Talk:HubSpot

New text and citations
The “Products and services” section had only a one sentence description of the software, which is the company’s core offering. I added a more complete description, including citations to mainstream media publications and other independent sources. I also renamed the section to “Products,” since training and consulting services are a relatively minor component of what HubSpot does; and I edited the lead section as I suggested above, to add clarity. RebeccaChurt (talk) 21:03, 5 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Everything about this article needs more independent and reliable sources which over HubSpot in significant details. Routine announcements, rebroadcast of your own press releases and such can't be used for source building per policy. Even after a substantial amount of trimming was done on this article, there are still excess references to your own press release. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 10:09, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi 2406:7400:92:8EB:FD77:1040:4C2:E3A8 (talk) 15:46, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

Canteloupe2, no objections here. Your trimming of details and excess references makes sense to me, and I hope to join you in the coming weeks in trimming it back further. Your edits to the text I added seem fine; your phrasing around the dual meaning of "HubSpot" is better, and I understand why the blog entry you questioned is less authoritative than other sources like the NY Times and Forbes. I had thought those sources would be an improvement on some of the less-known blogs, and worthwhile for describing the core product offering; I see you removed them along with some of the specific text. Do you disagree with using those sources, or just the way I phrased the description? I tried not to introduce bias in my description of the product, but your removal of a couple sentences seems fine.


 * The way it was written looks like a keyword spam looking for way to fill with buzz words. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 22:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

You tagged the new content as "reading like an advertisement," but after that you edited that text. The results are fine with me, and I removed the citation you flagged as “dubious.” You removed a couple sentences as well, so now it reads:


 * Reading through it, the tone and positive touch still sounds promotional. A bit in the products section and definitely in the corporate leadership section; the latter still makes liberal use of self published source which attempts to use your own personnel as noteworthy reference. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 22:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)


 * The HubSpot software provides software for businesses to coordinate their online marketing efforts. The software is offered in three subscription options.


 * A free product, Marketing Grader, was launched in 2011 to replace Website Grader. It analyzes a range of online marketing activities and then provides a report on what to fix on the website or blog to increase leads.

If you think the text is OK now, would you mind removing the "advertisement" banner in the "products" section? Or if not, maybe you could describe what you think still needs to be done in that section? RebeccaChurt (talk) 19:35, 11 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I'll look at it in a few days. I think tone should be what you would expect to read in a real encyclopedia or a summary you'd expect on a court briefing that describes the products offered by company. Right now, there's a hint of advocacy tone in my opinion. One of the reasons it looks like advertisement is that it looks like the contents are written in a way HubSpot wants it written, then, references are found to go around that, such as the twitter(ref), linkedin (ref0, blog(ref) so on rather than saying as covered by independent sources. Cantaloupe2 (talk) 22:01, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

To be clear, these are the references I added earlier -- do they seem worthwhile to you for pulling information about the company (even if the way I phrased it before wasn't ideal)?

About naming the section "Products" or "Products and services" - I am trying to follow the standard of basing the article on independent sources. As far as I know, independent sources have focused exclusively on HubSpot's product offerings. Any services the company offers are a tiny portion of what we do or are known for; I think this is reflected in all the independent coverage of the company. (The source you included about services was not an independent source - it's a minor page from our web site.) -RebeccaChurt (talk) 21:41, 12 December 2012 (UTC)


 * So you contend that "services" such as training is bunk and there's no such thing as service based offering available just to paying customers? Cantaloupe2 (talk) 21:46, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I believe I made my point above. -RebeccaChurt (talk) 17:48, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Zarella's tweetsuite
Was this AFTER or BEFORE his involvement with HubSpot? I'm asking this as I'm evaluating whether this is related to the notability of this as it relates to the company HubSpot.Cantaloupe2 (talk) 22:08, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
 * It appears that there is too much content in the leadership section anyway, including the reference to Dan Zarrella, so why don't we just remove that content except for the part about the co-foudners?! -RebeccaChurt (talk) 18:49, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

What is it?
I'm afraid a quick read of this article has left me with no clear idea of what this product is or what this company does, and how it or its services differ from similar ones.207.194.133.9 (talk) 22:40, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Improvements/overhaul
I use to have a conflict of interest on this article about one-year ago and it has been bothering me ever since, because most of my COI works I have been bringing up to the "Good Article" standard. It does not show well on my track-record or my credibility/reputation as a quality contributor on Wikipedia in my COI role to have even former clients who do not have impeccably neutral and high-quality articles. HubSpot is also a topic of general interest (I am also a HubSpot customer, long-time observer and most of my volunteer edits are on marketing topics). So I went ahead and boldly re-worked the article into something GAN-ready. CorporateM (Talk) 21:24, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

