Folks
I believe the article about Jupitermedia should be edited as noted below. Because I do a conference with them, I have a conflict of interest. So I marked it as non-neutral and made these suggestions on the talk page. I hope someone neutral will take a moment and edit the page. My best guess is that unhappy former employees are using the page to vent. I do not believe the factual material they present should be eliminated, but should be reduced to an appropriate length and presented neutrally.
Thanks for helping solve this.
My comment I have added a note to the page, because I think the dispute is irrelevant and should be mostly eliminated and shortened. I work with Jupiter on a conference, so did not want to make the change myself.
Note added to page - delete when updated.
I believe the below, and some of the above, should be edited for length, style, and relevancy. I did not do so because I do a conference with Jupitermedia and prefer to avoid the controversy about whether those with an interest should edit. I urge any neutral editor who sees this page to improve it, and have posted this to a forum as well. I have included my email in the history and will be glad to provide information. I strongly strongly support Wikipedia and use it regularly. db
----------
My suggested change would shorten the bits about particular items in Jupiter's past. I believe the issues are appropriate and as far as I know factual, and hence appropriate to include in Wikipedia. But I do not think they should dominate an article about a large public company that has a substantial history on the Internet. I therefore think they should be reduced to short bits and made neutral.
Happy to provide information and/or connect people with sources. Dave Burstein email daveb dslprime.com