User:Bawolff/Edit COI Summary/10 per page (newest first)/9

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

• Pearl.com
• New York Power Authority
• Nazia Mintz Habib
• EBay
• Point72 Asset Management
• Informa
• Nouria Hernandez
• Jack Logan (filmmaker)
• Anja Kotar
• USA Sports (2025–present)

---

← Previous page Next page→

Pearl.com

COI Edit Request

I’m making this paid edit request on behalf of Pearl.com. I am proposing the following edits for neutrality, clarity, and closer alignment with existing sources.

Extended content

Lead — replace current text with:

Pearl.com is an AI platform for professional services that combines AI-generated answers with human fact-checking and access to experts. The platform connects users with professionals in areas such as healthcare, law, finance, technology, and automotive services. It uses artificial intelligence (AI) to route questions and relies on human experts to review and provide responses.

History — replace history with:

The company was founded in 2003 by Andy Kurtzig as JustAnswer. Kurtzig had previously built and sold a company called Anser, which automated the creation of classified advertisements for newspapers. By about 2012, JustAnswer offered customers a forum for posing questions to lawyers, healthcare professionals, computer technicians, and relationship counselors.

In 2012, the company raised $25 million in a funding round led by Crosslink Capital and Glynn Capital, bringing total funding to more than $50 million. By 2014, the company changed its operations to comply with regulations.

Over time, the company evolved from a single marketplace into a broader platform model. The Pearl.com brand was introduced as part of this expansion, representing the platform’s infrastructure for AI-assisted professional services across multiple domains.

By the mid-2020s, the platform integrated AI-driven systems to generate responses, route queries, and coordinate independent professionals, with human verification processes in regulated fields such as healthcare, law, and finance.

COI Edit Request (Revised)

I am making this paid edit request on behalf of Pearl.com. This request is a revision of a previously declined request. I have reduced the number of citations throughout the proposed text and retained only the sources supporting each statement.

New York Power Authority

Please update introduction numbers

As an employee of NYPA (New York Power Authority), I'm here on the organization's behalf making a request due to my conflict of interest. I am hoping editors can update figures in the article introduction.

The second sentence of this article states that the NYPA operates "16 generating facilities and more than 1,400 circuit-miles of transmission lines." I'm not sure when these numbers were added to the article, but they are no longer accurate. The NYPA now operates 17 generating facilities and more than 1,550 circuit-miles of transmission lines.

These numbers are confirmed on the NYPA website. You can also find them mentioned in news coverage, such as this article from Bond Buyer and this article from pv magazine.

Can the introduction be updated with these new, accurate numbers? TN NYPA (talk) 18:26, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Nazia Mintz Habib

Edit request

I have a conflict of interest with this article but am requesting the following changes:

Prof Habib is now a full Professor, as declared on her pages at the University of Cambridge and at Newnham College .

1. Change "Dr" to "Professor" in the pre-nominal at the top of the infobox.
2. Under "Career", change "has a professor-equivalent role" to "is a professor"
3. Change the title of ref2 to "Nazia Habib" and the link for ref2 to the new location, https://newn.cam.ac.uk/person/nazia-habib
4. In the "Career" section, before the Centre for Resilience and Sustainable Development subheading, add this fact: She is co-editor of the Society of Chemical Industry journal SCI Sustainability. Cite the journal's page on the Wiley publisher site and "Professor Nazia M Habib named Editor-in-Chief of SCI Sustainability", news item on the University of Cambridge site.
5. In the same section, add: In 2026, she was awarded the Distinguished Guest Lecturer medal by the Royal Society of Chemistry Environmental Chemistry Group, for a lecture examining the persistent use fossil fuels. Ref: "Royal Society of Chemistry Awards Medal to Distinguished Guest Lecturer Professor Nazia Habib, FRSA", news story on the University of Cambridge site.
6. In the section on "Early life and education", add that she studied at Jesus College, Oxford. Cite This alumni magazine that mentions her.
7. The John F. Kennedy School of Government (Harvard Kennedy School) is mentioned in the infobox but not in the body text. Fix this by adding the following to the start of the "Career" section. She was a sustainability science fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School for two years from 2011. Cite this profile on the University of Cambridge site and this CV on the Harvard Kennedy School site.

Thanks in advance for any help! MartinPoulter (talk) 16:21, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

EBay

Improving sourcing in the History section

Hello! As part of my work for the communications firm Axicom, I have been asked by eBay to request updates to this article. If independent editors have any questions about my relationship with either company, I'm happy to answer those below or on my user Talk page.

With that disclosure out of the way, I'll pose my first request. I noticed that a few passages in the 2010s and 2020s parts of the History section are substantiated solely by press releases. As I understand it, Wikipedia prefers secondary sources over primary ones, so I've put together some fresh citations that I hope will shore up these passages:

• In October 2012, eBay launched an international shipping partnership with Pitney Bowes whereby a seller of an item to be shipped internationally can send the item to a Pitney Bowes facility in their home country, which then forwards it to the international buyer, taking care of all international shipping requirements.
• In January 2015, eBay acquired Vivanuncios, a classified advertising website in Mexico.
• In May 2022, eBay acquired a stake in Funko and became the preferred secondary marketplace for Funko.
• In August 2022, the company acquired the myFitment group of companies, specializing in online sales of automotive and powersports parts and accessories.

References

Not all of these new sources are top-tier, but they're the best ones I could find. I'll now step back and let independent editors review. Thanks! JN at Axicom (talk) 23:11, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Already done PK650 (talk) 04:07, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Adding sentence to the article introduction

Hello again, I'm back with another short request. I was wondering if it would be possible to add a sentence about the size and character of eBay's seller ecosystem to the article's introduction. The section already contains information about how many buyers are on the platform and how much money moves through it in a given year, so I thought a brief sentence about sellers might serve as useful additional context.

Here's my proposed addition. It's the introduction precisely as-is with one new sentence about sellers, which I've highlighted, and a paragraph break that I think makes the section a touch more readable:

Extended content

eBay Inc. (/ˈiːbeɪ/ EE-bay, stylized as ebay) is an American multinational e-commerce company based in San Jose, California, that allows users to buy or view items via retail sales through online marketplaces and websites in 190 markets worldwide. Sales occur either via online auctions or "buy it now" instant sales, and the company charges commissions to sellers upon sales. eBay was founded by Pierre Omidyar in September 1995.

As of 2021, eBay's marketplace features approximately 17 million sellers including individuals and small businesses. In 2023, eBay has 132 million yearly active buyers worldwide and handled $73 billion in transactions, 48% of which were in the United States. The company had a take rate (revenue as a percentage of volume) of 13.81%. The company is listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market and is a component of the S&P 500 and formerly the Nasdaq-100.

eBay can be used by individuals, companies and governments to purchase and sell almost any legal, non-controversial item. Buyers and sellers may rate and review each other after each transaction, resulting in a reputation system. The eBay service is accessible via websites and mobile apps. Software developers can create applications that integrate with eBay through the eBay API. Merchants can also earn commissions from affiliate marketing programs by eBay.