2014 GA review
For anyone who'd like to see the GA review notes from 2014, they can be found here.-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 18:14, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Additional editing, clean up and improvements
This is a copy of a comment that was mistakenly added to the GA review notes. -- — Keithbob • Talk  • 18:18, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * "I trimmed this article with the goal of making it read like an encyclopedia entry, not a company brochure." Chisme (talk) 2:13 pm, 8 June 2016, Wednesday
 * I'm happy to discuss and collaborate with anyone who wants to improve the article. I'll come back in a few days and work on the excess amount of quotes and move towards a  removal the Quote clean up tag I've placed on it.-- — Keithbob •  Talk  • 18:20, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I've cleaned up the quotes and removed the tag.-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 20:21, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Content removed
A comparative analysis conducted by VentureSkies compared data security in HubSpot’s CMS with WordPress-based websites. It showed that HubSpot maintains an increased level of information security, as well as protection against hacking, through a set of security measures including human factors (e.g., 24/7 monitoring), restricted access to hosted data (limited to Web server level, no file server access), restrained JavaScript and multilayered infrastructure security embracing network, storage and compute environments.ref name=VentureSkiesOnHubSpotWordPress>
 * Removed because Venture Skies is a self described "Hubspot partner" and has written several glowing reviews of Hubspots products.
 * Likewise The Sales Lion is also a "HubSpot partner" and I've removed that source and text too.-- — Keithbob • Talk  • 18:22, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Proposed addition
Hi there! I'm here to request the addition of a new section to this article on the company's HubSpot CRM Free product. HubSpot CRM Free is one of HubSpot's main software products, so it seems appropriate to include it here, to keep the page up-to-date on the company. The CRM was launched in 2014 and has been written about in multiple reliable sources, including Inc., HuffPost, Business Insider, Information Age, VentureBeat, TechRadar and Entrepreneur, among others. As disclosure, I do have a financial conflict of interest, as I am here on behalf of HubSpot through my work at Beutler Ink.

Due to my COI, I will not edit the article directly and hope that editors will review and make this update if it looks ok. Let me know if there are any questions or feedback. Thanks in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 21:51, 30 November 2017 (UTC)


 * The request was declined in the other instance. Please see that page for more information. Comparison of Mobile CRM systems  Spintendo  ᔦᔭ   07:17, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Spintendo, I'm afraid I don't understand this decline. This is an addition to the corporate page to note their major product offering. It's quite different than the requests to add to the Comparison of CRM page. Can you explain a bit more why this addition isn't appropriate? It's well-sourced, and clearly relevant to the HubSpot article. Thanks in advance. 16912 Rhiannon (Talk &middot; COI) 21:10, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keithbob: I'm pinging you to see if you'd be able to provide a second opinion on this edit request. It was declined by Spintendo but I'm a bit confused by the decline, so I'm hoping you can take a look, too, as you've made a series of constructive edits to this page previously.


 * If possible, I'd also be appreciative of your input on Comparison of CRM systems and Comparison of Mobile CRM systems. Spintendo declined those requests on the ground that the HubSpot CRM Free technology itself does not have a Wikipedia page. My thought is that HubSpot itself is notable and this is its major product, so this seems like a situation where it's hard to separate out the tech from the company for notability. What do you think? Thanks in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk &middot; COI) 19:41, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Given that the reason for this decline seems to be a confusion between this request and my others at the CRM comparison pages, I am re-opening this request for editors to look at again. Please note: I am requesting this addition here on the HubSpot page, since HubSpot's product HubSpot CRM Free is not currently mentioned here. Thanks in advance, 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 22:10, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

As it stands, all the CRM products on that list have their own seperate articles except for one: Pipedrive. Determining whether or not HUBSpot meets the same threshhold as Pipedrive does, is a matter for further discussion. Other editors are requested to add to it.  Spintendo  ᔦᔭ   22:28, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry but I think you're still missing that this is the HubSpot Wikipedia article and I'm seeking to add a mention of their own product to their own page. Can you please take another look? As far as I'm aware, there's no requirement for a product to have its own page before it can be mentioned in the article of the company that makes it. For the Comparison of CRM pages, I've started a discussion at WikiProject Software and will hold on seeking more input on those requests til editors have had a chance to weigh in. Thanks! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk &middot; COI) 03:24, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

