Talk:Cloudera

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Cloudera. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120209182001/http://articles.businessinsider.com:80/2012-01-31/news/31008410_1_yahoo-servers-and-storage-systems-oracle to http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-01-31/news/31008410_1_yahoo-servers-and-storage-systems-oracle
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120707100946/http://www.businessweek.com:80/technology/special_reports/20100420best_young_tech_entrepreneurs.htm to http://www.businessweek.com/technology/special_reports/20100420best_young_tech_entrepreneurs.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:41, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Neutrality
It is reasonable to assume that User:Cloudera editor is an employee or otherwise related to the company. As a major contributor to this article, I have reviewed their edits to ensure that they retain a neutral point of view.


 * 1150715038 - Seems mostly fine, but I've removed num_employees as it seems to be based on internal information that I can't find any references for online.
 * 1150716392 - minor edit
 * 1150927455 - sounds like an advert, and the reference used is not considered reliable, so I've reverted it
 * 1152828713 - this edit has 2 sections:
 * Operations - I can't find any reliable independent sources for the 19 countries its in. For the headquarters, reliable sources do point to it being in California, but that's all. It wouldn't make sense to keep a section 1 sentence long, so this should go.
 * Products - Other than from their official website, I can't find much information about what they do. However, I do believe those reliable sources exist somewhere, so rather than delete it, I'm going to reword it and add
 * 1152828811 - minor edit
 * 1152829148 - mostly adds information about the company's pivot to datalakes, which would be improved by using a better third party source.

Relatedly, I'm also reverting this edit by an IP user that isn't written neutrally.

To ensure WP:DUE weight, I've added references to the recent litigation they've been under, as it's been widely reported in reliable independent sources.

I don't think I see any other issues with the article. If someone else gives it a second look, I would be fine with the to be removed from the main article. Mokadoshi (talk) 21:37, 13 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Looks good to me, I'll remove the notice. Thanks for your work. Ligaturama (talk) 08:10, 24 May 2024 (UTC)