References

I hope that independent editors find my proposed addition helpful. Thanks, JN at Axicom (talk) 17:07, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

• Is there a more recent count of sellers? Is there one not based on an eBay press release? Also, I don't see the relevance of the Reuters article, other than it mentions individuals and small businesses, which the next paragraph leads with already. Another hint -- avoid marketing speak completely. I know it's hard! "eBay's marketplace features approx. 17 million sellers" -- no, it doesn't feature all those sellers. Just the facts. As of so and so date, eBay has 17 million sellers. Or something like that. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 21:28, 31 January 2026 (UTC)

  Hey, User:jpgordon! I appreciate the feedback. First, I'll provide context on a couple of editorial decisions I made. You're the non-COI editor, so please make your own determination, but perhaps it'll help if I explain myself a little bit.

  The Inc. Magazine piece is the best secondary source I could find that has a firm number (17 million, as of 2021) for the size of the seller ecosystem. There are other outlets—for example, this digital marketing blog— that say eBay has about 18.3 million sellers circa now, but those don't strike me as credible sources, even if the number is probably more or less correct.

  The Reuters article is there to substantiate the claim about the composition of the ecosystem (i.e. it's made up of individuals and small businesses). I mentioned "small businesses" specifically because I believe they're a meaningfully distinct seller category, as opposed to the more generic "companies" mentioned in the following paragraph.

  With all that said, here's a lightly revised version of the sentence:

  As of 2021, eBay's marketplace has approximately 17 million sellers including individuals and small businesses.

  Let me know what you think. Thanks again, JN at Axicom (talk) 17:52, 4 February 2026 (UTC)

  But it's individuals, small businesses, and also medium and large businesses -- all of which we say in the next paragraph. "eBay can be used by individuals, companies and governments to purchase and sell..." Always best to keep the opening paragraph tight and concise. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 01:24, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

  User:jpgordon: I see your point. Would you be okay with just including the 2021 seller figure? Something like this:

  As of 2021, eBay's marketplace has approximately 17 million sellers

  Thanks for being patient with me here. I appreciate your explanations. JN at Axicom (talk) 00:10, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

  I wonder if we can find similar data to parallel the scope of the data presented for buyers? That is, "In 2021, eBay had 17 million sellers, N% of which were in the United States?" Consolidating the number-of-sellers and number-of-buyers information would be pretty tidy. Isn't that sort of information available in eBay's annual reports? --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 01:37, 6 February 2026 (UTC)

  User:Jpgordon: Unfortunately, I'm not sure that data is available. Or at least it's not publicly reported. I think the best reliable source I can provide is that 2021 seller figure. JN at Axicom (talk) 23:56, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

  Yeah, the 2021 10-K seems to be the most recent accounting of the number of sellers, and it doesn't have a breakdown by region. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 00:47, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

  User:Jpgordon: Yeah, these 10-Ks, outside of some essential details, can be a bit inconsistent in terms of what kind of information they contain. So are you okay adding that one brief sentence? Thank you, again, for your help. I really appreciate it! JN at Axicom (talk) 01:01, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

  I've put in the 17 million number, and the actual source your reference was citing. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 05:52, 14 February 2026 (UTC)

  User:Jpgordon: appreciate the help with this, thank you! JN at Axicom (talk) 00:11, 19 February 2026 (UTC)

References

Adding content to 2020s subsection

Hey there, I would like to ask editors to consider adding to the 2020s subsection of the History. I've composed a draft, which includes new passages about notable acquisitions the company has made over the past few years, as well as some company developments that have received coverage in reliable sources. I invite independent editors to review my draft by clicking the dropdown below. All highlighted content is new; all unhighlighted content is exactly as it appears on the page right now.

Extended content

2020s

In April 2020, Jamie Iannone became the CEO of eBay. In June 2020, Fred D. Anderson and Thomas J. Tierney resigned from the board of directors of the company; both had been directors since 2003. In July 2020, eBay sold its classifieds business to Adevinta for $2.5 billion in cash and 540 million shares of Adevinta. To gain regulatory approval, Gumtree was further divested. eBay sold its shares in Adevinta in 2023, when that company was acquired by private equity firms.

In September 2020, Pierre Omidyar resigned from the board of directors, after resigning as chairman in 2015. In November 2021, eBay sold its South Korean business to Emart for $3 billion.

In 2020, eBay launched a service that would guarantee the authenticity of luxury sneakers sold on its platform. This authenticity guarantee expanded over the next several years to include other high-end goods such as watches, handbags, jewelry, and apparel. EBay also launched its Up & Running Grants program in 2020. The program provides 50 small business owners each year with a $10,000 grant to improve their companies.

In May 2022, eBay acquired a stake in Funko and became the preferred secondary marketplace for Funko. In June 2022, the company acquired KnownOrigin, a marketplace for non-fungible tokens. Ebay acquired MyFitment, a company specializing in fitment and compatibility data, in August 2022. In October 2022, the company acquired TCGPlayer, a marketplace for collectible card games, for approximately $295 million.

In 2022, eBay launched a venture capital arm called eBay Ventures. This part of the company invests in start-up companies that develop marketplace technologies. Its first investment was placed in the Norwegian social marketplace Tise.

In February 2023, eBay acquired 3PM Shield, a company that uses artificial intelligence to identify potentially fraudulent goods and sellers. In July 2023, eBay acquired Certilogo, a provider of AI-powered digital IDs and authentication for apparel and fashion goods.

In January 2024, the company announced plans to lay off 9% of its workforce after hiring outpaced growth projections.

In January 2025, eBay acquired Caramel, a company that digitally manages the final steps of a vehicle sale such as financing, insurance, and ownership transfer. In September 2025, eBay acquired Tise, a social marketplace for secondhand fashion and homeware.

References

My hope is that this draft is up to snuff, but if it's not, please leave me a comment below and I will try to adjust the content so that it better fits community standards. Thanks! JN at Axicom (talk) 21:13, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

Reply 20-MAY-2026

  Clarification requested  

• EBay's authenticity guarantee needs additional information. Specifically how, and in what way, the individual customer who makes use of this service receives their renumeration if that authenticty is determined not to be the case after the purchased item is paid for. Any other peculiarties or requirements of the authenticity guarantee program ought to be delineated.
• To merit inclusion in the article, the individual companies and or services that EBay launches, acquires, or otherwise collaborates with should be independently notable in Wikipedia. To that end, kindly provide the WikiLinks for the companies and services mentioned in the requested text.
• When ready to proceed with the requested information, kindly change the {{Edit COI}} template's answer parameter to read from |ans=y to |ans=n.

