freight broker / maritime equipment supplier. Andrez1 (talk) 20:22, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

  I won't be able to access the 150th book (let alone read Norwegian), but if these points can be edited into the draft, I could help implement the request. I don't want edit while it appears that the facts are in dispute.

  Also, I see that a different editor has closed some of the related edits requests. Since those are contingent on this one, they could be reopened after this is done. Fiske (talk) 12:39, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

  I have had the book through library loans, and have returned it. I can try to get it again. It was written on behalf of Wihl. Wilhelmsen, but by a maritime historian. It is difficult to know what is not included, what is included appears to be factual. I see it as unlikely that Wihl. Wilhelmsen's information department does not have or can easily obtain the book. As long as this is their request for an amended text on Wikipedia, I see it as reasonable that they are the ones who must contribute with a more factual presentation. If the early history is more complex than presented, then they must use a few more words to describe it. If they have access to a better source of historical information, then they must present it.

  I considered changing the text on EN:WP myself, and have no COI, neither positive nor negative on the subject. At the same time, help has been given on NO:WP, the article's discussion page there, with similar issues. NO:WP has a historically higher tolerance for COI edits. The advice given to Wilh. Wilhelmsen and the possibility that it will lead to some mobilization from NO:WP; is present. Andrez1 (talk) 16:37, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Another history request from Wilhelmsen

Hello again, Wikipedia editors. I'm Marius William Steen, the Group Communications Manager at Wilhelmsen Group, and I'm back with another request about updating the History section. My previous request covered the company's history from 1861 to just before the 1989 Partnair Crash. This new request includes the Partnair Crash subsection (which I've kept intact from the current article) and continues through the Tampa affair in 2002.

This draft is intended to expand the History section with new passages.

Expanded History section

1989 Partnair Crash

Main article: Partnair Flight 394

In September 1989, Partnair Flight 394 crashed en route to the naming ceremony for a new Wilhelmsen Lines ship in Hamburg. The flight had been chartered by the shipping company. 50 employees were killed, including the top two levels of management plus the five airline crew.

Restructuring and car-carrier expansion

Ingar Skaug became Wilhelmsen's CEO in 1990. He had previously served as COO of Scandinavian Airlines. Wilhelmsen was struggling to operate at this time. A year after the tragedy, Skaug becan implementing organizational changes, particularly with regard to the decision-making process. Wilhelmsen had historically operated with a hierarchical, top-down management style, where leadership dictated tasks and decisions. Skaug reshaped this structure, encouraging employees to take responsibility for initiatives and make their own decisions. Skaug oversaw the relocation of Wilhelmsen's headquarters to Lysaker in 1995, a move which symbolized a new beginning for the company.

Over the next decade, Wilhelmsen significantly deepened its roll-on/roll-off partnerships through strategic acquisitions and the formation of key joint ventures. Wilhelmsen acquired the Norwegian America Line in 1995, and assumed full control of its Norwegian Specialized Autocarriers (NOSAC) brand in 1996. The deal established Wilhelmsen as the largest car carrier operator in the world. Together, Wilhelmsen and NOSAC carried about 500,000 vehicles per year for major automotive companies, including Ford, Mercedes, and Volvo.

In 1999, the commercial activities of Wilhelmsen Lines and Wallenius Lines merged to create Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics. This strategic consolidation formed the basis of the current Wallenius Wilhelmsen.

In November 2002, Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics acquired the car carrier division of Hyundai Merchant Marine. This led to the formation of EUKOR Car Carriers, a Korea-based carrier where Wilhelmsen eventually held an 80 percent share, with Hyundai holding 20 percent.

During the early hours of 14 December 2002, MV Tricolor was sailing from Zeebrugge, Belgium to Southampton, U.K., with a load of nearly 2871 brand new BMW, Volvo and SAAB automobiles. She collided in the English Channel with MV Kariba, a 1982 Bahamian-flagged container ship. Kariba continued on, but Tricolor sank and required salvage by wreck-cutting. No casualties occurred.

Tampa affair

Main article: Tampa affair

In 2001, the Wilhelmsen-operated MV Tampa freighter rescued 438 asylum seekers, primarily from Afghanistan. The Howard government refused to grant the ship permission to land on Australian soil. The incident led to a prolonged legal battle and a diplomatic dispute between Australia, Norway, and Indonesia.

The crew of the MV Tampa received international recognition for the rescue effort, most notably the UNHCR's Nansen Refugee Award in 2002. Lloyd's List and The Nautical Institute both honored the ship's captain, Arne Rinnan, as "Captain of the Year".

References

Again, the Partnair Crash subsection already exists in the article, but I included it above so you can see how everything looks together. Following feedback on my last draft, I added quotes to many of the citations so that editors can easily confirm the cited claims.

