Talk:Salesforce

message: This article still reads like an advertisment produced by Salesforce.com marketing.  The first paragraph which should simply describe what this product is. Move the accolades to a section that includes criticism for a balanced lookTylerchill (talk) 22:11, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: The page edit history at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salesforce.com&action=history provides ample and obvious evidence that this page is the target of one or more ongoing Wikispam campaigns by marketing companies representing Salesforce and/or its addon app vendors. See e.g. the frequent anonymous insertion of blatantly POV accolades to the insertion of links like "". Marketing guys, you've been made. Wikipedia is not a billboard. Editors, be on guard. Kwertii 22:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article reads like an advertisement 

message: I've gotten rid of some advertising/marketese type stuff (apparently that's not the first time this has happened), but it could use some additional work on NPOV and less ad tone. I'll keep an eye on it as well. Seraphimblade Talk to me 22:52, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone keeps adding a link to Sofia Works. They are a UK Consulting Partner for Salesforce.com and I do not think they are notable enough to be linked to. I assume Salesforce.com have many partners and the article cannot list them all. --Sleepyhead 13:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Please read below an extract from the Wiki guidelines on adding external links. This site contains relevant information about salesforce.com, and will aparently be further enhanced to provide users with more information about the software.
"What should be linked
Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews."  (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:External_Links)  —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.152.0.58 (talk) 10:45, August 23, 2007 (UTC) 
It may have been changed (I can never figure out the history page), but as a user of SF, I think this looks pretty NPOV. There is no "this app is the best in the world and the other ones pale in comparison" type of things that I would consider NPOV. Citable sources are definitely needed, but at the risk of incensing others, I am going to remove the ad tag. Mechroneal 16:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ad cleanup

message: Hello folks,
I manage social media at salesforce.com, and I officially represent them on Wikipedia. I am not new to Wikipedia, and I know, and will play by the rules. This article is sub-par, and I'd like to help in any way I can. In the immediate time frame, I can: 
* clarify which partners are noteworthy and which are not
* provide guidelines on our brand names
* help correct factual inaccuracies with sources
In a slightly longer timeframe, I'd like to help improve the flow & content of this article.
- Kingsley2.com (talk) 00:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hello from salesforce.com 

message: I propose that the first reference to Salesforce.com stay, and change all following references in the body of the article to Salesforce only, without the ".com" (which is how it's more commonly referred to in conversation). Any disagreements?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crysb (talk • contribs) 13:18, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say usage is 50/50 in conversation. I do agree that the article needs to stop going back & forth. Just my $.02 Midlakewinter (talk) 00:22, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

text: There actually is a difference. Salesforce.com is the company, and Salesforce (without .com) is the name of the web application. They do get mixed up sometimes, but that's the official difference.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.210.194.150 (talk) 02:07, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Salesforce name in body of the article 

message: I recognized the Chatter commercials in the Super Bowl XLV halftime show and described their relations to the Black Eyed Peas and Will.i.am.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.8.42 (talk) 01:38, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Super Bowl XLV halftime show commercials 

message: A lot of the entry's content is specific to salesforce.com's product and not the company itself. I would think it makes sense to vastly slim down that content. Using Hubspot#Products_and_services as a model. Any thoughts?Midlakewinter (talk) 22:31, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Where did the product information go? I came here looking for the article for the "product" that seems to be salesforce.com. There's clearly such a product, for example, SF has a manual for it here (28 megabyte, 3818 pages and so it may take a while to download). --Marc Kupper|talk 07:18, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing product info from Company entry 

message: In the main text, it says "The Company was founded in March 1996..." yet in the box on the right it says 1999.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.217.31.4 (talk) 19:15, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Founded" Discrepancy 

message: I'd like to propose merging the Force.com article into Salesforce.com. Though Force.com is mentioned in the New York Times, this is not a sufficient reason to create a separate article about the product. The section on the product in Force.com is unsourced, so will benefit from the NYT article to verify it exists. Failing a merger, the Force.com article is ripe for a Articles for Deletion discussion IMO. Sionk (talk) 18:39, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, I don't think Force.com merits an article, and as the talk page indicates, it has been of most interest to Salesforce.com staff who wisely have refrained from editing the page. Leutha (talk) 18:26, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: You both bring up good points and I agree that Force.com doesn't seem to be able to stand on its own. A merger with Salesforce.com would be a good move. Stesmo (talk) 22:04, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