Thank you! Regards,  Spintendo  09:50, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Spintendo: I appreciate your comments here. As far as the authenticity guarantee, I'm happy to expand that content a bit, but I worry about digressing too much, since this is part of a History section. For consideration, here is a description of how eBay authenticates luxury sneakers from the cited CNN piece:

Here’s how it works: After a sale is completed, qualifying sneakers sold on eBay will be shipped to the company’s third-party authentication facility, instead of to the buyer. There, human experts will use a multi-point inspection process to verify that the shoes “are consistent with the listing title, description and images.” Approved items will be tagged as authentic and shipped to the buyer.

The sneaker authentication program also protects sellers who offer return options from having counterfeit items shipped back to them by predatory purchasers – that is, people who buy legit goods but then initiate a return and swap in fake ones. Sneaker returns will be shipped back to the center for verification of authenticity and condition, confirming it is the exact item that was sold, before they are sent to the seller.

Would a summary of those facts be suitable to add? I'm trying to better understand what you're looking for.

I'm also confused by your criteria for adding content about acquisitions. The page you linked to is about notability for standalone articles, and it has a brief section that stipulates "notability guidelines do not apply to content within articles or lists." It also doesn't seem out of the ordinary for corporate articles to cover acquisitions of companies that don't have their own Wikipedia articles. You can see this, for instance, in the Walmart article. Amazon has an article dedicated to its many acquisitions, the vast majority of which don't have their own Wiki articles.

I can take a second look at the acquisitions content and try to reduce it. I understand that too much of that kind of thing might stray into promotional territory. But I'm not sure what standard I should apply, when determining what to keep and what to discard. Any direction or clarification you could offer here would be much appreciated.

Again, many thanks for replying to my request. I'll standby and wait for you to weigh in further. Cheers! JN at Axicom (talk) 23:24, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

I'm going to ask User:Jpgordon if they would like to weigh in here. No problem if they're not. I'm just looking for some guidance as far as how I should proceed from here. Thanks! JN at Axicom (talk) 23:13, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

I think your very first source on the authentication line points entirely adequately to an a WP:RS that does describe how the authentication works. The company timeline doesn't need operational details. It could be the case that a paragraph elsewhere in the article about authentication would be of interest. Spintendo, JN makes a very good point here; we do seem to have a practice of including acquisitions of otherwise non-notable companies in company histories. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 05:54, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, User:Jpgordon. I'm happy to give Spintendo more time to weigh in, but I also don't know if they're interested in engaging further. If you could give me advice on what to do next, I'd much appreciate it.

As I said above, I can trim some of the suggested new content if non-COI editors think it's a bit too much. I just want to make sure I'm making cuts according to a particular standard first. (Quality of sourcing, tone, level of description, etc.) Or perhaps I should add a bit more information? I'm not really sure. Anyway, thanks in advance for any guidance you can provide! JN at Axicom (talk) 23:28, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Well, I kinda think there's too much detail -- you're mixing in history of acquisitions with descriptions of eBay features. It's leaning a bit much into the marketing/promotional side. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 02:23, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

I cut some content. I'm also open to further instruction. Just let me know! JN at Axicom (talk) 21:02, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Good work on the cuts. Why do we care when eBay announced something? In 2020, eBay announced that it was launching a service that would guarantee the authenticity of luxury sneakers sold on its platform -- why not In 2020, eBay launched a service that guarantees the authenticity of luxury sneakers sold on its platform? And so on. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 22:47, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Jpgordon: Yeah, I think that's a reasonable way to streamline the content. I've cut both instances of "announced" that were in my suggested additions above, so that the claims are now a bit more straightforward. I left one "announced" in the existing content because, as a COI editor, I'm hesitant to rewrite anything that isn't inaccurate or in obvious violation of the site's content rules. I'll leave the fate of that passage up to you. Look forward to hearing your thoughts! JN at Axicom (talk) 21:58, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

While I'm picking nits -- do you really think it's worth bragging that eBay is 63rd on a list of innovative companies? Maybe top 10 might be mentionable, but 63rd? --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 22:49, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Totally fair point, User:Jpgordon. I snipped that claim from the draft, too. What do you think now? JN at Axicom (talk) 01:56, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

Looks good to me. Double-check the changes I made to the article to verify that they're what you intended. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 05:14, 19 June 2026 (UTC)

Yep, your changes look great to me, User:Jpgordon. I really appreciate you taking the time to work through these edits with me! JN at Axicom (talk) 18:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Updating Financial history table

Hi, again! My next request, which concerns the Financial history section, is a fairly simple one. The existing table currently ends in 2022, so I’d like to update it to include financial and employee figures for 2023, 2024, and 2025. I’ve put together an updated version using eBay’s 10-K filings for each year (to stay consistent with the references in the rest of the table). I also provided new citations for 2021 and 2022 to link to the correct 10-K for these years. Everything else in the table is exactly the same as it is in the article now.

Extended content

Financial history

Year	Revenue in mil. USD$	Net income in mil. USD$	Total assets in mil. USD$	Price per share in USD$	Employees
2005	4,552	1,082	11,789	15.65	11,600
2006	5,970	1,126	13,494	13.00	13,200
2007	7,672	348	15,366	13.25	15,500
2008	8,541	1,779	15,592	9.58	16,200
2009	8,727	2,389	18,408	7.29	16,400
2010	9,156	1,801	22,004	9.68	17,700
2011	11,652	3,229	27,320	12.28	27,770
2012	14,072	2,609	37,074	16.61	31,500
2013	16,047	2,856	41,488	21.03	33,500
2014	8,790	46	45,132	21.01	34,600
2015	8,592	1,725	17,755	25.00	11,600
2016	8,979	7,266	23,847	27.08	12,600
2017	9,567	(1,016)	25,981	35.06	14,100
2018	10,746	2,530	22,819	34.31	14,000
2019	10,800	1,792	18,174	35.50	13,300
2020	8,894	5,667	19,310	36.45	12,700
2021	10,420	13,608	26,626	34.43	10,800
2022	9,790	(1,270)	20,850	34.34	11,600
2023	10,112	2,767	21,620	43.82	12,300
2024	10,283	1,975	19,365	56.05	11,500
2025	11,100	2,031	17,610	76.68	12,300

References

As noted in a previous request, I have a financial conflict of interest, so I’m hoping another editor will be willing to review this request for me. User:Jpgordon, I welcome your help again if you’ve got the time and interest. If not, I understand that, too.

Thanks in advance to whoever might take a look at this for me! JN at Axicom (talk) 15:58, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

• If I do put it in, I'll collapse the whole thing. Interesting looking at the numbers of employees...I was employee #30. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 16:27, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

  User:Jpgordon: wow, you were employee #30? What an incredible chapter to have been part of!

