Talk:GoodSearch

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Websites / Computing   
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.
 

Goodtree/GoodSearch?[edit]

I know very little about computers, but isn't the last footnote about Goodtree, a different website than GoodSearch? --Kletta (talk) 21:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Well spotted. The source was also a blog which is not considered adequate as a source for this sort of thing. I've removed the claim. If there are good sources that make the same claim about GoodSearch we can add it back. -- SiobhanHansa 21:41, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Deletion of Competitor Section[edit]

The competitor section has been deleted by User talk:Billiechloe three times. I have refered this to admin for a third option on whether a competitor section is a valid section to a company description on Wikipedia. See WP:THIRD.

It would also be useful to get a confirmation that there is no conflict of interest in the creation and edits of the GoodSearch entry. WP:CONFLICT

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Uptodateinfo (talkcontribs) 10:30, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Searchtool-80%.png Response to Third Opinion Request:
Disclaimers: I am responding to a third opinion request made at WP:3O. I have made no previous edits on GoodSearch and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process (FAQ) is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. Third opinions are not tiebreakers and should not be "counted" in determining whether or not consensus has been reached. My personal standards for issuing third opinions can be viewed here.

Opinion: In my opinion, the Competitor section is, as currently written, inappropriate because, first, it is wholly unsourced — links to the competitor's sites are not reliable sources — and violates no original research and, second, since the competitor issue is of marginal importance at best to this article, which is very short, including it gives undue weight to the subject of the section. As for the conflict of interest question, the motives of an editor in removing a section are irrelevant if the section is inappropriate, as I believe the Competitor section to be. Let me also note that the Description, Goodshop, and Browser integration sections are wholly unsourced as well, the links to the Firefox plug-in site and the Goodsearch website not being reliable sources any more than the links to the competitor sits are. Those sections should also be deleted if reliable sources cannot be provided for them within the next few weeks, but the Competitor section should be removed right away because of the undue weight issue. In any event, however, the slow–motion edit war over the Competitor section must stop immediately.

What's next: Once you've considered this opinion click here to see what happens next.—TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 18:17, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Understand the feedback and action. Apologies for the slow-motion edit/ re-editing. Thanks to TransporterMan and Athaenara. Signed Uptodateinfo —Preceding undated comment added 10:24, 28 April 2010 (UTC).