Talk:Splunk

Ad Page?
This page appears to be an advert for the company. It contains very little information about the history of the company or the approaches they use to build their software. It reads very much like the promotional material one would give out to potential investors. I am not sure exactly what to do about this, so I would like to hear from previous contributors and neutral editors and the best way to deal with this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlackPh0enix (talk • contribs) 16:01, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Odd Talk page deletions
Very odd. I'd like to see the past history here, but this Talk page has been redirected and deleted several times:

This talk page was deleted. The deletion log for this page is provided here for convenience (view all logs for this page):

12:30, August 11, 2008 Gb (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Splunk" ‎ (R1: Redirect to a deleted, nonexistent, or invalid target) 22:03, January 15, 2008 AliveFreeHappy (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Splunk" ‎ (CSD G8: Talkpage of deleted or non-existent article) 00:00, January 7, 2008 Slakr (talk | contribs) deleted "Talk:Splunk" ‎ (Deleted because "CSD G8 - talk page of article that does not exist".)

Why was a "nonexistent" article deleted? --NightMonkey (talk) 21:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, and how do I see what was present before the redirects/deletions? Cheers! --NightMonkey (talk) 22:02, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Tags and advertising and OR
I just tagged RefImrpove and SectOR for the "Web 2.0" component, which has no sources, and seems out of place in an article on a log analysis software. This article reads like advertising, and without sales data, seems to not be of a noteable subject. --NightMonkey (talk) 21:59, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * agree. I've prod'ed it. Canadian Monkey (talk) 18:39, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * you can not say this is not notable. it is featured in a few security books, as a network security tool (one even shows you how to set it up). This article sucks, but that is a reason to improve, not to delete. riffic (talk) 22:44, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying it's not notable, but notability has to be established, and so far, the article does not do a good job of establishing it. The cite you added is fine, as far as it goes, but WP:NOTABILITY says that notability requires significant coverage, and that "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail" - a passing mention in a book that says "you could also use tool X" does not meet that requirement, I think. Canadian Monkey (talk) 23:03, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * further refs have been added.riffic (talk) 23:22, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, I've removed the prod. Still needs a lot of improvement..Canadian Monkey (talk) 23:26, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * added lots of cites and use cases and toned down the language, i believe the notability is no longer disputable. 204.107.141.240 (talk) 21:26, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
 * IP address is registered to"United States San Francisco Splunk". Surprise, surprise! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:40, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Resource
For Start-Ups That Aim at Giants, Sorting the Data Cloud Is the Next Big Thing by MALIA WOLLAN published NYT December 25, 2011, excerpt "So they decorated Splunk’s booth in all black and gave away T-shirts that said, “Take the SH out of IT.”"

99.190.86.5 (talk) 06:29, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

COI edit requests
Hi, I work for a communications firm that represents Splunk, and I have a few suggestions for improving this article:
 * It might make sense to remove the "Licensing" section (none of the sources are very notable), or perhaps incorporate its contents into the “Products” section.
 * “Notable customers” might be a more apt title for the "Users" section.
 * Add to Users/Notable customers: Sports Illustrated has worked with Splunk to analyze NFL data and predict the next play during a football game. (Source: http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/01/20/super-bowl-100-gameplay-computers)
 * Rewrite the first paragraph of the Products section, which currently has no citations. My suggested text:
 * Splunk's core offering, Splunk Enterprise, collects and analyzes high volumes of machine-generated data. It uses a standard API to connect directly to applications and devices. Splunk's goal is to present data reporting in a way that is comprehensible and actionable for executives outside a company's IT department.

Due to my COI, I will not be editing the page directly. I'd greatly appreciate any help or feedback. Thank you!
 * Maybe rename Products section as “Technology” (a la Sumo Logic), since each of the items isn’t necessarily a discrete product, and it’s also something of a timeline.
 * Add citations for unsourced content that's already in article:
 * As of early 2015, Splunk has over 9,000 customers worldwide. — Update to “As of early 2016, Splunk has more than 10,000 customers worldwide.” (Source: http://www.splunk.com/view/SP-CAAAPC5)
 * In 2012, Splunk had its initial public offering, trading under NASDAQ symbol SPLK. — cite to http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/04/19/splunk-soars-in-debut/

Mary Gaulke (talk) 04:32, 18 February 2016 (UTC); request edit template added Mary Gaulke (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2016 (UTC)


 * I have completed the requested edits, with some alterations. Note for other editors: additional discussion about these changes can be found at User talk:MaryGaulke. --Drm310 (talk) 14:41, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

a few more COI edit requests
Hi! As previously noted on this page, I work for a communications firm that represents Splunk. It's been over a year since I last checked in here, and I'd like to request a few updates:
 * Six months ago an anonymous editor removed the entire "Customers" section as an "Indiscriminate directory of little encyclopedic value to the reader". What can I do to make this section more valuable? I'd previously worked with on this list, and they organized it into sections by application. Would it be helpful if I took that approach further, pared down the list, and wrote brief descriptions of how the example customers use Splunk? Or perhaps the section could be reworked as "Applications," with the case studies providing a few examples of each application of Splunk. Given the fairly technical subject matter, I believe this section can help the reader understand what Splunk's products do. ❌ I took a look at the edit, which falls under WP:PROMO. A list of customers has no place in an encyclopedia. If someone is interested in your products, the Splunk website is linked in the article's infobox. The problem wasn't the format, case studies and paragraphs are also not welcome if they are from Splunk. See WP:Primary sources for more info.
 * Infobox updates:
 * Add logo:  ✅ I cropped the image and removed the white background.
 * Remove Hunk from list of products—it's now a legacy product. ✅
 * Remove Hunk from list of products—it's now a legacy product. ✅