  When you say "collapse," do you mean readers would be able to expand or hide the table contents? If so, I think that's a great idea. It'd definitely help save space on the page. Unfortunately, I don't have any experience creating that sort of thing, so I'll defer to you on best practice. If I can be of any help, just let me know. Thank you, again! JN at Axicom (talk) 16:39, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

  Yeah, expand/hide. You've done exactly that with the "extended content". (It was indeed an incredible chapter. I was Meg Whitman's first hire, though the head of engineering did the actual selection. I was glad when it was over.) --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 16:44, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

  Double check my changes to the article please. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 16:53, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

  It all looks good to me, User:Jpgordon! Thanks for your help. JN at Axicom (talk) 16:50, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Point72 Asset Management

Page updates

Hi, this page could use some updating and cleanup.

Please add to the "2014-2019" subsection of History:

• In 2015, the firm created Point72 Academy, a 15-month paid program to train college graduates to work for the firm, and in 2016, the program began recruiting college graduates from Europe and Asia. That same year, the firm started Point72 Ventures, a venture capital unit focused on developing financial technology. In June 2025, Point72 Ventures helped fund series A for CX2, a military technology startup.

Please add to the "2020 to present" subsection of History:

• In March 2020, Point72 hired Mo Grimeh as head of its macro investing business, and created Point72 Hyperscale, a hybrid venture and private equity fund for early-stage AI technology companies. In 2025, Point72 Turion began as a stock-picking hedge fund focused on AI.

References

Thank you very much.Mrsnewyork (talk) 12:29, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Go ahead: I have reviewed these proposed changes and suggest that you go ahead and make the proposed changes to the page. Dahawk04 (talk) 23:56, 1 July 2025 (UTC)

Dahawk04 thank you for reviewing, I have made the changes! Mrsnewyork (talk) 17:02, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Already done Dahawk04 (talk) 17:19, 2 July 2025 (UTC)

Further suggestions

Hi again, I'd like to suggest a few more updates to the article:

• Please add the following explanation of Point72 Ventures: Initially, Point72 focused on fintech startups before shifting focus to additional sectors such as investing in AI, defense technology and consumer startups.
• In 2025, Point72 Turion began as a stock-picking hedge fund focused on AI - please add to this sentence that in 2025, Point72 Turion had $1.5 billion in assets.
• The "Nines" program was created in 2012 for analysts to build a team and test strategies. It was renamed LaunchPoint in 2020.
• Point72 has offices in Miami, Seattle, Dubai, Milan and Bengaluru
• In 2008, Harry Schwefel joined the firm and was appointed as co-CIO in 2018.
• Timothy Shaughnessy is currently listed as CEO in the article. Please correct to Chief operating officer. See this source for verification.

References

Thank you Mrsnewyork (talk) 17:19, 30 July 2025 (UTC)

I could validate the Miami office and Turion fund AUM. Will review others time permitting VacFiller (talk) 20:33, 21 August 2025 (UTC)

Thanks VacFiller! The list of references at the bottom of my edit request has sources to support inclusion of the remaining information. Mrsnewyork (talk) 14:12, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

@Mrsnewyork:, a few notes here. The first is that I added this primary source to footnotes in the information box. Normally primary sources are not to be used but if it is verifying basic information then it is acceptable. I updated leadership positions based on that link. For future requests, I would suggest you change the website so you do not have to bring in references from various sources to support. This also keeps the list evergreen. Be back with more comments shortly. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:55, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

For the line "...Harry Schwefel joined the firm and was appointed...", this is the kind of company jargon that isn't necessary. Readers don't care when someone was appointed. In fact, I was going to remove the information about early hirings but it seems relevant to one of the accusations made by the New York Times. So unless there is something notable about the appointment, I would not be willing to add it. Others may disagree so up to them what they would want to do here.--CNMall41 (talk) 18:01, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

For "...Timothy Shaughnessy is currently listed as CEO...", adding to the comment above actually. I do not see this person on the company website which is the precise reason why the primary source should be used for such information. Since there is nothing relevant to them, I simply removed their appointment from the body altogether. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:04, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

For office locations, these should never be in the body unless there is some relevance to them. Simply listing offices is not encyclopedic. I did add them to the information box as general information but removed the rest from the body. Again, I am using a primary source so that you do not need to keep tracking down different sources for when locations change. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:07, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

There is nothing on the page about LaunchPoint currently. If you are suggesting that it be added, it would need to be written different than how you proposed as it does not provide much context. I would suggest coming up with a brief overview of what the company does such as its funds and then propose it in a new section, keeping WP:NPOV and WP:PROMO in mind. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:18, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Finally, there is no source for your first proposed change. I would also suggest you incorporate that into a request for a brief overview about what they offer as that could then be added to the lead potentially. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:19, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

I think that is all. I would like to reiterate that it is important to use the edit request feature for COI edits as opposed to requesting on user's talk pages. I do realize that the queue for requests can be long and take time, but it is necessary to avoid the appearance of canvassing. --CNMall41 (talk) 18:21, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Partly done: See comments herein. CNMall41 (talk) 18:21, 9 September 2025 (UTC)

Hi CNMall41, thank you for your extensive cleanup of this article and constructive feedback. I have used the edit request tag for both my requests, I understand its necessity.

To your point about including a source to further contextualize Point72 Ventures, I've included the source on the page, with 2 additional sources, for convenience below:

@Mrsnewyork:, I realized you used the edit request template, but that was not the reason I pointed it out. I was pointing out the user talk page requests which again, can give the impression of canvassing. Just something to keep in mind. Unfortunately, I cannot access the Bloomberg or Forbes articles as they are paywalled. I would suggest formatting everything as a new request so others with immediate access to the sourcing can review. Cheers!--CNMall41 (talk) 20:35, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

• Initially, Point72 Ventures focused on fintech startups before shifting focus to additional sectors such as investing in AI and defense technology startups.

I have also written further context for Point72 Launchpoint below, taking into consideration your points about WP:NPOV and WP:PROMO:

• The "Nines" program was created in 2012 for analysts to build a team and test strategies and as of 2020, has trained over 70 long/short managers. The program was renamed Launchpoint in 2020; it trains portfolio managers to create a business plan and investing strategy, and build a team. As of 2023, 50% of Point72's long/short managers were from Launchpoint.

Finally, a clarification that Andrew B. Cohen is the CIO for Cohen Private Ventures, not Point72 Asset Management see company website and here is a second source. His listing in the Infobox as CIO is a bit misleading.

References

Thank you again Mrsnewyork (talk) 17:37, 11 September 2025 (UTC)

Tweak language, subsection names

In a continued effort to bring this article further within Wikipedia guidelines, I suggest consolidating the "History" subsections under the heading, "Background and history," as it will streamline the content and chronology.

