Salesforce Integration - Remove Custom Fields


Q: What feature / functionality are you looking for?
A: I don’t want Unbounce to create the “Submitter IP” or “Source” Lead custom fields.

Q: What problem are you trying to solve?
A: I already have enough custom fields and each of the fields I create adhere to a certain naming convention. These are dupes of things I already have and each time I delete them they come back into my org. I’ve tested this and it appears to be due to the Unbounce integration.

Q: If solved, what value would this provide (ex. increased efficiency, cost savings, etc.)?
A: This would help to keep my org clean of fields I don’t want or need.

Q: Use Case example? (ex. As a ____ I want to be able to _____ so I can _____.)
A: I want to have only fields that I use and that I’ve created for a given purpose. These fields serve no purpose.

Q: Is this being solved by another workaround or any other tool today?
A: This is specifically caused by the Unbounce integration, so “No”.


I realized in my screenshot I included the SubmitterIP in edit mode. Here is a different screenshot that shows that each field was created at exactly the same time.

When I try to remove the fields, they get automatically recreated when the Integration fires. Since we already have fields for this in our org, it’s nice to use existing multi-use fields, and for the fields that are specific to Unbounce I can prefix them with “Unbounce_”. This way a generic field like “Source__c” doesn’t confuse myself or other users/admins when creating…

  1. System Reports
  2. Mail Merges
  3. Field Validations
  4. Anything else involving fields in the system


I haven’t set this up before, but you may be able to use Zapier to replace the standard integration – normally it’s possible to choose which fields/data is sent.

Might be a good short-term fix :slight_smile:


Zoe, thanks for the suggestion. Overall, I’m quite happy with the Unbounce to Salesforce integration. Having seen a number of integrations with Salesforce I’d rate it a “Good” and close to a “Very Good”. It took a little while to learn how to map things effectively and efficiently but overall…

  1. It works
  2. It’s fairly easy to setup
  3. It’s effective in what it intends to do

So in that regard, I’m a bit hesitant to switch to anything else as I recognize that no integration between two different systems is perfect. However, because it’s just a couple of small annoyances away from being “Very Good” or perhaps even “Excellent”, I figured I’d mention a feature request here to see if it gets any traction. As a coder myself at times I know that not all feature requests and changes take the same amount of time, so I thought, “Why not send it?”


Totally understand that! :slight_smile: