Talk:EBay

Archives
/Archive 1: to September, 2005 /Archive 2: Sep, 2005 - Oct, 2006

Info on what I'm adding and why it should stay

Ebay is taking the right of having private feedbacks away from sellers as of 10/26. You will not be able to list an item to sell if your feedbacks are private. eBay has not bothered to notifiy sellers of this. The info here: http://www2.ebay.com/aw/core/200610.shtml#2006-10-02120653

Also many people are complaining to ebay at: http://pages.ebay.com/help/newtoebay/suggest.html

Anomo 19:23, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

• Oh excellent. I always hated the idea that sellers could have secret feedback. If I remember right, the "private feedback" policy started when it was eBay's policy that feedback could never be removed. I do wonder how you can say "without notifying sellers", though, since today is October 5th, it takes effect on the 26th, and you linked us to exactly where they are giving such notice. Further, I don't see in what way it is a "controversy" -- at least, your edit doesn't explain it. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 19:37, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Before, people had a choice whether to user private feedback and sell from private feedback and negs still show up as a number and percentage, but eBay takes away that choice. Anomo 04:33, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, and it what way is it a controversy? Got a reliable source describing it as a controversy, so we can properly characterize it as such? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 05:44, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

"Controversies"

Couple of comments about the "Other controversies" section:

1. Why is the Diebenkorn scam an "eBay controversy"? There was no controversy; there was an unethical art dealer committing fraud.
2. Why is PayPal's paying that fine stemming from before eBay acquired them an eBay controversy?
3. Is the Baazee CEO episode still active? What's the status of it? Isn't it more of a general website controversy rather than anything relating to eBay?
4. In what way are the ticket scalping issues controversial?

--jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 20:02, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

I've had someone Auction Snipe me twice! >:( Does this happen to anyone else? -Timmyfan

In the "Other Controversies" section it states that "eBay discourages sellers from using independent money-wiring companies such as Western Union and MoneyGram". I assume that this was added as people feel that this discourages competition for eBay's payment service, PayPal. If that is the case would this still be the case if that is not the reason it is discouraged? Both WU and MoneyGram discourage the use of their services on eBay as well: http://pages.ebay.com/securitycenter/mrkt_safety/instantcashtransfer.html#western If this is not the reason that this is considered controversial could someone clarify this? Kaid 16:07, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• I removed several. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:16, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Moved to discussion down the page. Kaid (talk) 06:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

finally change it to look like eBay

Link on WP for script: Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Edit Top 70.111.218.254 13:33, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Third Party Providers for eBay

A note about the third party providers/auction management software that help automate business on eBay?

Inc: Marketworks Channeladvisor Fruition

to name a few

19/10/2006

Free third party providers can be found on ebay.com under seller tools. The best one I have found is Turbo Lister.

Income being derived from Ebay on an automated basis is more than using third party providers. A discussion of third party providers that provide income on Ebay can be found here

Unusual items

I've tightened up the "unusual items" section, removing those that were only referred to by eBay item numbers (or copies of eBay listings), given that anyone who wants to can post something odd on eBay and then list it here. I've changed the comments so they say that external source for "unusualness" need be provided. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 23:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

eBay Template

For anyone who likes to shop at eBay:

{User:Bearly541/Userbox/Ebayaddict}}

Bearly541 03:20, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

That's nice, but this is a forum for discussing improvements to the eBay article. ANNAfoxlover

Why did the creator request deletion? William Ortiz (talk) 10:19, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

eBay Stores

I am new to Wikipedia so please forgive my ignorance.

I have added a new section on eBay Stores.

Does anyone know how I add my cite in the References area? http://www.proimpulse.com/ebay-store-design/ 16:33, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

You don't. Wikipedia doesn't permit self-promotional links. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:36, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

What are all the References at the bottom of the page then? There are several self prmotional links there like 1, 5, 6, links to Auction Guild, etc.

Did I miss something?http://www.proimpulse.com/ebay-store-design/ 17:05, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

How are those self-promotional? Some of those may be a little sketchy as good sources, but they aren't blatently promotional. Take #6; it's a reference to an article in the International Herald Tribune; a well-known newspaper. Please read Wikipedia:Reliable Sources for what sort of content is allowable in the References section. And read Wikipedia:External Links for more advice about not linking to a web page under your control. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:31, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! I understand now about References and Wikipedia:External Links. I wanted to link to a page on my site that is directly related to eBay Stores and the design of them (eBay Radio even interviewed us on this).