Second, I suggest the following language update for the opening "Background and history" section, both for WP:RELEVANCE and for further context to the founding of Point72. I tweaked the existing language a bit, expanding on Cohen's personal SEC settlement, as well as Point72's efforts to develop their legal and compliance teams. I also updated many of the references according to WP:RS:

Background and History

Point72 was founded in 2014 by Steve Cohen as a family office, following Cohen's former company, SAC Capital, pleading guilty to federal insider trading charges and paying a $1.8 billion fine. Cohen himself was not personally charged with insider trading. In 2016, Cohen reached a settlement with the SEC over failure to supervise one of the employees convicted of insider trading, a charge he neither admitted or denied, and agreed not to manage outside capital for two years. Following that period, in 2018, Cohen resumed operations as a registered investment advisor and Point72 opened to external investors. Point72 also took measures to develop its legal and compliance departments, including hiring Vincent Tortorella as chief compliance and surveillance officer, and Kevin J. O'Connor (attorney) as in-house attorney. Tortorella's compliance team included former CIA, FBI and SEC personnel.

Finally, CNMall41 suggested that I include greater context for Point72 Ventures in a new request, as the sources I used are paywalled. For convenience, I included both links to the archived versions of the articles, as well as quotes from the article to support the content:

Point72 Ventures:

• Initially, Point72 Ventures focused on fintech startups:

Quote: "Billionaire Steven Cohen’s investment firm is starting a venture capital unit to fund and help develop financial technology for asset managers."

before shifting focus to additional sectors such as investing in AI

Quote: "Cohen’s firm, Point72 Asset Management, set up the new investment vehicle in March under the name Point72 Ventures...It will provide early stage capital, along with advice and feedback, to startups in fields such as data mining, artificial intelligence, and machine learning."

and defense technology startups

Quote from Bloomberg: "Billionaire Steve Cohen’s Point72 Asset Management is raising its first venture capital fund for clients, seeking to bet on the “urgent” need for defense technology startups."

Quote from Forbes: "Billionaire Steve Cohen’s venture capital arm, Point72 Ventures, is pivoting away from fintech and crypto...The firm will instead shift more focus to investing in artificial intelligence and defense technology startups..."

References

Thank you Mrsnewyork (talk) 15:13, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Not done: The proposed changes are removing content that is well-cited or where sources exist. Encoded  Talk 💬 16:23, 21 December 2025 (UTC)

Hi Encoded, thanks for reviewing my request. I'd like to take another stab at this, as this section could use some cleanup to fix the primary source and "citation needed," and tighten the language. I know that the history of SAC Capital Advisors is intertwined with the founding of Point72, however, SAC has its own article that expands on the insider trading lawsuit. Below is a revised version of the first paragraph of the 2014 to 2019 subsection, which now includes the context that I omitted in the rpevious version. If you have time, would you mind looking this over? Thanks!

Background and History

Point72 was founded in 2014 by Steve Cohen as a family office, following an 11-year investigation which culminated in Cohen's former company, SAC Capital, pleading guilty to federal insider trading charges and paying a $1.8 billion fine. Cohen himself was not personally charged with insider trading. In 2016, Cohen reached a settlement with the SEC over failure to supervise one of the employees convicted of insider trading, a charge he neither admitted or denied, and agreed not to manage outside capital for two years. Additionally, Point72 was initially not allowed to manage money from outside investors. Following that period, in 2018, Cohen resumed operations as a registered investment advisor and Point72 opened to external investors. Point72 also took measures to develop its legal and compliance departments, including hiring Vincent Tortorella as chief compliance and surveillance officer, and Kevin J. O'Connor (attorney) as in-house attorney. Tortorella's compliance team included former CIA, FBI and SEC personnel.

References

I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Mrsnewyork (talk) 13:15, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Further cleanup & suggested edits

This new request clarifies and addresses some of the discussion points from above with CNMall41 and Encoded, as well as STEMinfo at Talk:Steve Cohen (businessman)#BLP cleanup. I still think this article can use some updating and below I point to well-sourced, relevant content that is missing.

Currently, the description of the company's founding has significant overlap between Point72 and SAC Capital, and my revision seeks to focus more on Point72 while summarizing the events leading to SAC Capital closing, per WP:RELEVANCE. The updates include:

• Renaming the “History” section as "Background and History" to provide further context to the founding of Point72.
• Alternate sourcing for a primary source and a citation needed tag in the first paragraph of History.
• An expanded sentence about Point72's efforts to develop their legal and compliance teams.

I include my suggested language with crossed out content that I think should be deleted or I have summarized. I highlighted my summaries and cleanup of current content in yellow. All new content is highlighted in blue.

Background and History

Point72 has origins to 1992 with the founding of S.A.C. Capital Advisors, a group of hedge funds founded by Steve Cohen. Point72 was founded in 2014 by Steve Cohen as a family office, following Cohen's former company, SAC Capital, pleading guilty to federal insider trading charges in 2013 and paying a $1.8 billion fine. after an 11-year investigation into insider trading. Point72 was founded in 2014 by Steve Cohen as the successor to S.A.C. with the bulk of S.A.C.'s assets being transferred to Point72.(no source) Cohen himself was not personally charged with insider trading. In 2016, Cohen reached a settlement with the SEC over failure to supervise one of the employees convicted of insider trading, a charge he neither admitted or denied, and agreed not to manage outside capital for two years. Following that period, in 2018, Cohen resumed operations as a registered investment advisor and Point72 opened to external investors. Point72 also took measures to develop its legal and compliance departments, including hiring Vincent Tortorella as chief compliance and surveillance officer, and Kevin J. O'Connor (attorney) as in-house attorney. Tortorella's compliance team included former CIA, FBI and SEC personnel. Douglas D. Haynes was appointed president.

Furthermore, I want to highlight the missing content that I raised in a previous request (see Talk:Point72 Asset Management#Tweak language, subsection names for direct quotes from the paywalled sources). Those additions are italicized below:

• Point72 was founded in 2014 by Steve Cohen as a family office.
• Point72 Ventures shifted from solely focusing on fintech to additional sectors which should be included. I suggest the following:
  • That same year, the firm started Point72 Ventures, a venture capital unit. Initially, Point72 Ventures focused on fintech startups before shifting focus to additional sectors such as investing in AI and defense technology startups.
• Point72's "Nines" program, now known as LaunchPoint.
  • Point72 also has the “Nines” program which was renamed LaunchPoint in 2020. It trains portfolio managers to create a business plan and investing strategy, and build a team. As of 2023, 50% of Point72's long/short managers were from LaunchPoint.

