LinkedIn Answers was nominated for deletion. The debate was closed on 30 November 2012 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into LinkedIn. The original page is now a redirect to here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
Project Voldemort was nominated for deletion. The debate was closed on 26 December 2009 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into LinkedIn. The original page is now a redirect to here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.
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 is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
NPOV :Alabama Cooperative Extension System, written almost entirely by a news and public affairs employee at ACES, so needs some neutral eyes to give it a going-over to check for both neutrality, and layout/content inclusion, etc.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
LinkedIn's Wiki needs a "Criticisms and controversies" section (similar to Facebook's Wikipedia page [Wiki]), because currently this Wiki appears to have been written with bias, seeming like a LinkedIn representative wrote most of it.
The main topics to cover would be:
LinkedIn's use of email address mining. LinkedIn has been sued for accessing users' email addresses by requesting their email passwords, then using those passwords to access their email contact lists and sending join requests to those contacts .
LinkedIn's use of Site Wide Auto-Moderation (SWAM). This LinkedIn policy automatically blacklists users from LinkedIn groups and offers limited recourse for appeals when a user is wrongly blacklisted .
LinkedIn's use of “People You May Know” email solicitation. LinkedIn generates lists of people that non-users may know based on email addresses that they have mined and then creates join requests which appear to be from those people, even though those people may not even be LinkedIn users . — Preceding unsigned comment added by CherubCow (talk • contribs) 04:12, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
The linked in mobile app references "linkd.in" web address in the read more section. Is this an official site or partner of linked in? Its unsettling that 10M people have downloaded the app but the documentation does not reference the official site.
Its been a while since I have posted anything, at least I remembered the tildes! Fozforic (talk) 14:13, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
It is important to write in such a way that a novice can understand the information. For example: the third paragraph under "Reception" -- after several tries, I have no idea what this paragraph means. It's wordy and jumbled. ProfessorAndro (talk) 23:12, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
i attempted to clarify it. Jytdog (talk) 23:16, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi all, in the nine months since the "Economic Graph" section was first added to this article the project has developed quite a bit, so I wanted to check in about updating/adding to the section. As mentioned above, I'm making the request here rather than editing myself because I have a COI: I work for a communications agency that represents LinkedIn. Here's what I suggest adding:
Insight from the Economic Graph has influenced research on various employment-related topics, including popular destination cities of recent college graduates (source), areas with high concentrations of technology skills (source), and common career transitions (source). LinkedIn provided the City of New York with data from the Economic Graph that highlighted “in-demand" tech skills to help inform the city's "Tech Talent Pipeline" project. (sources: 1, 2, 3) In March 2015, President Obama announced a technology training initiative for which LinkedIn will provide similar data. (source)
I'd be really grateful if someone could take a look at the above and let me know what you think. Happy to provide additional citations/research/information if that would be helpful as well. Thanks so much! Mary Gaulke (talk) 20:30, 26 March 2015 (UTC); relocated to new section for clarity and added request edit template Mary Gaulke (talk) 18:56, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
An edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.
Hi all, quick request: Would it be possible to update the first paragraph of the article with a more recent user number? Currently it states 259 million as of June 2013. The most current figure, which already appears in the infobox, is 364 million. (source) Alternatively, the total as of the end of 2014 was 347 million. (source) I'm not editing directly because (as previously mentioned) I have a conflict of interest: I work for a communications firm that represents LinkedIn. I appreciate any help! Thanks. Mary Gaulke (talk) 19:29, 13 May 2015 (UTC); adding request edit template Mary Gaulke (talk) 15:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)