Talk:Harman International

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Request[edit]

Can someone please update the logo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.156.180.229 (talk) 02:20, 10 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Harman International Industries. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 16:37, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Harman International Industries. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 08:25, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline[edit]

Might be nice to introduce a timeline on this page, similar to this one on the JBL page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JBL then we could mention smaller acquisitions, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rogerdpack (talk • contribs) 17:57, 4 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bang & Olufsen - a Harman brand? (No!)[edit]

Brands listed are supposed to be Harman brands, right? In that case Bang & Olufsen is placed on the list by a mistake Glubskeegern (talk) 18:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On the topic of articles about subsidiaries of Harman[edit]

I don't know where to place this, so I guess this is the best place to discuss this. I've noticed that on articles about subsidiaries of this company, including Revel Audio, Soundcraft, and Crown International, a few IPs are removing mention that Harman is a subsidiary of Samsung, under the pretense that this is too much information. I can't find any policy on articles about subsidiaries of subsidiaries, so I'm assuming this is a matter of consensus, and since I'd rather not edit war, I'm taking it here. I support keeping this information. It's only one sentence, and I don't see any noticeable downside to including this information. What say you? JellyMan9001 (talk) 17:09, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that knowing that Harman is a subsidiary of Samsung is valuable knowledge. I do not think including that detail takes away from the clarity of the articles that were edited. Samsung is a well known brand and a much larger company, while Harman is much more niche in comparison. CameronNemo (talk) 23:33, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I kind of disagree with naming of Samsung in the pages of subsidiaries of subsidiaries .These subsidiaries like The revel ,crown international,soundcraft ,lexicon, AMX all are owned by Harman directly .For example crown international is subsidiary of Parent company harman international Which is a full fledge subsidiary company .This is why they are Branded like crown international by harman . There needs to be some emphasis put on harman International here cause it operates independently of Samsung electronics. Also Harman international is itself a big brand with 8 billion dollar in revenue and 30,000 employees .Samsung Electronics is mentioned in the page of Harman International wiki page so its not needed in the name of the brands ,I guess it clears the air here .There are so many huge conglomerates like Berkshire Hathaway owning subsidiaries which in turn owns other subsidiaries but we do not mention Berkshire Hathaway in there pages.In Same way we shall only write harman here .Good faith. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 106.193.188.218 (talk) 14:20, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't where the harm is in it being mentioned. It's an undisputed fact, and it doesn't delegitimize Harman as a company. I don't think there's any policy for naming subsidiaries of subsidiaries, but it does happen. For example, YouTube TV list Youtube as a subsidiary of Google, and lists Google as a subsidiary of Alphabet Inc. It's only a single sentence, and I don't think it will confuse anybody researching the article. I'd argue the contrary in fact. That seems like information somebody reaserching these companies might want to know. JellyMan9001 (talk) 23:27, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it's useful information. Including it certainly doesn't harm the articles, and probably helps them incrementally. It should stay in.BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 10:51, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As an update, an IP made some edits re-removing the Samsung note. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2405:204:213:AB61:50E8:AD20:4F0D:7C40. I find it concerning that the only users who are removing the note or speaking on behalf of removing the note are non-login IP addresses. CameronNemo (talk) 22:50, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As another update, another couple IPs made edits. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/91.184.106.47 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/91.184.107.158 CameronNemo (talk) 00:12, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed more IP edits today. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/91.184.120.24 CameronNemo (talk) 17:30, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More IP edits https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/62.212.34.202 CameronNemo (talk) 04:19, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all, after banging my head against this for a few months now, I think it is time to request partial locks on all the pages being edited so that no IP users are allowed to edit them. CameronNemo (talk) 16:50, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't seem to be a consensus to remove mention of the Samsung connection from these articles. Proposed or reverted changes along these lines should be discussed here. ~Kvng (talk) 21:09, 7 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think you may have misunderstood me. I have argued for keeping the mention of Samsung in these articles, as has every other logged in user in this section. So I think there is consensus in the other direction, to keep the mention. Please also see my note below about this IP hopping edit warrior. CameronNemo (talk) 20:53, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all, it has recently come to my attention that this is linked to long term abuse/vandalism that is documented here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Linde_plc_vandal . The goal of the vandalism seems to be to push a particular US-centric POV. Hopefully we can come to a solution on this matter soon. CameronNemo (talk) 20:53, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This edit presumably has POV issues. Not sure if a revert is in order. It is a fact that JBL is a subsidiary of Harman which is a subsidiary of Samsung. All of this is spelled out in the JBL lead. What's the best way to present this in infoboxes? ~Kvng (talk) 14:40, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Infinity (audio)" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Infinity (audio). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 25#Infinity (audio) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. 64.229.90.53 (talk) 04:29, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Harman_International&oldid=1207552799"