 * Update in lead:
 * to  ✅
 * Add Australia to the list of locations with regional operations. ✅


 * Add to "Products" section:
 * ✅ Slight paraphrasing when I added it into the active; however, it is mostly the same. Machine learning is typically just a buzzword, so I have taken it out.
 * ❌ I don't see this as a major update worthy of inclusion in the article. Shorten the section and remove the ad-like language, please.
 * ✅ I removed the information about pricing


 * Add to end of "Splunkbase" section:  ✅ I removed the use cases; however, the rest of the info has been merged


 * Add "Corporate affairs and culture" section:
 * ❌ The wording seems overly promotional


 * In 2016, as part of its Splunk4Good initiative, Splunk pledged to donate $100 million in software and support for nonprofits and schools over a 10-year period. Recipients of the donations include Crossroads Foundation, which uses Splunk for cybersecurity in collecting online donations, and Team Rubicon, which uses Splunk for big data analysis to organize veterans for volunteer opportunities after a disaster. Splunk employees also receive 3 days of paid time off annually to volunteer at an organization of their choice.


 * Splunk also offers an Academic Program to train new Splunk users for free. In 2016 Splunk announced a global expansion of the program, which then reached 339 U.S. institutions and hosted more than 5 million students through a partnership with Internet2.

✅ As decided below, I have added a mention of the software donations, but nothing else.

I won't be editing the article directly due to my COI, so I'd appreciate help or feedback in getting these updates implemented. Thank you! Mary Gaulke (talk) 14:31, 16 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi . Sorry for the delay in responding to the request. I have begun merging these changes into the main article. Next to each item, I have, and will continue to respond with a done tag or a not done tag explaining why. If you have any questions, comments, or concerns, please leave a message below. Have a nice day! Daylen (talk) 21:29, 29 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for your help! Happy to reformat or provide additional sources for anything where it's helpful. Mary Gaulke (talk) 14:54, 3 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks again for taking the time. I really appreciate your feedback.
 * Re: Including use cases—I totally understand how a list of customers isn't helpful; I was envisioning something more qualitative, a bit like this section of Raspberry Pi. Since the sources come from external coverage, not Splunk comms, I don't think this falls under WP:PRIMARY.
 * Additions to Splunkbase section—Just want to make sure this didn't get lost in the shuffle.
 * From what I can gather, corporate social responsibility is sometimes encyclopedic; cf. Apple, Google, Sony. The $100m pledge, in particular, received extensive external coverage. Perhaps an abbreviated version of this section would be appropriate?
 * Thanks again! Mary Gaulke (talk) 17:21, 13 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Typically, I flat out deny corporate social responsibility sections; however, would a limited section be okay in this case. Also, can someone please give me some guidance with the customers section, I still believe that it is unencylapedic; however, would like a second opinion. Thanks for your assistance! Daylen (talk) 21:30, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * A list of customers of that kind is useless. If we could write sourced content about their sales strategy, for example whether they focus on specific sectors, that would be useful, but merely a context-free list of customer names is both useless and somewhat pathetic. Just imagine how our Microsoft and Apple, Inc. articles, or Xerox, or any other truly big company, would look like if we tried to add every sourced mention of someone using their products.
 * Regarding the "corporate affairs and culture", that's a decidedly mixed bag. The $100 million of software licenses and related services that they'll donate over ten years indeed seems worthy of mention, including the information in this source that it won't actually cost them anything close to $100 million and may at the same time help with employee morale and turnover. What I found even more interesting about that source is that it mentions another relevant fact about Splunk that currently isn't part of the article, namely that they're running at a loss of more than $80 million per quarter. Turning that one press release and its media coverage into two paragraphs seems undue, though. Huon (talk) 22:52, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you both. I'm happy to let both drop for now or revise the Corporate affairs section per 's suggestions, whatever you prefer. What about the Products and Splunkbase suggestions above? I believe those are the only remaining unaddressed pieces. Thanks again. Mary Gaulke (talk) 20:26, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Please take a look at the second bullet point under products; however, everything else has now been addressed. As such, I have went ahead and closed this request. Cheers, Daylen (talk) 16:49, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your patience and thoughtful consideration here. How's this revision look to the machine learning paragraph? Mary Gaulke (talk) 18:22, 27 November 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ Daylen (talk) 05:18, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Hier hat sich die Marketing Abteilung ja ordentlich ausgetobt
Liest sich weniger wie der Eintrag einer Enzyklopädie sondern mehr wie eine Verkaufsbrochüre. 46.114.150.92 (talk) 08:30, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Why is that
asjpdasjfpo as 2A02:2F0F:B113:7900:841F:6463:3482:F (talk) 09:29, 25 August 2023 (UTC)