Talk:37signals

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 37signals article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Illinois Low‑importance

	Illinois portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IllinoisWikipedia:WikiProject IllinoisTemplate:WikiProject IllinoisWikiProject Illinois articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chicago Mid‑importance

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Keep, 19 August 2017, see discussion.
Keep, 4 July 2017, see discussion.
Keep, 18 September 2016, see discussion.
no consensus, 12 April 2006, see discussion.

On 4 May 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to 37signals. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Archives

1

moved page to Basecamp (company)

The company 37signals announced they were changing their name to Basecamp in February 2014. I moved the contents of the wikipage 37signals to a new wikipage Basecamp (company) and changed it to a REDIRECT page to Basecamp (company).

This is great work. Thank you.--Soulparadox (talk) 11:26, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge with Basecamp (software)

now this article has been wikified, there's not much to it. It seems logical to combine the two articles Rayman60 (talk) 03:49, 30 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But it could be expanded. Comfr (talk) 04:56, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the sake of War-zone, Keep this or other corporate article?

Pardon me If I am violating any policies here. I have to Tag few admins and contributors here to know more and understand this matter. We have been facing this challenge from a long time on Wikipedia. Where people are just trying to make it Facebook, Newspaper, LinkedIn or some directory or blatantly used for Promotions or Press coverage.

What really surpise me that everytime for some article we have to go through same discussion where nothing to discuss. Clear reality is there to delete the promotion from Wikipedia. But by advocacy or personal Ego or making it War zone, this efforts has been wasted.
I need your help to know how we can make Wikipedia better. I am asking here as this article is going toward No consensus or Keep by baseless Press coverage.
We have completely forgotten this? Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), [[1]]
Please advise DGG, David Gerard, K.e.coffman, SwisterTwister, Lemongirl942, Grayfell, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง,Bejnar, Jimfbleak, Lankiveil , RHaworth Light2021 (talk) 17:07, 6 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that such a discussion should take place outside the realm of a specific article, and belongs either on Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not dealing with "Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion", and enlightened by Section 5. Advertising, marketing or public relations. Alternatively it could take place at either Wikipedia talk:Arguments to make in deletion discussions or possibly at Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab). While WP:NOTPROMO is a policy, WP:Notability is a guideline, so it is a mixed bag. --Bejnar (talk) 02:51, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

N.b. Note that the article was retained per the last two AfD discussions that occurred in 2016 and 2017. The first discussion in 2006 closed as no consensus. See the AfD template atop this page for more information. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:40, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
even the whole discussion points was for delete. vote counting happened. you mentioned PC magazine and business insider for notable media sources for building wikipedia article? that great! why we have biased for some articles? somewhere such sources become notable and other places its not. wikipedia does not consider them notable anyway. thanks. Light2021 (talk) 19:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging SoWhy, who closed the recent AfD discussion, regarding the notion of alleged "vote counting" above. The closer can address this better than I can here, since they closed the discussion. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:05, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(pinged) While the amount of keep !votes in fact outweighed the delete !votes, so did their arguments, although I understand that the nominating user might not see it that way. Let's analyze the arguments, shall we? We have some deletion arguments based on the tone and/or intent of the article as it stands and the rest is basically based on the fact that the sources mentioned are not sufficiently independent to use them to establish notability which was a minority viewpoint. There is no hard and fast policy what does or does not constitute independent coverage (WP:IS is only an essay and even that does not provide any such rule) but generally we can assume independent coverage exists if the sources are known to be reliable and having editorial independence, even if they sometimes borrow from company material; after all, lifestyle pieces about some celebrity or other are quite common but that alone does not mean the source is not reliable or independent. Except a WP:VAGUEWAVE at WP:INDISCRIMINATE, which does not really fit here, none of those arguing for deletion could point to specific reasons why the sources mentioned were not independent enough to establish notability (just saying "they sound PR-y" does not really count). As such, I saw no policy-based reasons for deletion, resulting in the keep result. Regards So Why 07:07, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More sources

The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:

Newsweek
Beginning Ruby: From Novice to Professional
The Globe and Mail
Time magazine (subscription required)
Wired
Wired
Inbound Marketing
The Lawyer's Guide to Collaboration Tools and Technologies. Chapter 14. pp. 105–112.
PC Magazine
PC Magazine
Crains Chicago Business
PC World
Making the Most of the Cloud
The Whuffie Factor. pp. 192–194 ...(subscription required)
Dreaming in Code
Business Insider
The Register
Business Insider
Basecamp for Beginners. Cengage Learning. 320 pages.
Sams Teach Yourself Basecamp in 10 Minutes. Pearson Education. 256 pages.

– North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:28, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 May 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Not moved for now. Per WP:NAMECHANGES, we need reliable sources that use the new name before it can moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 22:41, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Basecamp (company) → 37signals – Company is undergoing a name reversion: https://world.hey.com/jason/37signals-hello-again-117eae60 Sotomura (yell : see) 01:43, 4 May 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. ASUKITE 17:24, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Companies has been notified of this discussion. ASUKITE 17:24, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: WikiProject Illinois has been notified of this discussion. ASUKITE 17:24, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 22 October 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved — Amakuru (talk) 15:15, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Basecamp (company) → 37signals – Article states that Basecamp has been renamed to 37signals but the article title doesn't recognize that yet. RisingTzar (talk) 20:23, 22 October 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. Natg 19 (talk) 06:20, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support. In addition to official name change most RS cover has shifted and general common usage is shifting as well (or in some circles, never shifted to Basecamp to begin with). Skynxnex (talk) 01:38, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.