Talk:ZoomInfo

2nd deletion proposal
Please excuse my lack of knowledge on how to use WP, it can be a bit overwhelming for a beginner. Article is about no name company, with nothing of note in its history. Search results for ZoomInfo https://www.google.com/search?q=zoominfo: - The business website - Wikipedia article - Misc business related entries (review sites, glassdoor, etc) - PR spam that made it into news Company does not seem to have done anything of note to warrant listing.

I discovered the company because they seem to have become adept at google spamming, which im guessing is the same as most of their visitors.

Contested deletion
A7? --Ottawahitech (talk) 00:42, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Neutral point of view
While this page has been contested for deletion (which I would have voted to delete it on its time) I now agree to keep it running but telling users all the good and bad documented issue regarding it, ant copyright infringement practices should be and are worth keep them on record, also to update and keep record of the known Crawler agents which they use (and add more when they appear) As Neutral as possible and truthfully so the page reflects the company behavior good or bad. Otherwise its only pure marketing behavior which Wikipedia its not for, if so then i would then recomend its deletion again. Gabriel Vergara 2016 gv_sec_trans 14:01, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I am really happy this page exists. ZoomInfo has the # 1 market share in lead databases. I am very appreciative that this page exists. I am in sales, and I have no connection to ZoomInfo. --Westwind273 (talk) 18:53, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Competition
I think RocketReach is a much bigger competitor for ZoomInfo than any of the competitors currently listed. I would suggest adding RocketReach. Also, I do not think LinkedIn is truly a competitor. The goals of the two products are significantly different. But I am OK with leaving LinkedIn as a tangential competitor. --Westwind273 (talk) 18:56, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Spam blacklisting
I cannot find a source with which to WP:VERIFY the following, added in this dif, so am pasting it here for now.

"Due to its model, the service has been widely blacklisted by many hosting service providers and spam trackers, such as Spamhaus."

This cannot go into the article until it is reliably sourced. Jytdog (talk) 00:18, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I will try to pull the blacklist Record ID from the SBL, if there is not on this week list they probably asked de-listing it, SBL last week had it and it comes and goes. and in many lists its listed as badbot NextGenSearchBot the Zoominfo bot agent  as well as many common hosting black lists include it https://www.ultrawebhosting.com/downloads/badbotblocker.txt
 * Project honeypot have it on its list as well due agressive scrapping http://www.projecthoneypot.org/ip_207.106.190.66
 * Again me and my signature issue:D goodnight im going to sleep  thnx Gabriel.Vergara (talk) 00:46, 4 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I see, this is why it was important to you to reference their bot, NextGenSearchBot, in the article.  That bot does appear in the Ultrawebhosting list and I see that in honeypot they note is assigned to NextGenSearchBot; but they also say there that nothing bad came of the visit.   What would be the most helpful here would be a secondary source that talks about this - an article in a search engine trade rag or the like.... Jytdog (talk) 01:25, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Platform section
In my view this is not encyclopedic content, especially as it is sourced only to company's website. Moving here for now, for discussion. I made the section header bold instead of keeping it as a section, to keep this in one Talk page section. There was a reference just floating - I anchored it to a placeholder {floaty citation) text.

(floaty citation)
 * Platform

- Jytdog (talk) 00:25, 4 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Agree with removing the content. Wikipedia doesn't need to list every single component of a software service, and I think integrating a little bit of this information (if even that) with another section would be adequate. Appable (talk) 00:30, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Awards
Moving this here from the article. Most of these are sourced to press releases - we need independent sourcing to show it is noteworthy and assign appropriate weight.
 * Awards

Note - there was a longer version earlier that was trimmed by in this dif to reach the list above. Maybe that is good enough? Full list is below.


 * Awards (older, longer version)

- Jytdog (talk) 00:28, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Request edit on 28 August 2020
I am proposing this edit on behalf of ZoomInfo. I am a paid editor and aware of the COI guidelines. I am submitting this edit request to propose edits that would correct out-of-date information and add further information about the company. I’ve provided an overview of proposed edits below. Thanks for your time and consideration.

ZoomInfo used to be called DiscoverOrg until 2019 when it rebranded. The founders of this company are Henry Schuck and Kirk Brown. Please remove Yonatan Stern, as he was the founder of the original Zoom Information, that was purchased by DiscoverOrg in 2019.

While Zoom Information (also known as Zoominfo) was founded in 2000, the current ZoomInfo (which used to be called DiscoverOrg) was founded in 2007. Can someone please change the founded year in the info box to 2007 to reflect the correct dates for the company that the article is about?

Thanks

Tehila.stern (talk) 16:35, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Proposed Changes to the Services & Solutions section
I am proposing this edit on behalf of ZoomInfo. I am a paid editor and aware of the COI guidelines.

I would like to recommend updates to the services and solutions section. The current version lacks information about the product and business model of the business. In general I would recommend an update to this section, but my own proposed update would include: "ZoomInfo bases its pricing on credit usage, number of licenses and functionality. Cost per credit and cost per license can vary depending on usage. The information ZoomInfo provides is also based on customer needs, with credit costs based on the depth of information needed by a customer. All customers can access traditional demographic and firmographic details. Advanced credits are needed to view intelligence categories like technographics and department budgets. Add-on solutions to the ZoomInfo platform can also impact pricing."