Thanks again! http://www.proimpulse.com/ebay-store-design/ 20:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Such a link would be in violation of the external link policy. Please stop adding it. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 20:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Acquisitions & investments

Under Acquisitions & investments, there needs to be some sort of edit to the statement "ebay aqcuired kruse auctions."

There needs to be grammar check, and information on when the aquisition occured. -(Theemojesus 20:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC))

Ebay did not acquire Mercadolibre.com, just a small percentage of it. This should be corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.216.234.165 (talk) 17:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Frequency of fraud

During I think it was about 2003, a new MMORPG, Eve-Online, started.

I spent about six months playing, during which time I learned how to make a lot of in-game currency, which I was then selling on ebay.

A small number of other people were also engaged in this activity, and we got an idea of who was who through the ebay listings.

We found that fraudenlent buyers were a *major* problem. Buyers would pay with stolen credit cards and it would only be later that the payment would be recognized as fraudent. With Paypal in particular this was a major problem, since Paypal then billed the seller for the fraudent payment and because Paypal exlude virtual goods from their insurance programme. With other forms of payment (Western Union on-line money transfers, for example) this wasn't a problem because WU would honour the payment once it was made.

As a result, I began to track *all* the sales of ISK (the in-game currency) for a period of about two months.

It turned out to be very easy to spot a fraudent buyer. They would bid over the going rate and they would often bid on many auctions concurrently. This was of course because they weren't spending their own money and because they wanted to get as much ISK as possible before the card was detected as invalid.

There was only *one* case of a more sophisticated fraud, who built up a +5 reputation before going on a fraud spree. He did well, because ebay at that time only showed the current rating, which for him of course was only going down by -1 each time someone gave a negative feedback that he'd defrauded them. (From that episode, I learned to always check the full user history).

What I found was that about *HALF* of all bidders were fraudulent.

I emailed one seller who lost the equivelent of 3000 dollars of in-game currency.

I think this information is quite interesting and I wish/intend to add it to the Ebay page.

Any comments/suggestions?

Toby Douglass 18:25, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment: It isn't interesting. Suggestion: Don't add it. KarlBunker 18:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it's interesting, but it most definitely will get shot down as original research. Gzuckier 20:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

If I write up the work, can I not refer to it from the Wiki? Toby Douglass 13:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

No. It's original research, and you don't get to insert it into Wikipedia either directly or by reference. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 14:15, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm offended by your tone. I have no ulterior motive to "get it into the Wiki". Fraud is an issue with on-line auctions and objective statistical information is useful - and THAT is why I've been prepared to do the work necessary to write the work up and publish it. Toby Douglass 22:20, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if you're offended. One of Wikipedia's official policies is no original research. Of course fraud is an issue, and of course objective information is useful -- but Wikipedia doesn't allow you to include your own research. On the other hand, if you publish it and it's deemed a reliable source, another editor may choose to use it (and you can recommend they do so here on this page.) --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 23:42, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

That's cool - I was wondering if I could write it up and then add it in. I'll get it done, then put a pointer to it here, you guys can review it and add it if it's acceptable or give me feedback if it is not. Toby Douglass 13:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Great! I look forward to seeing it. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 15:48, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Despite my comment above, I think this would be extremely interesting--to fans of this particular type of game who sell or have considered selling their in-game currency currency on eBay. To the rest of the world? To eBay users in general? to WP readers interested in eBay? Not so much. In the first place, your research only covers this one type of eBay user, and in the second place, the only real lesson from your research is: "exercise a little caution if you're selling an item that appeals to teens and children." KarlBunker 22:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Conflict of interest?

I note an unusual amount of edits by Jpgordon wiki admin and ex ebay employee. I wonder if this is the best person, a self stated former employee & ebay programmer, to be chronically editing and monitoring the page, and by comments, apparently this is a pet project. STeve65.8.240.227 00:11, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

• Fair question, certainly. I've tried to tread pretty carefully. I wouldn't mind hearing from other editors regarding this. Have I been crossing the boundries of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest? (Actually, I'm a little surprised this hasn't come up earlier.) --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 03:25, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Charity Auctions

I threw in one, it would be cool to see other people add other ones that they know of. They run around 5 or 10 a week and have an entire department dedicated to it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jazzmaster j (talk • contribs) 17:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

Validity of the "unusual items" page?

Isn't this highly subjective? Only an external link is required? This section seems out of place in Wikipedia and doesn't contribute to the article nor does it even list some of the more peculiar items that have sold on ebay. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.124.45.194 (talk) 03:44, 25 December 2006 (UTC).

• Well, yeah. It's smaller than it used to be...none might well be better. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 07:31, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I once saw someone trying to sell a link to a website. Upon closer inspection, I saw that the link was stated in the product description. Even better, there were bids on it.69.251.157.48 12:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)ARANDOMGENIUS69.251.157.48 12:46, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

External links

• http://pages.ebay.com/turbo_lister/
• http://pages.ebay.co.uk/turbo_lister/
• Turbo Lister Forum
• http://watches777.blogspot.com/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watches777 (talk • contribs) 05:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again. Cbrown1023 02:38, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

• Why is it even particularly worth mentioning? It's one of a slough of free and non-free listing tools available from various sources, and it's one of a slough of software tools available from eBay. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 05:23, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[MAGBAZA]http://www.magbaza.com/ Adds Trust and Reliability to Buy From China by ebay Headquartered in Hongkong, China, MAGBAZA and its operating subsidiaries provide MAGBAZA services that facilitate and accelerate purchasing from China by assuring secure settlement and providing supplier investigation services and other helpful services. It’s a fast growing team with representative offices and cooperators all over main cities of China. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 221.221.116.199 (talk)

ebay, not eBay

The logo says "ebay", or maybe ebaY, not eBay. 67.188.172.165 23:10, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but the site itself consistently uses "eBay". --Someone Else's Problem 23:26, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Looking on Google, that's correct. BuickCenturyDriver 23:28, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

From the horse's mouth:

The eBay Name

It is usually permissible for you to refer to eBay in a descriptive manner on your website, in item listings or in advertisements. For example, you might say "Check out my antique items on eBay," or "I sell on eBay." (By the way, eBay is always spelled "eBay"; it is never spelled "Ebay" or "e-Bay.") You should not refer to eBay in any way that might lead someone to believe that your company or site is sponsored by, affiliated with, or endorsed by eBay. [1]

Lanternshine 00:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

So why is the wiki page name EBay, not eBay? -- LeCour^T:C 01:53, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Technical reasons. All article names on Wikipedia begin with upper case letters. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 03:42, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

• The "ebaY" thing is popular among one particular community of eBay detractors. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 21:20, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

So is 'egay' but I wouldnt mention it on the wiki page 62.25.106.209 05:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Poor customer service

Some users have been frustrated with Ebay's customer service. All problems must be resolved by email, there is no way to speak directly to a person. Email responses are often canned responses. The frustration with Ebay's failure to improve has given rise to a petition calling for customer service improval.

This text has been removed 3 times without a valid explanation. According WP:RS this classes as a primary source. Incidentally, I have no affiliation with the petition website. Although at least one of the reverters works/worked for eBay.

Could you please give your reasons rather than just starting revert war? Pgr94 19:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

The fact that a petition page exists isn't enough to establish that this issue is notable. Stories in mainstream news outlets would do that. Apart from the issue of notability, I doubt (though I don't know offhand) that it's within WP policies to include a link to a petition page in an article. KarlBunker 20:11, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

It's not. There's no reliable source. Online petitions are neither reliable sources nor indicative of anything. And, for gosh sake: 275 signatures. Pretty trivial even for an online petition. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 20:26, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

As a longtime eBayer, I will attest that the issue is, indeed, notable. Having spent countless hours in some of eBay's chat rooms, I've found that the matter of lack of accessibility is a sore subject for many -- especially newbies. For the most part, eBay veterans are accustomed to it and find the chat rooms themselves to be the best available workaround, but it doesn't mean that they like it. Additionally, there is Live Help, which offers real time assistance via chat. I've used it quite a few times and have generally found it useful; others have not had that experience. The topic itself is not inappropriate to the article, although I agree that the link to the petition page is of dubious value.