seems to be confused. I don't see what the objection could be to adding information about a prominent product to the company's page. I have added a simplified version of the proposal to the article. ~Kvng (talk) 15:14, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with User:Kvng, I don't see any grounds for a blanket refusal to add this content. Assuming the reliable secondary sources have relevant info I don't see any reason for it to be blocked. User:Spintendo can you please cite a policy or guideline that supports your position?-- — <b style= "color:#085;">Keithbob</b> • Talk  • 21:19, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Realized I hadn't circled back here to 1. say thanks so much to Kvng for reviewing the request and updating the article, 2. also say thanks to both Kvng and Keithbob for taking a look into this and confirming I wasn't losing my mind! Thanks again! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk &middot; COI) 16:57, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Updates to Software and services
Hello! On behalf of HubSpot, I'd like to propose a few article additions as part of my work at Beutler Ink. Like my former colleague 16912 Rhiannon, I have a conflict of interest (which I've disclosed in the template at the top of this page), so I'll seek editor review and avoid editing the article directly.

Currently, Software and services has a subsection dedicated to HubSpot CRM Free, but not other products. I'd like to offer some text additions about some of HubSpot's other main products based on secondary coverage, in order to bring the entry up to date. Following are four suggestions:

HubSpot Marketing Hub integrates customer relationship and social media management, campaign automation, and email marketing. Usability features were added to the marketing tool in 2020. As of 2021, there are four service tiers (Free, Starter, Professional, and Enterprise). Starter offers basic analytics, and Professional enables additional marketing automation options, custom workflows, A/B testing, more inboxes, and support for more currencies. The Enterprise version allows access to more contacts, revenue reporting, custom event automation, and campaign reporting.

HubSpot launched Operations Hub in 2021 as an extension of the customer relationship management tool. Available in multiple service tiers, Operations Hub helps customers use data in the CRM.

HubSpot's customer service tool Service Hub (previously known as Customer Hub) was announced in 2017, moved out of beta testing in 2018, and received a "refresh" in 2022. The contact center platform provides self-service automation, Twilio telephony, as well as "sentiment analysis and churn forecasting" and testimonial capturing, according to The Irish Times. TechCrunch says Service Hub also includes a "universal inbox" for all customer communications, tools for developing a "company knowledge base" and surveys, and a dashboard for team tracking.

HubSpot Academy is an online training program with free courses for content, email, inbound and social media marketing, as well as graphic design and search engine optimization. Some of the courses offer certifications. In 2022, Avi Stern of The Jerusalem Post and Christian Rigg of TechRadar described the Academy as "one of the nation's leading digital marketing sources for businesses" and "an industry-leading learning center for all things CRM", respectively.

My goal here is to cover these topics in a way similar to the existing HubSpot CRM Free subsection. I've tried to make the descriptions brief, neutral, and non-promotional, but editors are welcome to tinker with the wording if needed. I believe all of the proposed sources are suitable for Wikipedia.

I should note, the HubSpot Academy text could be used to replace the existing text "In November 2016, HubSpot launched HubSpot Academy, an online training platform that provides various digital marketing training programs", which uses HubSpot's website as a citation.

Finally, if I could offer one additional suggestion re: article structure, I recommend moving content in the "Tech industry reviews" subsection from Software and services to Reception. I invite any editors to review these suggestions, and I'd also like to ping User:Kvng and User:Keithbob, who assisted with the edit request above. I'm happy to address any concerns or answer questions here. Thanks for your consideration.

Inkian Jason (talk) 14:34, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello! I've struggled to get editor feedback here, despite using Template:Request edit and seeking assistance at 5 or so relevant WikiProjects. You've edited this article before, so I was wondering if you might be willing to take a look at the proposed changes? Thanks for any help in advance, Inkian Jason (talk) 14:37, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Kvng, @Keithbob Hello, I came across this request via the WikiProject Software section. I was curious if either of the two users tagged might be interested in reviewing the proposed changes by Jason? Although I'm happy to help, I have very little knowledge of CRM software and can only comment on tone and sourcing of the proposed changes. Taostlt (talk) 02:21, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
 * For now, I've sworn off working on company articles for COI editors. ~Kvng (talk) 02:29, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Inkian Jason I think most of that content is fine. Go ahead and add it. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 16:48, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Piotrus Thank you for reviewing and for granting permission to add. However, I very much prefer not to edit articles directly given my conflict of interest. Are you able to copy over the content for me? Inkian Jason (talk) 14:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * @Inkian Jason Done. I appreciate you following COI rules. I hope your company considers donating few bucks to Wikipedia :) <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 15:04, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your assistance here. Inkian Jason (talk) 15:05, 5 December 2022 (UTC)