text: I think as long a a redirect from Force.com to Salesforce.com exits it would be beneficial.  I used this content as a reference to verify Force.com was a website, platform related to Salesforce.com and that I wasn't being phished.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.160.96.25 (talk) 15:09, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I support the merger. Content seems to be duplicated on both sides, among the confusing and overlapping product line. Its been a year since the merge was proposed, and so I'm being WP:BOLD and completing the merger. With the exception of 2 statements in the Release Cycles section, and 1 statement in the Lead section (data centers), all content has been included into Salesforce.com. Can someone with better knowledge of the Salesforce.com series of products please clean-up the list of services? -- Wonderfl (reply) 17:02, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal 

message: The article has a very confusing list of products/services offered by Salesforce Inc. I'm responsible for merging Force.com with Salesforce.com but yet I have only the most basic understanding of the overlapping terms, sales jargon and product suite titles. Not to mention all the acquisitions that were also re-branded and merged into the "Salseforce1 platform" (or whatever they call the overall platform).
Can someone with some knowledge of the product line please clean it up, while refraining from inserting meaningless statements such as "Sales Cloud" as the titles of the sections. I've renamed the sections to follow a single standard, which is the domain name. Thus Salesforce.com, Work.com and so on. Please stick to this system since it improves understanding of a very confusing product line. Please improve the sections requiring expansion (messages added into article itself). Any other changes may be suggested and/or implemented. -- Wonderfl (reply) 17:21, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Representation of product line 

message: How else would one pronounce "salesforce 1"?108.225.17.141 (talk) 23:51, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Salesforce 1 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Salesforce.com. 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/20140110090251/http://work.com/blog/2011/09/introducing-bohdan-zabawskyj-rypples-new-vp-engineering/ to http://work.com/blog/2011/09/introducing-bohdan-zabawskyj-rypples-new-vp-engineering/
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/610yADEeP?url=http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2010/12/beyond-babel.php to http://www.readwriteweb.com/enterprise/2010/12/beyond-babel.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130710033813/http://www.insideindianabusiness.com/newsitem.asp?ID=59728 to http://www.insideindianabusiness.com/newsitem.asp?ID=59728
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:42, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hey,
I'm not a regular editor, but I noticed that the Salesforce Lightning section links to a partner blog.
Shouldn't it lead to the official Salesfoce site for it instead? https://www.salesforce.com/eu/campaign/lightning/
Markus.lautenbach (talk) 16:00, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Salesforce Lightning link 

message: So called "case study". This ref, "Purkayastha, Debapratim and Chakraborty, Barnali (2020). "Corporate Culture and HR Practices at Salesforce.com, Inc.|Human Resource and Organization Behavior|Case Study|Case Studies". icmrindia.org. Retrieved June 14, 2020." Is total puff, to say the least. Reading the abstract of it (the rest is conveniently behind a paywall) is enough to tell that this is not something to base the corporate culture section on. I'll include the abstract below. 
Founded in 1999, Salesforce began its journey as a company specializing in software as a service (SaaS). In 2020, it became a global leader in customer relationship management, or CRM, software. According to analysts, a strong corporate culture and HR practices were a huge driving force behind its continuous business success. The case discusses in detail Salesforce’s culture based on the concept of Ohana, a deep-rooted support system nurtured inside the company. In addition, the company’s culture emphasized certain core values, behaviors, and experiences. The case then sets out to describe how the company managed to make Salesforce a great place to work and maintained this position as it continued to grow. The case also explores the company’s HR practices. Salesforce’s focus on employee wellbeing is also explained in detail. The leaders at Salesforce believed that its culture fostered dialogue, collaboration, recognition, and a sense of family, and helped its employees drive the company’s purpose, vision, and impact. The case ends with a discussion on whether Salesforce’s unique culture could be preserved as it continued to grow.
Who are these mysterious "analysts"?
Lots of ambiguous language. 
Written like a scientific study, but it's a load of puff.
Goodbye to this ref, and anything it backs up, because the stuff it does, is basically paraphrased from it. The Alternate Mako (talk) 13:18, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing a blatantly promotional ref. 

message: @Ohnoitsjamie  I have updated the content and please approve, if it is not under the WP policy . Rakish (talk) 03:24, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  September 2023 Edit  

message: I tried to add the 2020 Evergage acquisition but I can't figure out the markup to include it. If someone wants to add it...?
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/salesforce-acquires-evergage-will-use-personalization-to-enhance-customer-data-and-deliver-more-relevant-experiences-301000691.html Nikjft (talk) 17:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing Evergage acquisition