Talk:Factiva

This article is rated Start-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

United States

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Criticism

the does not clearly state what Factiva does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.107.93.18 (talk) 23:37, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the criticism below, but another option besides deleting would be editing for a more neutral tone and/or acknowledging competing viewpoints and/or businesses. While there is some useful information in this page, phrases like "world's best resource" are an embarrassment and not up to Wikipedia's standards.Jon Ippolito 14:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article about factiva is pure marketing I recommend to delete it.

This is actually useful factual information that provides a valuable overview of this company and its evolution.

This article is pure marketing, I would suggest to delete it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2405:204:E380:5223:310F:EFD4:5900:C221 (talk) 04:28, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Factivalogo.gif

Image:Factivalogo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:08, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Importance

This article is classified as unknown importance. I'd say it's definitely an important article. I do a lot of research using libraries' electronic archives, and Factiva is one of the most common resources for that. However, despite its prevalence, I usually opt for other resources because Factiva isn't very user friendly, and I often suspect it's not giving me the results I'm asking for. I don't know if this is just a problem with my computer/browser (iBook / Safari) or if it's widespread. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.11.27.80 (talk) 17:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain

What is it? Dow Jones? Do they even make products? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.241.2.38 (talk) 13:43, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Factiva. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051001063212/http://search.yahoo.com/subscriptions to http://search.yahoo.com/subscriptions

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:36, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Logo is outdated

I'm the creative director at Dow Jones and responsible for our brands. Rikmorandj (talk) 13:41, 26 April 2021 (UTC) The current logo on the Factiva page is outdated and should be replaced by this one https://images.dowjones.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/193/2020/10/09180206/f-01.svg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rikmorandj (talk • contribs) 15:12, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]