Talk:Gizmodo

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Blogging (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of Blogging WikiProject, an attempt to build better coverage of Blogging on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the Project Page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Rooster Teeth[edit]

can someone add a link to the podcasts page? i dont know how.

its page is here.http://roosterteeth.com/groups/profile.php?id=6123


Blatantly obvious Apply fanboyism[edit]

I think there should be a section regarding the common criticism that Gizmodo has gone from reputable tech site to being an Apple fanboy's wet dream. Just about every article on it for the past few years have been praising Apple endlessly and criticizing everyone else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.116.91.139 (talk)

I'd agree, but unless there are verifiable sources you can't include it in the article. Plus, it'd be pretty difficult to represent it neutrally. --Topperfalkon (talk) 17:45, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

First Talk Page Post About Something![edit]

So we've added the #whitenoise section. It looks pretty nice. Feel free to edit anything wonderfully new in, as is your right. If anyone feels like getting rid of it, let us know here, perhaps we can talk. Four tildes now?

Sithishade (talk) 07:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Let's throw something in there about Bill. He seems like a cool guy that impacted the community like no one's business. - Totallynotbilliswear —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.172.251.54 (talk) 03:03, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Controversy[edit]

Generally when a company has broken laws (as with the iPhone) and caused controversy and disruptions (as with the TVBGone thing), we call that controversy, not coverage. It would be biased to call it anything else. 174.112.18.193 (talk) 01:58, 30 March 2011 (UTC)