Talk:SoundHound

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Into empty space?[edit]

"allows users to identify music by humming, singing or playing a recorded track" Into what? Empty space? Maybe so, because according to the next sentence it was "launched" rather than initiated or started. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.251.118.110 (talk) 22:44, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reads like a press release[edit]

This article, from the start, reads like a company brochure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.137.249.24 (talk) 14:32, 5 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"SoundHound Inc. believes in enabling humans to interact with the things around them in the same way we interact with each other: by speaking naturally to mobile phones, cars, TVs, music speakers, coffee machines, and every other part of the emerging, connected world." Really awful--they didn't even try to disguise it. Tagged as an advert. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinequabosh (talk • contribs) 07:54, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. This is a company brochure. As soon as I get the time, I'm whiddling it down. Chisme (talk) 23:02, 9 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed changes[edit]

Wikidelrey (talk) 02:39, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply 10-MAY-2018[edit]

These claim statements and their accompanying source references are mentioned by those publications primarily because they were recent occurrences, and thus were viewed by those publications as newsworthy. Nevertheless, that mandate is not shared by Wikipedia, which has different reasons for inclusion (e.g., WP:NOTNEWS.) .spintendo⋅⋅) 01:05, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed changes[edit]

- Change opening line description to: "SoundHound AI, Inc. is a voice AI company, founded in 2005."

- Replace second sentence that explains what the company does more accurately as of 2023: "SoundHound’s independent voice AI platform allows businesses to provide customized conversational experiences to consumers through voice-enabled products, services, and apps."

- Add: "SoundHound holds more than 200 technology patents and its voice AI is available in 25 languages. The company works across the automotive, TV, IoT, restaurant, and customer service industries."

- Add to explain what the company is often known for vs. what it does now as part of the 2015 emergence from stealth: "While in still in stealth, SoundHound created a music discovery app before launching the SoundHound voice platform in 2015, built on the company's proprietary speech recognition and natural language understanding technologies."

- Add to correct and list current products available (Houndify is no longer the name of an externally facing product, the music app is no longer a core part of the business): "SoundHound's core offerings include AI-driven products like Smart Answering, Smart Ordering, Dynamic Interaction, and SoundHound Chat AI, a voice assistant with integrated Generative AI." Fmcevoy (talk) 01:45, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: There are several problems here, but the simplest explanation is that these proposed additions are not written neutrally and are poorly supported.
GreyB doesn't appear to be a reliable source and is very poor for demonstrating that the number of patents is encyclopedically significant, so it appears to be a promotional factoid. TechCrunch is borderline per WP:TECHCRUNCH, but just as important, a source from 2015 cannot be used to describe what the company is currently known for.
Information about the company's "core business" should come from a reliable source (sources must be published and verifiable, so editors are not reliable sources). Further WP:NOTCATALOG applies. Grayfell (talk) 19:46, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Okay. How would you propose citing the patents?
The reason the TechCrunch article was from 2015 is because I was using it to support the sentence that says "the platform launched in 2015", which is a significant shift from the previous business. 2015 is the year the main offering shifted from one thing to another. Fmcevoy (talk) 16:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In terms of references for the core business, can I use links to published media articles? I'm not sure what you mean by "editors are not reliable sources"? The rules you cite seem to suggest the work of a reporter is sufficient. Fmcevoy (talk) 16:49, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You have not provided any reason to mention the patents. We aren't going to mention them just because you want to. If a reliable, independent source mentions them, we can evaluate that source and go from there, but without this context it would just seem like corporate bragging.
'Reliable sources' is explained in detail at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. COI editing and commercial pages in general also benefit from independent sources, which is explained at Wikipedia:Independent sources. Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources may also be useful, and is a bit more approachable as a starting place.
What I meant by 'editors are not sources' is that Wikipedia doesn't publish original research, which would include things you, personally, claim to be true based on your own direct experiences. What is and is not part of your company's "core business" should be explained by reliable, independent sources. Passing mentions, press releases, churnalism etc. are unlikely to be useful to readers searching for a neutral overview of this company. Grayfell (talk) 05:35, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SoundHound_AI_logo_black.jpg Fmcevoy (talk) 21:17, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Grayfell (talk) 19:48, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SoundHound AI description update[edit]

Change opening line description to: "SoundHound AI, Inc. is a voice AI company, founded in 2005."

Reliable source: https://news.yahoo.com/ai-related-stocks-soar-on-chatgpt-craze-200818105.html 2601:647:5D80:3C0:BDF4:EE14:D43B:4827 (talk) 00:40, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Two problems: First, "Voice AI" is vague and very poorly-defined, so this term would not help readers understand the topic. The second is that the source is a passing mention. Do you have any better sources which explain what this term means? Grayfell (talk) 00:52, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's an unreasonable call out & isn't based off of any research. "Voice AI" is and has been a trending tech term, as of late. There is no synonym for "Voice AI". 2601:647:5D80:3C0:BDF4:EE14:D43B:4827 (talk) 01:52, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I looked for recent sources on SoundHound during the recent flurry of obvious conflict of interest editing, but didn't find much that was usable. I certainly could've missed some, so feel free to propose any which you think might be reliable per Wikipedia's guidelines.
Being a "trending tech term" is exactly the problem, here. AI is not automatically a buzzword, but it becomes a buzzword when used to promote a company or hype stocks without any additional context. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so, ideally, we provide context. Grayfell (talk) 02:50, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:SoundHound&oldid=1210464528"