Lanternshine 20:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't doubt your experience or the validity of your opinion in the least, but mere mortals like you and I don't count as Wikipedia:Reliable sources. KarlBunker 20:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

And, of course their customer service is terrible. It was quite good when I first started working there, but went downhill way quickly as the company and customer base grew exponentially, and never regained its stride. As Karl points out, our personal experiences aren't relevant. Now, if we had a good reliable source -- say, a Consumer Reports expose of eBay customer service -- we could use it. But that petition really isn't any different than just you or I whining about it here; in fact, it's worse, because there's no way to identify any of the signatories; it could just be one guy who likes to type. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 21:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

The SEC filing of eBay's July 2007 10-Q is a reliable source, stating: "We believe that government regulators have received a substantial number of consumer complaints about both eBay and PayPal" http://investor.ebay.com/secfiling.cfm?filingID=950134-07-15993 Customer service procedures are explicitly mentioned there as among the "substantial number" of inquiries from federal regulators. Wphamilton 17:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

I checked that link and the section than mentioned consumer complaints seemed to be referring to fraud rather than customer service. I may have missed that though. Could you provide more information as to where the reference to customer support complaints can be found there? Thanks. Kaid 15:29, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

It says, "We have responded to all inquiries from regulatory agencies by describing our current and planned antifraud efforts, customer support procedures, operating procedures and disclosures." The customer support procedures appears to be distinguished from anti-fraud measures, as you would expect. The quote is in the context of the "substantial number of consumer complaints" received by federal regulators. I don't think we'll find a more credible reference than eBay's own filing with a federal agency. Wphamilton (talk) 02:39, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

EBay does, in fact, have a phone support department, but that service is limited to members of the rank "Gold PowerSeller"

This could be put more accurately. General phone support during business hours is available for "Silver Powersellers" ($3,000 per month). Gold level powersellers may call an "account manager" who is assigned to their account and a number of others, up to hundreds. Top level powersellers and subscribers to Anchor Stores have 24/7 dedicated support. It may be better to express the criticism more generally if at all since none of this really shows the true picture. Should this section even be included without references to litigation, testimony etc? Wphamilton 02:35, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

And now, even more accurately, eBay offers phone support for all eBay Store subscribers as well as PowerSellers of Silver level and above. (Premium and Anchor stores get 24/7. http://www2.ebay.com/aw/core/200709041243562.html) Kaid 04:57, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I have added the information about phone support as well as cleaning up the section a little. It was a bit confusing to say they offer no phone support and then turn right around and say they do. Close reading did clarify but this way seems less confusing. Kaid 07:56, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

In reviewing the citations for this section I am concerned that A) they do not support the claims in the section and B) they do not even refer to eBay. The three currently listed are:

1) http://slightlyrandom.com/?p=20 2) http://www.instantservice.com/news/20041230.html 3) http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/01/03/business/service.php

Citation 1 actually discussed how good eBays support is, 2 briefly mentions eBay in a bigger article about customer support on the internet in general and number 3 doesn't even mention eBay at all. I am not the most active or knowledgeable Wikipedian, so I would ask for advice on this. Do these sources support the section? Should we ask for more sources? What is the best way to improve this section? Thanks. Kaid 15:14, 15 November 2007 (UTC)Kaid

NPOV

The "Items and Sevices" section reads like an advertisement to me. Anyone else get that feeling when they read it? worthawholebean _talk^contribs 05:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

• Kinda, yeah. Improve it! --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 07:02, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Prohibited items

Does the list belong in the article, or should it be kept to prose and an external link to their policies. I'm aware the topic is notable enough to include, though I don't know if a list of prohibited items is good encyclopedic practice. Richard001 00:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I thought it was kinda strange to include the prohibited items as well. It's one of those things that are in the user agreement. I would suggest that a simpler way to deal with the prohibited items is perhaps in one of the auctions that made headlines that violated that listing policy, we describe that the item was listed as being prohibited and then link to the prohibited items from there, as well as including a link at the bottom to "prohibited items". DanielZimmerman 14:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Not so controversial items listed in "controversies and criticisms"

I cannot fathom how "misspellings" can be listed as a controversy or a criticism. I also do not think that sniping should be included in this list. The entire section could probably be organized better with some additional information on other problems that ebay has with dealing with fraud. DanielZimmerman 16:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I removed the misspellings and search engine portions at the end of this section. It just didn't belong there. DanielZimmerman 14:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

After removing the mispellings (again) and the sniping section, another user reverted them back. I have since deleted the mispellings (yet again) and put a tag on the sniping portion because there needs to be some reference as to why the sniping section belongs in a section about controversy and criticisms of eBay. DanielZimmerman 15:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Fraud section: Part Deux

