Talk:Sitecore

Discussion
Keen to start a discussion on Sitecore. Looking for editors to improve the first version. Please add technical information, and require more balanced articles. Mjsm7s (talk) 05:32, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks like PR agency under the username 'brandess' added a substantial amount of information in September 2014. Does this stand as advertising or information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Labarista (talk • contribs) 07:09, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

This page is notably outdated and contributors should revisit their actual line of business and products 70.50.133.169 (talk) 04:06, 22 August 2018 (UTC)Lynnette

added npov-section tag
while it might be true that managing multiple sites with sitecore is a nightmare, id like to find some other wording to illustrate it. cecilgol (talk) 19:04, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

proposed deletion
I'm very new to Wikipedia but it came to my attention that this page may be deleted, in part, due to a lack of notable references. If I add additional references that highlight the company's coverage in secondary sources would the deletion be reconsidered? Industry references for consideration:

http://www.gartner.com/technology/media-products/reprints/oracle/article91/article91.html

http://www.cmswatch.com/CMS/Vendors/Sitecore

http://www.cmswatch.com/CMS/Vendors/

http://www.cmswire.com/news/topic/sitecore

http://www.sitecore.net/Products/Resources/whitepapers/Forrester-5-Additional-Options-for-WCM.aspx?sc_camp=711866D66F644CF4AFF160F5C6E0B9DE

--Sakebouteille (talk) 16:32, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

partners
Sitecore has tons of partners, why is there only one listed?? that should either list ALL of them or none of them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.133.219.2 (talk) 21:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I've added info to the Sitecore page and it gets deleted - why? 94.170.104.158 (talk) 19:00, 21 February 2010 (UTC)labarista


 * If you refer to, it's because of WP:EL rules. Besides, partners need to be verified from a reliable source as such, not just linking to the main page of their web site, which usually says nothing about Sitecore. Even then, a complete list of partners is unsuitable per WP:NOTDIR. Pcap ping  19:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I think you refer to . As I indicated in my edit summary when I reverted it, it was written in a very heavy marketing style. Wikipedia must not be used for promotion of any company or product, and text must be written from a neutral point of view, always. Haakon (talk) 19:20, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Please be reasonable
You can't just insert press release-like material written in a completely non-neutral style and not even cite your sources. Please be reasonable, and note WP:3RR. Haakon (talk) 21:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

External link question
Hi, I recently reverted a link addition I believed to be link spam. The posting user then decided to privately email me about the matter. I clip part of that email here:


 * "Thank you for your review. I linked our site cause we are the Sitecore solution partner in Europe. Beside our services in sitecore user can reach a broad range of information about sitecore in the maigruen section of our site. For example:
 * http://maigruen.netzkern.de/data-modeling-in-sitecore.aspx
 * http://maigruen.netzkern.de/intelligent-xml-import-in-sitecore.aspx


 * Beside this we are going to launch the new sitecore developer community. So as you can see we are realy interested in delivering good and interesting content for the Wikipedia visitors, which are interested in Sitecore. Even more then the "Czech partner microsite" link which was under our link.


 * I hope that I was able to explain my intention in submitting that link. I would appreciate it, if you could give your permission to insert the link." User:Taylando

Could someone with subject expertise please guide this user and see if any of those subpages are appropriate. Thanks, West.andrew.g (talk) 17:46, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Company or software
Hi all, Curious as to why this is categorised and described as a company, while comparable competitors such as Wordpress and Sharepoint are categorised as software (appropriate infobox, version information in the copy). Is the Sitecore company more important than the software? Should there be separate articles? (I doubt it as I suspect that the Sitecore software is what is notable rather than the people who make it). - Vickytnz (talk) 22:45, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

It seems like at this point the article is more about Sitecore the company than Sitecore the software, so though you may be correct (and I think you're asking an important question), I'm going to try something like adding a Products section to the article instead of changing the overall emphasis and categorization at this point. Everrob (talk) 20:38, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Also the software isn't Sitecore, depending on what you read its Sitecore Experience Platform / Sitecore XP among others. Your two examples Wordpress is open source so not owned by a parent company and Sharepoint is software owned by Microsoft. Where as in this case Sitecore is the parent company and sometimes (even by them) referred to as the software. I've had a look on their site and they don't ever referrer to the company as a long form so its not even like we can use that to differentiate the two. --Traitmeans (talk) 12:54, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Sitecore Logo
Just uploaded the new logo of the company but as Wikipedia (Commons) is sensitive about copyright, it might get deleted.

Can someone verify the logo is correct?

The new image was uploaded here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sitecore_Logo.svg

The source file is here: https://sitecorecdn.azureedge.net/-/media/sitecoresite/images/global/logo/sitecore-logo.svg

The old logo is here, i didn't find a way to update and rename it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sitecore_Logo_2014.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.185.235.122 (talk) 08:46, 29 January 2020 (UTC)