CITATION: https://www.martechcube.com/martech-interview-vp-product-marketing-zoominfo-peggysue-werthessen/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tehila.stern (talk • contribs) 11:51, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
 * ❌ Wikipedia is not for advertising products; the proposed change seems to be clear advertising, for example referring to customers and the cost of the products. Furthermore, the provided reference is to an interview with a marketer for the company, rather than a neutral independent source.  Spencer T• C 01:15, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Just been "notified" by Zoominfo
I came here because I just received mail from this company, with subject "Notice of personal information processing". I think they violate the EU GDPR on a grand scale. Basically they are saying "We collect the following types of Personal Information about you:

Name Profile picture associated with your professional Telephone number (general or direct business numbers, faxes, and/or mobile numbers) Email address, including business and/or other email addresses (including “freemails” such as Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail, etc.) Job title and department Office address Company name Work history Education history Professional affiliations Links to social media profiles Links to articles by, about, or quoting you (“web references”) Inferences drawn from personal data in these categories

A scary amount of information.

The mail continues to explain in some detail what they want to do with the info (basically to provide it to their clients, including to sell it). They do provide a link to opt-out, but GDPR requires opt-in.

The mail states that "ZoomInfo is a registered data broker" in some US states.

The lead should explain at elementary school level what this company is getting their money for. Currently, it reads "is a software and data company which provides data for companies and business individuals." This obscures more than it explains.

As a start, I added this to the lead: Zoominfo is a commercial search-engine, specialized in contact and business information. From internet and other sources, the company collects contact and other information about individuals, companies and other business entities, such as departments. They maintain profiles for the subjects and make these available to their clients, as a service and for a fee.

Now if only some reliable secondary source had written this. 77.180.180.175 (talk) 11:34, 16 June 2023 (UTC)


 * I too came here, as today I received an e-mail from this company in clear violation of the GDPR. I never heard about ZoomInfo prior to their spam-mail and sure never allowed them to process data about me. I am a EU-citizen. In the e-mail they state that "ZoomInfo may transfer Personal Information internationally" (which is not allowed under the GDPR), and "ZoomInfo gathers Personal Information from several sources" (under the GDPR this also is not allowed: you have to get explicit, informed consent from each single individual in advance - no OptOut!). And then they write "ZoomInfo is ZoomInfo Technologies LLC, and we are located at 805 Broadway St, Suite 900, Vancouver, WA 98660" (so they are not located in the EU and thus not allowed to treat data from EU-citizens a priori). Sajoch (talk) 08:17, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Listen up please everybody. First up, I do sympathise with the frustration on show here. The trouble is that there isn't really anything that Wikipedia can do about it. This is an encyclopaedia and this page is not a general forum for airing grievances with Zoominfo. That said, the article could do with some coverage of criticism of the company but only if it is derived from reliable sources and presented in a neutral manner. If anybody has any suggestions for sources we can use then please feel free to suggest them but only if they meet the criteria in WP:RS. --DanielRigal (talk) 18:31, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Request edit on 29 April 2024

 * What I think should be changed: I am a paid editor and acknowledge the COI guidelines.

Remove the following passage from the Controversies section:

Multiple organizations have issued warnings to their employees, customers, students, and other related parties regarding emails from ZoomInfo, zoominformation.com, and m.zoominfo-privacy.com.[16][4][17][18] The emails, while not technically claiming to be related to the popular videoconference software Zoom,[16][17] are vague enough that many unassuming email recipients may confuse the two;[16][19] there is speculation that the vague resemblance is intentional,[17] with ZoomInfo hoping to trick the recipients into clicking on the email's links,[17][20][21] thereby providing ZoomInfo with the personal information of both recipient and all those who email to or are emailed by the recipient[22][23] which ZoomInfo can then sell.[17] Zoom has felt the need to issue clarifying statements on the issue, too.[19] While technically not illegal, this approach has been called "voluntary malware"[24] and been noted as "morally questionable" as a legal borderline version of phishing[21][20] – hence the warnings published by many organizations to their employees and customers.[21][20]


 * Why it should be changed: Baseless speculation from anonymous Reddit users does not constitute well-researched content and has no business being on Wikipedia. As a previous Talker stated: "This is an encyclopaedia and this page is not a general forum for airing grievances with Zoominfo." These criticisms are uninformed, inaccurate, derived from unreliable sources and not presented in a neutral manner, all of which goes against Wikipedia guidelines.
 * References supporting the possible change (format using the "cite" button):

Rob.morse.zoominfo (talk) 14:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC)


 * While I do think that the section needs to be re-written with sources that aren't self-published, the sources that you provided are not reliable. One is to a forum post and the other is to, what it looks like, an AI written article.  Cowboygilbert  -  (talk) ♥  15:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)


 * We welcome a rewrite using authentic, news-based sources, rather than those sourced from comment sections.
 * AIThority is actually a media outlet covering the AI space: "AiThority.com covers AI technology news, editorial insights and digital marketing trends from around the globe. Updates on modern marketing tech adoption, AI interviews, tech articles and events." https://aithority.com/
 * Additionally, ZoomInfo is an A+ Accredited Business on Better Business Bureau: https://www.bbb.org/us/wa/vancouver/profile/digital-marketing/zoominfo-1296-22673812
 * @Cowboygilbert Rob.morse.zoominfo (talk) 19:34, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Removing the "controversies" section
I've nuked the controversial section which (to my chagrin) appears to make me the agent of a shifty sales company doing shifty things to cover up their dubious business practices.

however...

Shifty sales company, for all their shiftiness, has seemingly done a good job of crisis management and no reputable media firms have reported on their shiftiness. This means that it's not appropriate to disparage them in this article, because to do so is WP:OR. I am very much open to reinstating an verifiable version if appropriate sources can be found. BrigadierG (talk) 21:24, 27 May 2024 (UTC)