References

I appreciate everyone's involvement to bring this article closer to Wikipedia guidelines. Thank you Mrsnewyork (talk) 14:12, 23 April 2026 (UTC)

Not done for now It appears that you are trying to separate SAC's history from Point72 to give it a clean start, yet the Wall Street Journal article clearly says Point72 was formerly known as SAC Capital Advisors LP. I have no problem adding the compliance info, since that's a result of the firm's previous troubled history as SAC, but I'll let others review, including those who were also pinged, and see what they think. STEMinfo (talk) 21:56, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks STEMinfo for weighing in. My goal was simply to refocus this article on Point72 since S.A.C. Capital Advisors has its own article. While Point72's history is indeed intertwined with S.A.C Capital, legally, they are two separate entities. Please use whatever language you think is best, in addition to updating the other non-controversial content requested. Thanks so much for your attention on all of this. Mrsnewyork (talk) 14:32, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Reply 11-JUN-2026

  Edit request declined  

• The provided reason for making this change, legally they are two separate entities, is mistaken in how it views Wikipedia as operating. Wikipedia does not operate solely on legal frameworks, rather, its content requirements operate on the basis of WP:V. Furthermore, the COI editor admits that Point72's history is indeed intertwined with S.A.C Capital. That coupled with the already existing sources which provide verifiability are reasons why the information ought not to be changed.

Regards,  Spintendo  08:01, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Straightforward updates to the article

I understand from the previous discussion that I need to do some further research to explain the differences between SAC and Point72 for Wikipedia. In the meantime, I'd like to bring attention to the more straightforward and well-sourced recommendations from the previous request to update the Point72 article. Additions are italicized.

• In the lead, add that Point72 was founded in 2014 by Steve Cohen as a family office.
• Rename the "History" section as "Background and History" to provide further context to the founding of Point72.
• In the first paragraph of the History section, expand the sentence about Point72's efforts to develop their legal and compliance teams:

Point72 also took measures to develop its legal and compliance departments, including hiring Vincent Tortorella as chief compliance and surveillance officer, and Kevin J. O'Connor (attorney) as in-house attorney. Tortorella's compliance team included former CIA, FBI and SEC personnel.

• In the second paragraph of the History section, edit the last sentence to read:
  • That same year, the firm started Point72 Ventures, a venture capital unit. Initially, Point72 Ventures focused on fintech startups before shifting focus to additional sectors such as investing in AI and defense technology startups.
• After the second paragraph of the 2020-present section, and a new paragraph:

Point72 also has the “Nines” program which was renamed LaunchPoint in 2020. It trains portfolio managers to create a business plan and investing strategy, and build a team. As of 2023, 50% of Point72's long/short managers were from LaunchPoint.

References

I am pinging the most recent editors who chimed in above, STEMinfo and Spintendo, to review this updated request. Thank you. Mrsnewyork (talk) 15:52, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Responding to ping. I'm still not convinced that SAC shouldn't be renamed to Point 72 and the content of this article merged into the newly renamed article. SAC's assets were all moved into Point72, regardless of the legal gymnastics designed to make Point72 appear to be a completely new entity. The WSJ says Point 72 was formerly known as SAC, and then executives were all replaced to give the company a fresh start. But it's still the same history. I don't want to be doing any whitewashing so I'll let others more familiar with the company's history address this request. STEMinfo (talk) 00:21, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

As this request doesn't touch on the larger conversation about the relationship between SAC and Point72, and I think it's important to update the Point72 content here, I'd still appreciate an editor vet this request. With approval, I'm happy to add the content to the article myself if that is easiest. Mrsnewyork (talk) 13:19, 1 July 2026 (UTC): Note:

Mrsnewyork, Responding to your request on my talk page: with the exception of NYT, I do not have access to subscription sources quoted in your proposed revisions. To provide access, you could login to each source requiring a subscription, and archive each page at the Wayback Machine, or alternatively, use the |quote parameter in citations to subscriptions like Reuters and Bloomberg. Grand'mere Eugene (talk) 21:28, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Informa

Article Lead Request

Hello there,

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

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

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

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

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

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

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

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

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

References

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Article Lead Request 2

Hello there,

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

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

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

References

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

2. OK

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

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

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

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

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

Article Lead Request

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

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

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

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

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

• May the final sentence be updated by:

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

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

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

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

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

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

References

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Operations Request

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

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

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

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

Informa is organized into five operating divisions:

• Three divisions are B2B events-focused:

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

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

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

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

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

The company also has a Global Support division.

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

References

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

Thanks for the update. Here's my feedback:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

History Section Request

Hi there.

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

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

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

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

1998 to 2013

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

[...]

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

2014 to present

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

[...]

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

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

History Section Request 2

Really appreciate it Dormskirk for implementing the sub-headings!

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

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

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

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

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

• Removal of the "Informaworld" discontinued domain paragraph.

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

• Removal of the sentence regarding Hobby Star Marketing.

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

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

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

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

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

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

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

1998 to 2013

[...]

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

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

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

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

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

References

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

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

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

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

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

History Section Request 3

Thanks again @Dormskirk for implementing my last suggested changes.

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

Could I please suggest:

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

• Is hard to follow.

• Uses incorrect tenses.

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

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

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

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

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

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

1998 to 2013

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

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

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

References

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

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

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

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

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

History Section Request 4

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

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

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

• Informa's entry to the FTSE100 in 2016.

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

• The company's response to the Covid pandemic.

• The change in company chairman in June 2021.

• I have also found three replacement citations for:

• The Dove Medical Press acquisition,

• The sale of UBM Life Sciences,

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

• Removal of tangential information about the launch of Omdia.

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

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

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

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

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

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

In January 2020 Informa acquired F1000 Research Limited.

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

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

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

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

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

References

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

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

Hi Dormskirk and hope you are well.

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

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

History Section Request 5

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

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

• Partnerships in Saudi Arabia and Dubai.

• Acquisition of Winsight.

How it would appear:

Proposed Changes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References

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

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

Hi Dormskirk and apologies for any misunderstanding.

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

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

Reply 20-JUN-2026

  H:WIKILINKs requested  

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

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

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

Nouria Hernandez

Request for page update

Hello, I work for the University of Lausanne, and Nouria Hernandez is a former rector and professor of this institution. I have updated a few dead or incorrect links in sources, but would rather go through the "requested edits" for other proposed changes, due to the COI.

First of all, in the "Life and career" section, I wanted to add the following sentence:

In 2023, she received a honorary Doctor of Science degree from the Cold Spring Harbor School of Biological Sciences, and in 2025, she was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

In addition to adding these two facts, this provides a new source, the biographical information from the website of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, which confirms some of the information already provided in the article. There are more sources available (although mostly in French, which you can see in the French language article); I wanted to check which facts would require additional/better citations (which I will happily look into) ?

My other request is about adding a paragraph about what her research was about, which could either go directly into the "Life and carreer" section, or in a "Research" subsection:

Her research work has focused on the regulation of gene expression in mammals.

During her PhD, she used an in vitro system to show that the Precursor mRNA splicing reaction could be separated from transcription. Afterwards, she worked on the transcription of the U small nuclear RNAs, which are involved in several cellular processes including Precursor mRNA splicing. This work showed that RNA polymerase II and RNA polymerase III transcription depends on several common transcription factors.

