Talk:EPAM Systems

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

PR Statement?

This looks like a well cited statement by the company. I actually don't know if this is ok, or this is the right forum, but I just wanted to note this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2620:15C:170:110:B897:F682:13F7:1D8E (talk) 18:45, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is not OK, since it is a
WP:COI. Looking into it. Anton.bersh (talk) 12:19, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Connected contributor

User:Fatiherikli might have been employed by EPAM Systems because user noted that left EPAM, which implies past employment. For this reason, I added "Connected contributor" template above. If I misread something, please remove the template. I asked directly at User_talk:Fatiherikli, waiting for answer. Anton.bersh (talk) 12:35, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Edits Requested

I would like to request edits to add acquisitions to the Timeline on EPAM Systems. CIO disclosure: I am part of EPAM’s marketing team. I have found and included external resources for all except three.

Reason for the following requested additions: Missing acquisitions

  • 9- Text to be added: NAYA Technologies | US, Israel | November 2019 |Cloud migration and data management services
  • Reference: https://naya-tech.com/

174.216.8.237 (talk) 21:49, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done:
WP:NOTCATALOG. Thinker78 (talk) 01:03, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

EPAM Ukraine

I work for EPAM Systems. In compliance with WP:COI, I previously raised some issues at the Biographies of Living Person's Noticeboard regarding misleading omissions about CEO Arkadiy Dobkin and the war in Ukraine. Besides a brief comment from @Uncle G:, the discussion was archived without any meaningful discussion or improvement. Specifically, I'd like to propose three changes:

1 The current page mentions Arkadiy Dobkin was criticized for not condemning Russia, but doesn't explain he did so to protect the safety of EPAM Systems' employees, something there is plenty of strong citations (see "source material" below). I suggest something like: "Dobkin said he does condemn Russia, but could not say so publicly in order to protect the safety of its staff in Belarus and Russia, where citizens are often arrested for their political views."
Source Material

Excerpted from Forbes

"Dobkin also defended his initial statement on the war, which mentioned neither President Putin, Russia nor his native Belarus. “I have a very strong reason why. I have senior people in Belarus and I know if I risk this, they can be arrested,” says Dobkin. “So I have responsibility for 14,000 people in Ukraine, but I also have responsibility for 18,000 people in Belarus and Russia. These are good people.”

Belarus, which has been dubbed Europe’s last dictatorship, led a brutal crackdown against pro-democracy protests last year, and now imposes prison sentences of up to seven years for just following opposition accounts on the messaging app Telegram. “Arkadiy’s from Belarus, and he has an intimate background of how things happen there,” says a senior Epam staffer who asked not to be named. “He’s facing an impossible position because of the laws in Belarus and Russia . . . people could easily go to jail just based on whatever he’s posting publicly.”

Excerpted from Bloomberg (reposted on Yahoo!)

"In an interview with Bloomberg News, Dobkin said he had been clear in internal town hall meetings that “Russian aggression” was to blame for the conflict. But he said that he had to be careful with his public statements as he does not want to jeopardize the safety of his employees based in Russia and Belarus.

“We are an international company,” he said. “When you make a statement you can endanger people in Belarus and Russia who could be arrested.”

2. The current page has a dedicated section for the Ukraine war. This feels like
WP:RECENTISM
, especially given EPAM is not directly involved. I suggest it be merged into the History section.
3. The current page criticizes EPAM/Dobkin, but doesn't include much about everything EPAM has been doing to help Ukrainians. I suggest adding something like "EPAM launched the EPAM Ukraine Assistance Fund to help Ukrainians and made a US$100 million humanitarian aid commitment.[1]

