Talk:Endeca

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Computing / Software (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software.
 
WikiProject Companies (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 


Buzzwords & Advertising[edit]

User:Galloping Moses was correct to label this page for attention. Terms like deploy, "services work", and "the many types of Endeca solutions" may be meaningful to Endeca customers, but do not advance the understanding of the general reader to whom Wikipedia's encyclopedic content is aimed. The extensive use of capital letters in this article on words that are not proper nouns is also problematic. Please try to explain the company and its products and services in a neutral way, and cite sources. Please do not simply revert the tags because you disagree with them; that is vandalism. Start a discussion here if you feel they are misplaced on this article. --Cantabwarrior (talk) 23:22, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree that the entry should be improved, but I think that the previous version by User:Endeca was better than the current one. I understand insisting on the tags until the language is more encylopedic, but why revert the substantive edits? Dtunkelang (talk) 02:31, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

The contributions by User:Endeca may have been substantial, but they were also entirely unsourced, unverifiable from reliable sources, and from someone with a conflict of interest. If you are able to improve the article by using edits as a basis for an article with a neutral point of view with verifiable and sourced information, please be bold and fix it. The article needs your help. --Cantabwarrior (talk) 01:17, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
I decided to be bold as you suggested. I encourage you and others to make incremental improvement. Also, I want to disclose clearly that I am a former Endeca employee. Dtunkelang (talk) 02:38, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! Your edits are a great contribution. --Cantabwarrior (talk) 03:33, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Staffworx Ltd in UK are a good Endeca recruiter, see them on www.staffworx.co.uk — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.178.142.186 (talk) 20:56, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I've deleted your spam and will report you in the chat room when I get a moment 213.122.174.85 (talk) 09:41, 31 March 2014 (UTC)