The original page had a strong advertizing character which I mitigated a bit. It is still an important page, because the company's tools are used in a major number of ad supported installs alongside with downloads and mobile app installations.
If any content is wrong, e.g. about subsidiaries, it should be corrected; in a way that related companies/products, which are frequently distributed through IronSource tools, still appear in the text.
I removed "partner" companies, for which a reference to the IronSource page was used as a source:
"ironSource partners with companies including Microsoft, Citrix, Spotify, Yandex, Baidu, Symantec, Audible, Opera, and others." [2]
The linked IronSource page doesn't show these partners currently, and since IronSource products are used by several developers offering all kinds of freeware, it is not clear whether these companies deliberately cooperated with IronSource, or just had their products offered for download with IronSource tools by a third party, without any explicit agreement with IronSource or dedicated permission to offer through IronSource tools.
BBirke ( talk) 15:37, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
References
There is still ongoing vandalism
BBirke ( talk) 23:16, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
I have tagged the page for a possible conflict of interest, as most recent material has been added by an SPA - Bluej0830 ( talk · contribs) - Arjayay ( talk) 16:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Material has been scrubbed from a number of ironSource related articles, particularly when touching on their product InstallCore, and cited news articles which reported negative events. As cited material relevant to the company's history, I have restored it. Conflatuman ( talk) 01:36, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Another round of anonymous edits removing any reference to malware, mention of click fraud, etc in the company's history and with still-current products, particularly InstallCore. I had my revert anonymously reverted, so putting a note here. Anon editors, by all means create an account and justify what you are doing, and add references. Why delete this relevant information? Giving a chance for engagement before removing again. Conflatuman ( talk) 01:19, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
I have just the latest round of information-removing edits, which follow the same pattern seen since 2015, ie, removal of information now embarrassing to the company around its original product being widely considered to be malware junk.
However, there was a new piece of information that it was "no longer supported" in this anonymous edit. As it was part of this abusive pattern of edits, and the citation was a wikipedia link with no relevant info, I deleted it with the rest. However! - this would be interesting and relevant information if it could be backed up with some sort of evidence. I did a quick search now just to check. Any editors with such information in hand are welcome to add it and cite it. That goes for regular editors with a user account, or anonymous SEO editors deeply engaged with this content for financial reasons, so long as you have a citation.
Conflatuman ( talk) 22:31, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
This page seems suspiciously sparse for a company with such a controversial history, shouldn't there be more discussion of their past dealing with mass-scale malware? It's pretty well-documented on other websites; e.g: https://www.benedelman.org/news-021815/ & https://blog.infostruction.com/2018/10/26/adware-empire-ironsource-and-installcore/
I have an ill feeling that they're trying to whitewash their past seeing as they seem to be aiming to merge/acquire other businesses in their current direction. 51.37.240.131 ( talk) 18:28, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi, feel free to add historical detail with citations or reorganize for better emphasis. The page is periodically targeted by anonymous edits with a very upbeat attitude towards the firm. Conflatuman ( talk) 18:49, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
|
The original page had a strong advertizing character which I mitigated a bit. It is still an important page, because the company's tools are used in a major number of ad supported installs alongside with downloads and mobile app installations.
If any content is wrong, e.g. about subsidiaries, it should be corrected; in a way that related companies/products, which are frequently distributed through IronSource tools, still appear in the text.
I removed "partner" companies, for which a reference to the IronSource page was used as a source:
"ironSource partners with companies including Microsoft, Citrix, Spotify, Yandex, Baidu, Symantec, Audible, Opera, and others." [2]
The linked IronSource page doesn't show these partners currently, and since IronSource products are used by several developers offering all kinds of freeware, it is not clear whether these companies deliberately cooperated with IronSource, or just had their products offered for download with IronSource tools by a third party, without any explicit agreement with IronSource or dedicated permission to offer through IronSource tools.
BBirke ( talk) 15:37, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
References
There is still ongoing vandalism
BBirke ( talk) 23:16, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
I have tagged the page for a possible conflict of interest, as most recent material has been added by an SPA - Bluej0830 ( talk · contribs) - Arjayay ( talk) 16:06, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Material has been scrubbed from a number of ironSource related articles, particularly when touching on their product InstallCore, and cited news articles which reported negative events. As cited material relevant to the company's history, I have restored it. Conflatuman ( talk) 01:36, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
Another round of anonymous edits removing any reference to malware, mention of click fraud, etc in the company's history and with still-current products, particularly InstallCore. I had my revert anonymously reverted, so putting a note here. Anon editors, by all means create an account and justify what you are doing, and add references. Why delete this relevant information? Giving a chance for engagement before removing again. Conflatuman ( talk) 01:19, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
I have just the latest round of information-removing edits, which follow the same pattern seen since 2015, ie, removal of information now embarrassing to the company around its original product being widely considered to be malware junk.
However, there was a new piece of information that it was "no longer supported" in this anonymous edit. As it was part of this abusive pattern of edits, and the citation was a wikipedia link with no relevant info, I deleted it with the rest. However! - this would be interesting and relevant information if it could be backed up with some sort of evidence. I did a quick search now just to check. Any editors with such information in hand are welcome to add it and cite it. That goes for regular editors with a user account, or anonymous SEO editors deeply engaged with this content for financial reasons, so long as you have a citation.
Conflatuman ( talk) 22:31, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
This page seems suspiciously sparse for a company with such a controversial history, shouldn't there be more discussion of their past dealing with mass-scale malware? It's pretty well-documented on other websites; e.g: https://www.benedelman.org/news-021815/ & https://blog.infostruction.com/2018/10/26/adware-empire-ironsource-and-installcore/
I have an ill feeling that they're trying to whitewash their past seeing as they seem to be aiming to merge/acquire other businesses in their current direction. 51.37.240.131 ( talk) 18:28, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
Hi, feel free to add historical detail with citations or reorganize for better emphasis. The page is periodically targeted by anonymous edits with a very upbeat attitude towards the firm. Conflatuman ( talk) 18:49, 13 July 2022 (UTC)