Please let me know if this update is possible. Once again, I am happy to answer any questions regarding my draft and research. In the meantime, I am working on one final History request, covering everything from 2010 to the present. Marius at Wilhelmsen (talk) 05:48, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

A response has not yet been received for this question.

Reply 19-MAY-2026

  Request closed for inactivity  

• The above edit request has not received any responses over the past 3 weeks (22 days in total).
• Discussion is often a key component to implementing edits, and requests may be adversely affected when they fail to garner input from either reviewing or requesting editors. In light of this — and as a safeguard — this request has been declined as needing discussion.
• The COI editor is urged to revive stalled communications by making contact with local editors on those editor's own talk pages, and then by moving those discussions back to this talk page.
• The COI editor may also wish to broadcast requests for edits at the talk pages of the WikiProjects which govern this article. Those projects are usually listed at the top of an article's talk page.

Regards,  Spintendo  07:15, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Final history request from Wilhelmsen

This is Marius William Steen again, the Group Communications Manager at Wilhelmsen Group. I have one last request about updating the History section, this time for the period from the 2010s to the present. This period is currently not covered in the article at all, so the draft below could easily be slotted in at the bottom of the section.

2010s to present history draft

2010s to present

In 2010, Wilh. Wilhelmsen Holding ASA underwent a major restructuring, establishing itself as a new parent company and separating its shipping/logistics operations into a new entity, Wilh. Wilhelmsen ASA. Thomas Wilhelmsen became Group CEO for the Wilhelmsen group, leading Wilh. Wilhelmsen Holding ASA, and also chair of the new shipping and logistics company, Wilh. Wilhelmsen ASA, while Jan-Eyvin Wang became CEO.

In 2012, Wilhelmsen acquired a 35.4 percent stake in NorSea Group, a Norwegian offshore supply base and logistics company. The move was part of a strategy to increase exposure to the oil and gas energy market, supplementing their existing maritime services. At the time, NorSea was controlled by Eidesvik Eiendomsinvest AS and Simon Møkster Eiendom AS. Wilhelmsen's ownership share increased to 40 percent in 2014. In 2017, Wilhelmsen became the majority owner with a 72 percent ownership share. In 2022, Wilhelmsen and its New Energy segment increased the stake in NorSea to 99 percent.

In 2015, Wilhelmsen Ships Service acquired Timm, a 240-year-old Norwegian rope, cable, and cordage manufacturer.

In 2016, Wilhelmsen and Wallenius announced a merger. The deal included the creation of a new entity, Wallenius Wilhelmsen, that included the companies' jointly owned entities Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics, EUKOR Car Carriers, and American Roll-on Roll-off Carrier. The merger was completed in 2017. That same year, Dag Schjerven retired as president and CEO of Wilhelmsen Maritime Services. As part of a broader reorganization of the group management team, the role of president was restructured into new industrial investment roles.

In 2018, Wilhelmsen launched Raa Labs, a startup focused on digitizing operational vessel data. That same year Wilhelmsen and Kongsberg Maritime established a joint venture, Massterly, for managing autonomous shipping vessels.

In 2020, Wilhelmsen Ship Management took a 50 percent stake in Ahrenkiel Steamship, a subsidiary of Hamburg-based MPC Capital AG. In 2022 that stake increased to 80 percent, and Ahrenkiel was rebranded as Barber Ship Management, reviving the name of Wilhelmsen's original tanker ship management service.

In September 2020, Wilhelmsen announced the acquisition of a 25 percent stake in Edda Wind, the Ostensjo Group’s offshore wind company. In March 2021, Wilhelmsen exercised an option to increase its holding to 50 percent of the company. Following the increased stake, Wilhelmsen and Østensjø announced plans for an IPO to raise capital for fleet expansion. Due to frustration with slow growth rates and operational struggles, in April 2025 Wilhelmsen joined investors John Fredriksen and Idan Ofer to initiate a buyout of Edda Wind. They aimed to take the company private, with their group holding roughly 84.3 percent of the company at the time of the announcement. In August 2025, Edda Wind was delisted from the stock market.

In October 2022, Wilhelmsen Port Services agreed to acquire 100 percent of Vopak Agencies and 50 percent of its digital software company, Diize. The deal was completed in February 2023 and allowed Wilhelmsen to expand its services in Northwest Europe.

In 2023, Wilhelmsen Ship Management and Affinity Shipping launched a joint venture, Hecla Emissions Management, to help shipping operators comply with EU ETS and FuelEU Maritime regulations. The next year the venture released a platform for trading compliance balances as tokens.