In the most recent archive it is mentioned that the Fraud section has a lot of what appears to be OR. I tend to agree, especially with the lack of citations in this section. I will be working on a rewrite unless anyone has any objections. DanielZimmerman 14:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

i think under fraud they should do the chinese mp4 player scam.. as ebay is flooded with counterfit music players with hacked memory (1gb made to look like 4gb) and maybe links related to it 82.24.175.199 01:14, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Remember the eBay scam thing? It's listed as #16 on the top 25 Web Hoaxes and Pranks list! Just look on the 4th page of this link. --Angeldeb82 22:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Mm. What in that link says anything about scams? Hoaxes, yeah. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 00:37, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I sue you 23:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Fraudsters (irrespective of how menial the fraud) are creatures of habit and if they are committing fraud on eBay, they are committing it elsewhere. Several have tried it on me and I have recovered every penny (including postage) - it's actually quite easy, just think like them. Remember there are more ways of skinning a cat! 00.36, 24 July 2007 (ISU)I sue you 23:37, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Caps

Why doesn't this article use the {{lowercase|eBay}} template? 134.250.72.142 21:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

• Um, it does? The very first thing in the article? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 22:46, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Nazi items?

Does that mean it's impossible to get such items as Hitler Youth knifes? Or does that just mean pro-nazi books and such? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.174.93.102 (talk) 05:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC).

• Dunno about "impossible", but definitely against the eBay rules. eBay will generally remove items that bear the marks of such organizations, such as relics from the KKK or certain Nazi memorabilia.[2] --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 18:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

• Ebay HAS allowed a nazi flag to be sold on its site, you just cannot show the swastika in the picture. If you dont show the swastika then ebay has no "proof" that what you are selling is an actual nazi item. DanielZimmerman 19:15, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

And the buyer has no proof he's actually getting one... Someguy1221 23:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok I find this somewhat weird. I was on there trying to buy a m43 field cap on ebay. Most of the results (and there were lots of listed items) said that I could not view/purchase the item when I tried to click on them because of "legal restrictions in your home country". I live in New Jersey, in the United States of America, and I have never heard of such a prohibition. Furthermore, I was allowed to click on and get to the details page of some of the hats. Ironicly, this ones were what I would think would be the more controversial ones addorned with Totenkopfe, the Reichsadler, and also ones in the iconic "pea-pattern" Waffen-SS camouflage. I have no idea what this was all about... they aren't even banned in Germany to the best of my knowledge (plain ones, without explicit Nazi symbols that is), seeing as their Gebirgsjäger still wear basically the same hat. Does anyone know the status of this? (And by the way don't want it because I'm a neo-nazi or something... I actually planned to put a hammer and sickle or hammer and compass symbol on it) --KobaVanDerLubbe (talk) 16:34, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Correction to above: I noticed now that some of the hats with the symbols were not full size but were for action figures. Others, though, such as the Waffen-SS one, were actual hats. --KobaVanDerLubbe (talk) 17:04, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Phone number

Ebay's US phone number 08887493229, is not a "closely guarded secret", even if ebay does not publish it. First of all, it's public information. Second, it can be found doing a simple google search. Hardy secret, I would say.

[3]Toll free General phone support is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week by calling 1-866-442-3229. For Trust and Safety related issues (such as feedback removal, non-paying bidder, ended listings or suspensions) call 1-866-442-3229 6am-6pm PT, seven days a week.

Shill bidding

I detected a blatant case of shill bidding and reported it to eBay. I cited a dozen or so auctions in which it happened in a completely obvious fashion (e.g. items accidently bought by the shill bidder were later 'resold' by the original seller!!). I received absolutely no reply to my emails to eBay and the fraudulent seller is still on line and still shill bidding!! eBay is a disgrace KarenFischer 12:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

• What suggestions do you have for improving the article? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 15:00, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes Karen, ebay only cares about the seller. The people who pay for items (the buyer) don't matter. No buyers no ebay. And Jpgordon most be getting well paid for defending them. 81.151.68.233 15:23, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

• • I beg your pardon? They don't need to pay me anything, and I stopped working for them over fiver years ago. This, however, is not an eBay complaints forum; it's a page for discussing how to improve the Wikipedia article about eBay. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 15:39, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

[[4]]Actually Ebay will side with the Buyers every single time, i have been a platinum seller since 2004 and i have lost every dispute, to say the truth i only answer the disputes so Ebay would not say i did not show any interest in helping solve the issue,because i know they just side with the buyers! Why? because Ebay does not have any control over the buyer, but it SURELY does over the seller!! Watches777(Watches777 (talk) 01:01, 17 February 2008 (UTC)).