Ladida555 (talk) 20:23, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • First I'd like to express my appreciation for User:Ladida555 trying to thread the needle which is COI editing on Wikipedia. We all appreciate the honesty and directness of a COI editor who makes a clear attempt to notify others of their interest and then properly refrains from editing the conflicted pages themselves. When working with an announced paid editor, many wikipedians are reluctant to help, for a multitude of reasons. I encourage Ladida555 to make edits outside of their interest in order to understand what tends to work and what does not. Editing outside your interest gives wikipedians a chance to see you are a helpful person, and not here to demand your own way. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history has an academy of courses which can take an editor from newbie to truly useful, especially inside your connected field. On the merits of this request, I'm not impressed with the reliability of the presented sources (forbes.sites being essentially blogs, and the Yahoo mirroring the actual Bloomberg page). I don't question the material itself or the words or actions of Mr. Dobkin, but the quality of sourcing, which I will characterize as weak. If I were a connected editor, I would position myself as an asset to Wikipedia's effort on those pages, being more knowledgable than most about the subject, and having the capability to gather information unavailable to those outside the company. Specialized knowledge like that possessed by industry professionals is badly needed on Wikipedia. If I were acting in connected way, I might manifest my usefulness by presenting my suggested edits exactly like the following:
Edit request: "Text exactly as it would appear on the page, followed by already formatted citation.[2][3]" Here is my rationale and this is why this is an improvement over the current state of the page. Because of my connection to the subject, I'm aware "source A" doesn't adequately cover the points intended and IMHO the presented "sources B and C" more fully describe the nuance of the situation. I'm willing to discuss and defend my assertion if others disagree or have questions.
By providing current page editors (certainly more knowledgeable than myself) an exact wording with formatted sourcing plus brief rationale, you give those contributors an easy choice, yes or no. By requiring page editors (who may have their own reasons for interest in the subject) to parse the language and deeply investigate the assertion, you give those editors more reason to decline to help you. Do you follow my thinking? BusterD (talk) 17:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @BusterD:. It's not practical or realistic for me to become a regular volunteer contributor in a timeline that would matter for this request. However, I can try to format my request in the manner you described to make things easier. How's this?
(1) Edit request: Delete "Russian invasion of Ukraine" section title (just the section name, not its contents) so the paragraph on Ukraine becomes part of the history section
Rationale:
WP:CRITS
(discourages sections dedicated to a controversy)

(2) Edit request: Add the following highlighted content: "According to Forbes, Dobkin defended his statement which didn't mention Putin, Russia or his native Belarus, saying the company could not use its infrastructure for cyberattacks and had to protect EPAM employees in Russia and Belarus from political reprisals that are common in those countries."
Rationale:
WP:DUE
. Due requires Wikipedia "fairly represent all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources." CEO Dobkin's point that he did not condemn Russia publicly to protect the safety of his employees is prominent in Forbes and Bloomberg. It is unfair and misleading to include criticisms of a BLP without explaining his defenses that are in the very same citation.
Clarification: The Forbes piece is written by a Forbes staff journalist, not a "Contributor". It is the same citation currently on the page.

(3) Edit request: Add the following to the end of the Ukraine paragraph: "EPAM launched the EPAM Ukraine Assistance Fund to help Ukrainians and made a US$100 million humanitarian aid commitment.[1]"
Rationale: Adding more cited content
Reference:
Сапитон, Михаил (April 8, 2022). "EPAM полностью уходит из России и запускает фонд помощи украинцам – письмо основателя компании". Forbes.ua (in Russian). Retrieved April 26, 2022.

Is that better? I don't know if I want to "defend my assertion if others disagree." I understand I have a conflict of interest and defer to your judgment. However, if you do want me to elaborate on something, please let me know. Ladida555 (talk) 17:33, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

While I am not involved on this page, I am also not knowledgeable enough in this topic area to make any sort of decision about appropriateness of sources and content. I'll invite page watchers to discuss whether these edit requests can find consensus for inclusion. BusterD (talk) 15:53, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ladida. I got your message on my talk page. I appreciate your careful attention to your COI status and I will try to evaluate your suggestions. I am not knowledgeable in this field, but like any Wikipedia editor, I can try to evaluate whether proposed content is supported by Reliable Sources. Your second suggestion has a link in the article; it would be more convenient if you could post it here too, as an inline citation to your proposed change. In the case of your third suggestion, you did provide a source, but it is in Russian. Let's see if Ymblanter could help us out with that. And Drmies, might you be willing to provide some input here? -- MelanieN (talk) 18:37, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, concerning #3, the source is reliable and says indeed that the company founder sent a letter saying this.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:41, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Ymblanter. I will add this to the article. And I checked the Forbes reference and it does indeed provide his response about the reasoning behind his public comments. So I will add that to the article as well. As for the first suggestion - about whether to eliminate the separate section about the Ukraine war - I am inclined to keep it (it would not fit well in the History section as currently constituted) but will wait for more discussion. -- MelanieN (talk) 18:59, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@MelanieN: Thanks so much for such a prompt and thorough response! In terms of finding a good place for the Ukraine content in the History section, I have a couple ideas. You could create a "Recent history" sub-section to put it in that will hopefully be expanded in the future, or add one equals to both ends to keep the section title but make it a sub-section of history. In any case, I defer to impartial editors. Thanks again! Ladida555 (talk) 21:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ a b Сапитон, Михаил (April 8, 2022). "EPAM полностью уходит из России и запускает фонд помощи украинцам – письмо основателя компании". Forbes.ua (in Russian). Retrieved April 26, 2022.
  2. ^ use cite templates
  3. ^ another cite template
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:EPAM_Systems&oldid=1196121516"