In December 2023, Wilhelmsen Ship Management and MPC Capital agreed to acquire Zeaborn Ship Management from Zech Maritime. The deal was completed in 2024, and allowed Wilhelmsen to establish a hub for third-party ship management in Hamburg, Germany. That same year, Wilhelmsen launched a new brand, Navadan, that consolidated its recently acquired tank and hold clearning companies.

A series of Norwegian court decisions in the early 2020s upheld Thomas Wilhelmsen’s control of Wilh. Wilhelmsen Holding ASA, the holding company behind the Oslo-listed Wilh Wilhelmsen. The Wilhelmsen family shareholder case concerned disagreements over governance and distribution policies in privately held companies affiliated with the Wilhelmsen group. Several family members sought dissolution or a compulsory buyout of their shares, arguing that the company structure limited their influence and access to value. The courts assessed issues related to ownership rights, corporate structure, and long-term financial management. Trials in the district court and later in the court of appeal all resulted in the existing ownership structure remaining intact. Thomas Wilhelmsen has maintained more than half of the share capital and close to two-thirds of the voting rights in Wilh. Wilhelmsen Holding ASA, and this position was strengthened by a 2025 capital reduction that lifted his total holding to about 54.6 percent of shares and 63.8 percent of votes.

References

As you review the draft, you'll see that I am once again citing prominent industry publications (TradeWinds, Maritime Executive, ShippingWatch, etc) along with Norwegian news outlets. I would be very happy to answer any questions you might have regarding my research. Marius at Wilhelmsen (talk) 00:26, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

A response has not yet been received for this question.

Reply 19-MAY-2026

  Request closed for inactivity  

• The above edit request has not received any responses over the past 3 weeks (22 days in total).
• Discussion is often a key component to implementing edits, and requests may be adversely affected when they fail to garner input from either reviewing or requesting editors. In light of this — and as a safeguard — this request has been declined as needing discussion.
• The COI editor is urged to revive stalled communications by making contact with local editors on those editor's own talk pages, and then by moving those discussions back to this talk page.
• The COI editor may also wish to broadcast requests for edits at the talk pages of the WikiProjects which govern this article. Those projects are usually listed at the top of an article's talk page.

Regards,  Spintendo  07:15, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

Operations request from Wilhelmsen

This is Marius William Steen again, the Group Communications Manager at Wilhelmsen Group. I have another request, this time about the Current operations section, which is completely out of date. Very few of these claims reflect how Wilhelmsen currently operates, and much of the information is unsourced and appears to be original research. This section actually has a flag on top warning readers that "This section needs additional citations for verification." That flag was placed there in February 2009.

I put together a new Operations section for your review that represents a stripped-back and restructured version of the Current operations section. This draft, then, is intended to entirely replace the Shipping, Logistics services, Maritime services, and Supply services subsections. I didn't try to integrate the Accidents and casualties material, as it felt inappropriate for me to revise a section about "controversies" as a representative of Wilhelmsen. If editors want to keep this subsection in place as is, that's fine—although, honestly, I think these two paragraphs could easily be incorporated into the History section.

Operations section draft

Request to remove List of current Wilhelmsen Lines ships

This is once again Marius William Steen, the Group Communications Manager at Wilhelmsen Group.

I am requesting that editors remove the List of current Wilhelmsen Lines ships section. This list was added to the article back in January 2011. There was no cited source for the information; it was presumably just original research. In April 2013, a different editor added a tag noting that the entire section "does not cite any sources."

That was fourteen years ago.

I am hoping that an editor watching this page will take action and remove the original research from this section and elsewhere in the article (see my previous requests). I am very happy to answer any questions and collaborate to help ensure that the content here is accurate and timely. Marius at Wilhelmsen (talk) 11:38, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

This request makes sense. The lack of source and lack of maintenance is typical of long lists that appear on many Wikipedia pages.

One question: A few of the listed ships are the subject of separate articles, but only MV Tønsberg is mentioned separately on this page. Should any of the ships in that list which have articles be mentioned in the Wilhelmsen article? Fiske (talk) 10:50, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, Fiske. I would certainly be fine with keeping a reference to the MV Tønsberg or any of the other ships. I'm not sure where the best place for that would be, though. If the individual ships were truly notable in some way—especially regarding company history—it might be possible to weave a mention of them into the History section. For instance, one of my History drafts above summarizes how the Wilhelmsen-operated MV Tampa freighter rescued 438 asylum seekers in 2001. That was a story that generated international media coverage. Not every ship is going to be that notable, so the See also section might be another option. Marius at Wilhelmsen (talk) 19:14, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

I have deleted the entire section. I moved to the See Also those ships that have their own page but are not already mentioned in the article. Removed several See Also entries that are already linked in the article. Fiske (talk) 22:20, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

---

← Previous page Next page→