Talk:Citrix Endpoint Management

Request to remove plagiarized content in Features + update intro
Hi editors! I'm here requesting two fixes to this article. I am working on behalf of Citrix as part of my work at Beutler Ink, so I'll outline these changes below for editors to review and make the edits, and not make them myself due to my conflict of interest.

I'll start with the Features section, as this is the bigger issue. In November 2016, Features underwent a number of edits by an IP address and another editor. It now contains promotional material, odd paragraph breaks, and perhaps the biggest problem, that the text is copied word-for-word from a PDF found via Citrix's website here. Additionally, the final sentence of the section is full of unencyclopedic language that Wikipedia editors would surely (and rightly) flag as promotional. I believe that the  maintenance tag appearing above this section actually relates to Features and not to History, the section in which it is found.

I'd like to request removal of this existing problematic content and suggest replacing it with something much shorter, straightforward, and closer to what was here originally. This will hopefully allow removal of the advert tag, too.

Here's my proposed replacement draft:

As well as the issues with Features, the existing introduction of the article is not entirely accurate. If my Features proposal above is incorporated (or if that section is otherwise edited down), I suggest deletion of "and provides integration of any Microsoft Windows application on any mobile device" from the introduction, as the material won't be reflected elsewhere in the article.

I'm happy to discuss these edits further. Thanks in advance for considering! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 01:51, 9 January 2018 (UTC)


 * ✅ Thank you for your well crafted and detailed edit request. I think your clean up proposal is well sourced and neutral in tone and reference. ~  Rick305  t·c 04:25, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much, Rick305! Appreciate your quick and thorough review. 16912 Rhiannon (Talk &middot; COI) 12:26, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 20 October 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: No consensus to move  (t · c)  buidhe  15:27, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

XenMobile → Citrix Endpoint Management – Since 2018, XenMobile has been called Citrix Endpoint Management, per IT Pro, which says, "The cloud-centric company, specialising in workplace digitisation, is rebranding products such as XenApps, XenDesktops and XenMobile to Citrix Virtual Apps, Citrix Virtual Desktops and Citrix Endpoint Management respectively" (bold emphasis mine). I'm submitting this request on behalf of Citrix Systems, as disclosed on the article's talk page. Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 16:25, 20 October 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. BegbertBiggs (talk) 22:35, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose at this time: Before I would be agreeable to any possible name change there would need to be more constructive content. On a quick glance there are and would be critical issues. Before this article is allowed to just be a promotional vehicle for the company, as well as an income generator for an "editor" meaning there would be grounds for exploring deletion, some changes are in order. See comments below. Otr500 (talk) 14:13, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Thanks for weighing in. I understand your skepticism. Since you've asked for more examples of sources below, I should note, TechTarget has verified the rebrand a few times as well: source ("XenMobile eventually evolved into Citrix Endpoint Management..."); source ("An example of an MDM platform is Citrix XenMobile, now Citrix Endpoint Management."); source (... one of the few vendors that supports VDI desktop environments with its Citrix Endpoint Management product, formerly known as XenMobile"). I hope this helps, Inkian Jason (talk) 16:46, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Reply: It does help. Not a fan of the use of "skepticism" as presented. I actually did not doubt the truthfulness of the turn of events. This would be where reading the comments subsection (mentioned above as "See comments below") might be important. An editor is seeking to change content for a client. The change has to follow policies and guidelines. I !voted "Oppose at this time" with the rationale (noted in the comments) that "just the change", without proper additional content and referencing, would not "jive". This is a rather informal (maybe even colloquial) way of stating "deceitful or worthless" which would be against several policies and guidelines. I am NOT actually as concerned with an editor getting paid for making edits (or helping to cause then to be made) as I am to the fact that, as written, the article sucks and there are changes needed far more than concerns of the name change that could be added to the lead, which I did.
 * There appears to be some conflict with the lead (non-referenced), that states: "It is developed by Citrix Systems") and content in the body (three references) that states, "The technology that would become XenMobile was created by MDM developer Zenprise.".
 * My concerns (better word than "skepticism") are valid. Just throwing reliable sources (I didn't even check that part) on the article and changing the title would create a confusing mess. Read the article, as written, and logically argue how it would even make sense to change just the title. I don't know if the company is trying to bury the current name and or history (and don't really care) but with only the suggested title there would be more issues. To reiterate: Content changes are required (of course with sourcing) before (or at the same time) a title change is sought. A proper use (to me) of "skepticism" would be: Can there be article improvements that would be in line with removing promotional tones and presenting an article where the content and title follow WP:TITLE: precisely identifies the subject... and WP:UCRN (section): ...that indicates the subject of the article. Thank you, Otr500 (talk) 08:42, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Otr500, I agree the article text could be improved and would support efforts to make the prose reflect the proposed page title to avoid confusion. I'm unable to edit the article text because of my COI, so I figured this was a logical way to get started. Inkian Jason (talk) 17:19, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