Prostores

I added Prostores to this eBay wiki entry because Prostores is owned by eBay as well. i need to improve on my Prostores article I wrote and I'm sure the people that come to this eBay link should help me on that now. The Cleveland Browns are awesome! 14:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Countries

A list of countries that eBay has websites for should be added to the article. Does anyone have any infomration on this? ANNAfoxlover 02:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

See footnote #1. RedSpruce 10:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

How do you pronounce 'eBay'?

I always thought the pronounciation of eBay was like in 'bay', 'hey'. The other day I heard someone say it like 'ebuy' or 'ebye'. Which is right?

88.91.213.194 04:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

• Were they Australian or something? eBay rhymes with May and Hay and Day and Oy Vey. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 04:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

ive always heard it rhyming with hay. that sounds like an accent. Maddie ^{was here} 05:34, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Feedback abuse

Feedback abuse:

A practice among some sellers is to hold feedback hostage. Even though the buyer paid promptly, the seller refuses to leave feedback. A further abuse of this is that some sellers deliberately withhold feedback so that if a customer is not satisfied with a purchase, no matter how legitimate their reason is, the seller may then use their feedback for malicious retaliation against the buyer, intentionally damaging their feedback score and reputation, and thus, their buying and selling ability, as buyers and sellers both often rely on the feedback score in deciding whether or not to do business with a particular individual. Abacene

"retaliatory Feedback is strongly discouraged on eBay" "some eBay members choose not to leave feedback" These are word-for-word quotes directly from Ebay, which acknowledges that the problem does exist. Source: Ebay - Direct word-for-word quotes

I have added citations for a couple of third-party sources that examine eBay's feedback weaknesses, and added a cite from eBay's own policy pages for good measure (diff). This should satisfy WP:V for the information that is already there. The topic is already covered in the article, it just needed some references to back it up. ~Matticus ^T_C 14:35, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I should also add that just citing eBay's policies alone is not good enough - just because they say "don't use retaliatory feedback" doesn't mean there actually is a problem with it (that would be drawing your own conclusion from incomplete evidence). To draw an analogy, most countries have laws against murder, but that does not mean all those countries have problems with high murder rates. You need someone else to say "this is a problem", and to cite them, before you say likewise in a Wikipedia article. ~Matticus ^T_C 14:58, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

This is the latest change from Ebay about feedback policies.

The eBay Feedback system was designed to provide a simple, honest, accurate record of member experiences. Focusing on customer service includes doing everything we can to grow customer confidence in our sellers.

• Buyers will only be able to receive positive Feedback.
• Positive repeat customer Feedback will count (up to 1 Feedback from the same buyer per week.)
• Feedback more than 12-months old won't count towards your Feedback percentage.
• When a buyer doesn't respond to the Unpaid Item (UPI) process the negative or neutral Feedback they have left for that transaction will be removed.
• When a member is suspended, all their negative and neutral Feedback will be removed.
• Buyers must wait 3 days before leaving negative or neutral Feedback for sellers with an established track record, to encourage communication.
• All Feedback must be left within 60 days (compared to 90 days today) of listing end to encourage timely Feedback and discourage abuse.
• Buyers will be held more accountable when sellers report an unpaid item or commit other policy violations.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Watches777 (talk • contribs) 05:59, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Fiscal accounts

I think the fiscal accounts are not encyclopedic and the section should be removed. Stifle (talk) 09:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

# of Sellers for whom eBay provides 'primary income'?

This used to be in here and is a valuable metric. Somehow it got cut. Could someone please put this back in? I haven't followed the edit discussion here or I'd do it. I've seen eBay estimate 1.3 million primary-income sellers in the US, but I don't know the original source of this data. Thank you.

