Talk:Cohesity

Reverted edits
I reverted edits an editor made to the page as I feel it removed much referenced, neutrally-toned material. The explanation of the products and technology are completely neutral and not promotional - simply having in-depth information about it (such as the Microsoft page) does not make it WP:SOAPBOX or promotional, unless it is written in that tone. As the guideline says, "Information about companies and products must be written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery. All article topics must be verifiable with independent, third-party sources" - as it is here. Garchy (talk) 19:30, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I have reverted that as the awards were non notable awards and entirely sourced to primary sources. We go by WP:WEIGHT and not every info is worth including in the article. It also makes the article promotional. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:48, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

self-cited to a press release
Moving here for storage:


 * Cohesity launched publicly in June 2015, introducing a web-scale platform designed to consolidate and manage secondary data. In its first year revenue increased more than 100 percent each quarter and the workforce tripled in size.

K.e.coffman (talk) 03:54, 30 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Removing that the company tripled in size makes sense. Removing when the company launched and what it does? That is simply encyclopedic, and you could easily find a citation supporting this (with a quick Google search) - the purpose of Wiki is to improve an article, not simply remove information haphazardly. Garchy (talk) 13:55, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * "...introducing a web-scale platform designed to consolidate and manage secondary data" is promotional language. What does this mean in plain English? K.e.coffman (talk) 17:54, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Does "introducing a web-scale platform" or something similarly edited sound better to you? My point is that it needs to be stated WHAT the company does - accurately and concisely stating as above is not promotional language - but if you have a better suggestion I'm all ears - however, you can't simply remove cited information that is not visibly promotions (I don't see that sentence as WP:PROMO at all but in assuming good faith I'm willing to hear suggestions on adapting the language...Garchy (talk) 20:00, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Products
I feel that the products section is rather messy and could benefit from a subheading or two. However, I'm not sure if there is enough content to warrant its own subsection? Tincoaster (talk) 18:52, 6 April 2022 (UTC)