She later worked on the enzyme RNA polymerase III and its effect on transcription in mice when it is deregulated. This led to the discovery of links between RNA polymerase III transcription and the regulation of growth and metabolism, in particular lipid metabolism.

I have added one general reference (the one from the American Academy of Sciences) in the first paragraph describing her research in general, and then 1-2 scientific references for each of the three parts of her career (trying to source everything without adding too many notes).

Let me know if there is something to change/improve !

Many thanks in advance, BooksWithTea (talk) 13:45, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Jack Logan (filmmaker)

Update on “Social media” subsection under “Career”

I would like to suggest expanding the “Social media” subsection under “Career” to reflect newer independent coverage of Jack Logan’s revived #JackLoganRealtalks series in 2026. The proposed wording is neutral and based on coverage from Daily Tribune, Manila Bulletin, and ABS-CBN Lifestyle. Please feel free to edit the proposed text if necessary. Thank you very much!

Proposed text:

In 2026, Logan revived #JackLoganRealtalks as a short-form social commentary series focused on Philippine social and political issues."Jack Logan on purpose, platform, and speaking out". Manila Bulletin. 30 April 2026. Retrieved 20 June 2026. The series was covered by Daily Tribune, which described its vertical-format episodes as direct and relatable discussions of everyday issues affecting Filipinos."Laughing through the truth: Jack Logan's 'Realtalks' sparks conversations online". Daily Tribune. 27 April 2026. Retrieved 20 June 2026. Manila Bulletin described the project as a return to short-form commentary blending satire, humor, and social observation,"Jack Logan on purpose, platform, and speaking out". Manila Bulletin. 30 April 2026. Retrieved 20 June 2026. while ABS-CBN Lifestyle profiled Logan’s use of humor in discussing political issues."Why content creator Jack Logan uses humor to tackle political issues". ABS-CBN Lifestyle. 18 May 2026. Retrieved 20 June 2026.

Thank you very much.

Suggested sources:

• Daily Tribune: https://tribune.net.ph/2026/04/27/laughing-through-the-truth-jack-logans-realtalks-sparks-conversations-online
• Manila Bulletin: https://mb.com.ph/2026/04/30/jack-logan-on-purpose-platform-and-speaking-out
• ABS-CBN Lifestyle: https://www.abs-cbn.com/lifestyle/people-culture-events/2026/5/18/why-content-creator-jack-logan-uses-humor-to-tackle-political-issues-1602

RavenFireblade (talk) 14:12, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Reply 16-JUN-2026

  Unable to review  

• Your edit request could not be reviewed because it is unclear which references are connected to which claim statements in the text of your proposal. When proposing edit requests it is important to highlight in the text, through the use of ref tags, which specific sources are doing the referencing for each claim. The point of these inline ref tags is to allow the reviewer and readers to check that the material is sourced; that point will be lost if the ref tags are not clearly placed. Note the examples below:

Examples

N  INCORRECT

The Sun's diameter is 864,337 miles, while the Moon's diameter is 2,159 miles. The Sun's temperature is 5,778 Kelvin.

References

---

      1. Sjöblad, Tristan. The Sun. Academic Press, 2019, p. 1.
      2. Harinath, Paramjit. (2019) "Size of the Moon", Science, 51(78):46.
      3. Uemura, Shū. The Sun's Heat. Academic Press, 2019, p. 2.

In the first example above there are three references provided, but the claim statements do not contain ref tags indicating which reference applies where. The references instead have been placed outside of the text, bundled together towards the bottom. Your edit request similarly bundles references together outside of the area of the requested text. These links between material and their source references must be more clearly made, as shown in the next example below:

Y  CORRECT

The Sun's diameter is 864,337.3 miles,<ref>{{cite book|no-tracking=true|last1=Sjöblad|first1=Tristan|title=The Sun|url=http://www.booksource.com|publisher=Academic Press|date=2020|page=1}}</ref> while the Moon's diameter is 2,159 miles.<ref>{{cite journal|no-tracking=true|last1=Harinath|first1=Prisha|title=Size of the Moon|journal=Science|issue=78|volume=51|url=http://www.journalsource.com|date=2020|page=46}}</ref> The Sun's temperature is 5,778 Kelvin.<ref>{{cite book|no-tracking=true|last1=Uemura|first1=Shu|title=The Sun's Heat|url=http://www.websource.com|publisher=Academic Press|date=2020|page=2}}</ref>

Which displays as:

The Sun's diameter is 864,337.3 miles, while the Moon's diameter is 2,159 miles. The Sun's temperature is 5,778 Kelvin.

References

---

• In the second example above, the links between the provided references and their claim statement ref tags are perfectly clear. Kindly reformulate your edit request so that it aligns more with the second example above, and feel free to re-submit that edit request at your earliest convenience.

Regards,  Spintendo  11:23, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the guidance. I have revised the proposed text above to include inline ref tags showing which sources support each claim. Please feel free to edit the wording if necessary for neutrality, style, or due weight. RavenFireblade (talk) 14:24, 20 June 2026 (UTC)

Anja Kotar

Request to update career and discography

I have a conflict of interest because I am the subject of this article. I am requesting review from an uninvolved editor.

Suggested changes:

1. In the “Career” section, after the sentence about Earmilk covering “Fun For You”, please add:

In 2022, Kotar released 12 Months, a project structured around one song for each month of the year. The project was described by musicto as “a musical version of the calendar,” with each song named and themed after a month.

Suggested source: https://www.musicto.com/news/in-the-spotlight/in-the-spotlight-anja-kotar/

2. In the same section, please add:

In 2023, Kotar released the album Hopeless Romantic.

Suggested sources: https://music.apple.com/us/album/hopeless-romantic/1708459010 https://open.spotify.com/album/0t693lqDk1XlU8avBNrCKz

3. Please add a current-career update:

In 2026, Kotar continued releasing music as part of her ongoing At The Bookstore project. LOUD WOMEN described the project as being released song by song, with each track inspired by a different book genre, title, cover, or bookstore find.

Suggested source: https://loudwomen.org/2026/05/28/track-of-the-day-anja-kotar-shares-bookish-bop-writers-lovers/

4. In the “Albums and extended plays” section, please add:

• Hopeless Romantic (2023)

Suggested sources: https://music.apple.com/us/album/hopeless-romantic/1708459010 https://open.spotify.com/album/0t693lqDk1XlU8avBNrCKz

Thank you. Anjakotar97 (talk) 20:51, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Reply 23-JUN-2026

  WikiLinks are missing  

• Your proposed text appears to be missing key H:WIKILINKs which may help to facilitate a reader's understanding of the subject matter.
• In your proposed text, it was noted that 12 Months, Hopeless Romantic and At The Bookstoore were not WikiLinked.
• WikiLinks provide instant pathways to locations within and outside the project that can increase readers' understanding of the topic at hand. Whenever writing or editing an article, it's important to consider not only what to put in the article, but also what links to include to help the reader find related information. Official guidance for the use of links is to avoid both underlinking and overlinking.
• To save time, please feel free to place these WikiLinks in the text already submitted above, rather than re-writing an entirely new draft; unless there are glaring absences, in which case it might be prudent to reconsider referring to that particular term.
• If you have any questions about this, please don't hesitate to ask. When ready to proceed with the requested information or any questions which you might have, kindly change the {{Edit COI}} answer parameter to read from |ans=y to |ans=n, or place a newer {{Edit COI}} at the beginning of any new submission offered for review below this reply post.