Comments

 * The too short lead does not contain any information concerning "rebranding", that would be a summery of sourced content found in a corresponding section, either under the "History" section or a possible "Current" section (I didn't look close enough), that would justify the corporate paid seeking of such a name change. We can't (or shouldn't) just change a title when the content and sourcing would end up advancing confusion. Either the article would have to be recreated with different sources and the suggested title or there would be a problem. The company is apparently trying to move away from using XenMobile according to their website on products (no mention of rebranding) yet at the bottom of that page there is a note: "XenApp, XenDesktop, XenMobile and XenServer are part of the Xen® family of products". There are more serious issues than "just a title change".
 * The paid editor requested an "Introduction" edit to delete material "and provides integration of any Microsoft Windows application on any mobile device.", that was apparently implemented with the justification "as the material won't be reflected elsewhere in the article." The company website does state that Microsoft is a "Featured partner" (Citrix and Microsoft partner to accelerate the future of work) so I am not sure the rationale or intent.
 * Removal because the sources or other content don't back up article content (when there are apparently many sources available) would be like wanting to change the title when article content and current sources would not jive. Since the apparent name change was in 2018
 * The bottom line is that the want of the company to change the title, as evidenced by paying to have it changed, is not a concern of the Wikipedia community more than the results of having a politically correct title placed on a horrible article. Maybe the paid editor should suggest the company have a "history" section in their "About" link that would include the transformation or "rebranding". When a company site includes "XenApp, XenDesktop, XenMobile and XenServer are part of the Xen® family of products" (no indication of any rebranding or doing away with the "family of products"), and multiple sources include the current name, inquiring minds will want to know some history, timeline, or other encyclopedic content over just one source being touted as evidence the title should be changed. I would suggest we could chop the article back to a bare stub, use the current sources as historical, and the suggested source to back the title. Surely there is more than just one source?  Otr500 (talk) 14:13, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Promotional material

 * I have removed: "Users can download additional applications through WorxStore. The applications available to users are configured by IT staff through WorxHome. "
 * Wikipedia is not an advertising vehicle nor a place for website offers where the links are revenue generators. The source give some info on "Worx" with an advertising link. The source also includes: "Note: When you purchase something after clicking links in our articles, we may earn a small commission.". This removes any element of independence when the source provides product links that in return generates the potential for additional income. Otr500 (talk) 11:08, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Draft replacement
Hello! Last October, I proposed moving this article from XenMobile to Citrix Endpoint Management, the name of the product since 2018. The move request was declined. At the time, Otr500 noted that there were other issues with the article that needed to be addressed before moving. At the bottom of the notes, Otr500 wrote, "I would suggest we could chop the article back to a bare stub, use the current sources as historical, and the suggested source to back the title." That made sense to me, as the current article is several years outdated, and software changes quite a bit over time. Please see my draft article here.

My draft pares down this article to its essential details, based on WIkipedia-appropriate sourcing. That includes streamlining the infobox, condensing the description of the product for accuracy, and deleting the Product overview and Features sections. I retained the material from History, but copy edited it slightly for readability. I also ask editors to consider moving this article from XenMobile to Citrix Endpoint Management, since that is the name the product has used for three years now.

I've disclosed my conflict of interest at the top of this page, in compliance with Wikipedia's Terms of Use, and Citrix has verified the accuracy of the proposed draft. As with all my work on Wikipedia, I'd like to think the draft, even if it is a stub, is an improvement over the current article, but I will let volunteer editors review and implement appropriately. You helped review my Citrix Workspace draft, perhaps you are interested in also assessing this request.

Thanks! Inkian Jason (talk) 15:33, 24 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Looks good, feel free to replace it with your draft and ideally link to this discussion in the edit summary in case people are confused. You can also move the article over to the new name, as I believe that your draft addresses the issues raised in the November 2020 discussion. 15 (talk) 21:34, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for granting permission, but I try hard to avoid direct editing because of my conflict of interest. Might you be willing to copy over the draft markup and move the page on my behalf? Inkian Jason (talk) 14:34, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Done. 15 (talk) 21:53, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help here. Inkian Jason (talk) 13:38, 5 October 2021 (UTC)