|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Lenovo article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 365 days|
|This page is not a forum for general discussion about Lenovo. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about Lenovo at the Reference desk.|
|This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled), and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.|
|Lenovo has been listed as a level-5 vital article in Society. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.|
|This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 6 September 2020 and 7 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yhl7283.|
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
My recent edits
Hi. I'm new to Wikipedia, so I hope I'm doing this correctly and in the right place.
Yesterday I made some significant changes to the intro of the Lenovo article. HaeB retracted the edits, citing incorrect use of links. (I used inline links for external sources. Sorry about that. I didn't understand the distinction at the time.)
I can fix the links, but how do I get back to the version I created yesterday? I only see the reverted version (previous to my edits.)
Also, how do I make external links? I see, for example,  as a citation and the 128 part is a link, but when I use the visual editor, it only shows one sort of link, for inline ones. Does simply enclosing text with the square brackets create the link? A pointer to an editing tutorial would be appreciated.
P.S. Per the discussion on where Lenovo's headquarters are, here is the answer (sort of) from Lenovo itself:
On one hand...
"Lenovo is a global company that is incorporated and headquartered in Hong Kong, with operational centers located strategically around the world to drive Lenovo's global/local business approach."
On the other hand...
"Lenovo organizes its worldwide operations with the view that a truly global company must be able to quickly capitalize on new ideas and opportunities from anywhere. By foregoing a traditional headquarters model and focusing on centers of excellence around the world, Lenovo makes the maximum use of its resources to create the best products in the most efficient and effective way possible. In addition, our dispersed structure keeps us closer to customers, enabling Lenovo to react quickly to local market requirements."
I've just removed a section of the article (diff) that, while referenced, didn't seem to make sense in the company article given the scope of the issue; beyond that, the section was poorly worded and non-NPOV. However, the issue referred to in this section would be (IMO) suitably notable in the ThinkPad X1 Carbon article. Per WP:BRD, if there is disagreement on this, feel free to revert my edit and I'm happy to discuss. Thanks! –Erakura(talk) 23:38, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
Operating Income - millions instead of billions
As per heading, I think Operating Income should be “Billions”
Updating Lenovo wiki - Controversies Section
My name is Stuart Gill and I work for Lenovo. The current page has a section called “Controversies” that (naturally) caught my attention, as I don’t feel Lenovo has a specific reputation for being controversial.
WP:CRITS says "sections or article titles should generally not include the word ‘controversies’” and to "avoid sections... focusing on criticisms or controversies." It elaborates "best practice is to incorporate positive and negative material into the same section."
My question is whether it would be proper for this section to be merged into History or otherwise disbursed into the article, instead of having a dedicated “Controversies” section. StuartGill (talk) 09:28, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Most subsections describe reports of software security incidents or compromise. The three exceptions are Lenovo Customer Feedback program (privacy), U.S. Marine network security breach (hardware supply chain compromise), which is still a security incident, and Supplier controversy, which is about use of slave labor. I'd make the last one a subsection of Operations and rename the whole section Security and privacy incidents. The Crab Who Played With The Sea (talk) 12:08, 23 November 2021 (UTC)