Regards,  Spintendo  01:41, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. I have added WikiLinks to the proposed text as requested.

Revised suggested text:

In the “Career” section, after the sentence about Earmilk covering “Fun For You”, please add:

In 2022, Kotar released ‘’12 Months’’, a project structured around one song for each month of the year. The project was described by musicto as “a musical version of the calendar,” with each song named and themed after a month.

Suggested source: https://www.musicto.com/news/in-the-spotlight/in-the-spotlight-anja-kotar/

In the same section, please add:

In 2023, Kotar released the album ‘’Hopeless Romantic’’.

Suggested sources: https://music.apple.com/us/album/hopeless-romantic/1708459010 https://open.spotify.com/album/0t693lqDk1XlU8avBNrCKz

Please add a current-career update:

In 2026, Kotar continued releasing music as part of her ongoing ‘’At the Bookstore’’ project. LOUD WOMEN described the project as being released song by song, with each track inspired by a different book genre, title, cover, or bookstore find.

Suggested source: https://loudwomen.org/2026/05/28/track-of-the-day-anja-kotar-shares-bookish-bop-writers-lovers/

In the “Albums and extended plays” section, please add:

‘’Hopeless Romantic’’ (2023)

Suggested sources: https://music.apple.com/us/album/hopeless-romantic/1708459010 https://open.spotify.com/album/0t693lqDk1XlU8avBNrCKz

Thank you. Anjakotar97 (talk) 04:16, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

USA Sports (2025–present)

PGA of America extension and Firethorn Productions venture

COI Disclosure: I work with Versant and am not editing directly per WP:COI guidelines.

Two developments related to USA Sports' golf portfolio that have third-party coverage:

1. PGA of America media rights extension through 2033: NBC Sports and USA Sports extended their media rights agreement with the PGA of America through 2033. The deal covers the Ryder Cup, KPMG Women's PGA Championship, Senior PGA Championship, and PGA Professional Championship, with coverage airing across USA Network, Golf Channel, NBC, and Peacock. This is the second major golf rights partnership struck between NBC Sports and Versant since the spin-off.

Front Office Sports: "PGA of America Extends Ryder Cup Deal With NBC and Versant" Sportcal: "NBC Sports, Versant, retain US Ryder Cup rights in PGA of America extension"

2. Firethorn Productions: In December 2025, Versant and Rory McIlroy launched Firethorn Productions — described as Versant's first-ever joint venture. The company will produce original content across GolfPass, Golf Channel, and other Versant properties, including documentary storytelling, branded campaigns, and live fan experiences. McIlroy's GolfPass partnership was also extended through 2038.

The Hollywood Reporter: "Rory McIlroy and Versant Are Launching a Production Company" Sports Video Group: "Versant Announces Long-Term Partnership Extension with Rory McIlroy"

The article currently covers the PGA Tour and Golf Channel rights in the Current rights section. Would editors consider whether these developments warrant inclusion? WeekdayUpdate (talk) 03:32, 15 April 2026 (UTC)

Reply 9-JUN-2026

  Clarification requested  

1. N The proposed text regarding the PGA deal appears to contain WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE material. The text is short, just 3 sentences long, however, the text still needs to be sufficiently variegated so that it adheres to our guidelines on close paraphrasing.
2. Y The proposed text concerning Firethorn Productions can be added if that company is independently notable in Wikipedia. Please provide the H:WIKILINK for the company to proceed.
3. When ready, kindly change {{Edit COI}} answer parameter to read from |ans=y to |ans=n.

Thank you! Regards,  Spintendo  15:00, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks, Spintendo. To address the WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE concern on item 1, here is fully reworded text for the PGA of America extension, drawing on the two independent trade reports. I'm advancing only this item for now; the Firethorn Productions item (your point 2) remains on hold while I work out the WP:N notability question you raised, so please disregard it in this pass.

Proposed addition to the Overview section:

In March 2026, the PGA of America renewed its United States media-rights partnership with NBC Sports and USA Sports, carrying forward through 2033 an arrangement that had previously been set to conclude in 2031. The renewal keeps the biennial Ryder Cup as its anchor event and also spans the KPMG Women's PGA Championship, the Senior PGA Championship and the PGA Professional Championship, with telecasts distributed across USA Network, Golf Channel, NBC and Peacock; the men's PGA Championship is not part of the agreement, as those rights are held separately by CBS and ESPN. As a result of the extension, the 2033 Ryder Cup at the Olympic Club in San Francisco will fall under USA Sports and NBC Sports coverage. It was the second golf renewal the partners completed following Versant's spin-off, after an August 2025 USGA agreement that runs through 2032.

I've updated the section's edit-request template to |ans=n per your note. Thank you! WeekdayUpdate (talk) 01:21, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Current rights: add Olympics and DP World Tour; correct WNBA citation

COI Disclosure: I work with Versant and am not editing directly per WP:COI guidelines.

Would an editor consider three small updates to bring the Current rights list into line with the article's own infobox and Overview? Each of these includes independently sourced citations:

1. Add the 2026 Winter Olympics. The Olympics appear in the infobox and are described in the Overview, but are absent from the Current rights list.

Proposed (add bullet): * 2026 Winter Olympics (2026) — NBC Sports–produced coverage of the Milan Cortina Games on USA Network and CNBC, sublicensed from NBC Sports

2. Add the DP World Tour. It is named among the golf properties in the November 12, 2025 launch announcement in the Overview, but is missing from the list. Front Office Sports reports the deal was extended through 2030.

Proposed (add bullet): * DP World Tour (2026–present) — coverage on Golf Channel through 2030

3. Correct the WNBA citation. The Women's National Basketball Association entry currently cites a Sports Video Group article about the League One Volleyball (LOVB) deal — not the WNBA. The correct source is the Deadline report already used in the Overview.

Proposed: repoint the WNBA entry's citation to:

(Note: the same name=SVG reference is also attached to the Babe Ruth League "U.S., International and World Championship on CNBC" line, where it likewise doesn't match; editors may wish to repoint that to the Sports Business Journal source already cited on the Babe Ruth entry.)

Thank you for considering these.

WeekdayUpdate (talk) 01:18, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

---

← Previous page Next page→