In my opinion, the article still contains strong POV and still reads like a commercial presentation. Thanks for your effort, but we need to do more. 1) Read the section on the economic doldrums of Xerox between 1980 and 2002 it's practically missing. 2) The section on the poor accounting practices a half-decade ago reads like it's intended to excuse, not explain with NPOV. 3) The overall article reads like a brochure intended to court investment and instill confidence that Xerox has never done wrong and always grown.