"Customer Support"

Well seeing as the customer support is so great and I can't edit this section, can someone tell me the UK number where I can enjoy this service? I want to report someone setting up a fake account at my home address. Considering the hassle I have had trying to inform eBay, I think my addition (previously posted by another user a few days ago) was rather benign. 195.137.127.145 21:46, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Your addition was pointless and trivial. Since you can't use eBay without registering, and since it costs nothing to register, the fact that you can't get customer support without registering is a complete non-issue. RedSpruce 22:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't see why I should register with eBay in order to inform them that someone has set up a (business) account falsely at my home address. This account is clearly going to be used for fraudulent activities and should be investigated. With fraud a serious issue, I think that the company's response to this is non-trivial. 195.137.127.145 05:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

BTW: I have now seen the three-revert rule, and apologise for breaking this. 195.137.127.145 aka 155.198.204.97 09:10, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree that it's silly that you have to register to get support in a situation like that. But in the first place it's still a trivial inconvenience that you do have to register, and in the second place, you're talking about a situation that probably applies to about one in a million users. Therefor it's not worthy of mention in this article. RedSpruce 09:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

OK. I shan't try to keep the addition in the article. Hopefully, it's one-in-a-million. Although, I'd like to point out that the sentence, "In addition, .... to sign up for an account first." was taken from an old version (17:06, 12 July 2007), so I can't be alone in finding it inconvenient. Also, in contacting eBay, I was doing it on behalf of my parents- they don't even have internet or an email account to voice their concerns. 155.198.204.97 10:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

It is about 2.4 Million earn a living on eBay.

Ebay mobile

I was suprised to find no mention of Ebay's mobile offering. Perhaps because the full offering is not available in the US. Anyway here is the link:

http://pages.ebay.co.uk/mobile/

Mathiastck 17:25, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

External links

Something seems to be wrong with the external links. Two are the same. I don't know why we need the support page.

One is very unclear (http://pages.ebay.co.uk/mobile/). Why is it there? Is this an ad for Ebay? Perhaps it would be better to mention using ebay with mobiles somewhere in the text above. Plus: why hasn't it got a name?

The last one, most-watched, is OK is guess (though removing it would be OK as well).

HJ —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.83.206.204 (talk) 22:55:58, August 19, 2007 (UTC)

• Yeah. I've removed the non-useful ones. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 04:42, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Overstock

Why is Overstock Auctions listed as one of "eBay's rivals"? With about 1/1000th of the listings (not even including eBay store format listings), and barely even a net profit compared to billions every quarter, Overstock Auctions rivals auctions on some private websites, but hardly eBay. This hype from 2004 Overstock press releases doesn't belong here. Is the idea to list those sites considering themselves competitors of eBay, or realistic competitors? If the former, there's a list of about a dozen which may merit inclusion. Wphamilton 22:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Overstock is a notable company that also offers online auctions. Seems appropriate, regardless of comparative balance sheets. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 23:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

The inclusion of Overstock as a rival is a personal opinion, and it is not appropriate to say that a company that merely offers online auctions is a rival. Overstock is not particularly notable as a host for auctions. At best, this line should be removed until someone provides a credible source demonstrating rivalry or competitiveness.

ebay 13,458,116 listings, Bidville 1,096,362, eCrater 743,967, uk.ebid.net 546,452, blujay 214,495, tazbar 151,105, ePier 146,365, AuctionQuests 95,793. Overstock is WAY down the list with 17,000, not even an also-ran at this point.

Wphamilton 14:53, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Curious that your only edits on Wikipedia involve trying to remove Overstock.com from this entry. Do you have a particular interest in this matter? --ZimZalaBim ^talk 15:50, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Curious why you think that matters. I have suggested a number of edits on this page which have been implemented, and I don't appreciate your personal attack. Wphamilton 19:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

That certinaly does matter. There are policies regarding that, such as WP:SPA and WP:COI.Tabor 19:32, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe these policies prohibit my correcting a mistake on one entry. Just develop a consensus, without attacking the person—Preceding unsigned comment added by Wphamilton (talk • contribs) 20:56, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I fail to see how it was an attack on you as a person. Please explain. Tabor 21:26, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, please explain. Asking for one's motivations when evidence suggests there might be a conflict is not a personal attack, but rather an attempt to ensure policy is followed and that we are building the best possible encyclopedia. Perhaps you can shed some light on the situation. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 21:40, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

There is no evidence suggesting a conflict of interest. None. Impugning someone's integrity without cause is an attack. Clear enough? Wphamilton 21:59, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I still do not see how you are considering this an "attack". It seems to me (and this is not an attack either) that you are taking what was said out of context. Tabor 00:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

It's not an attack, perhaps, but it's a pretty obvious failure to assume good faith. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 02:01, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I haven't assumed anything. I made an observation and asked a question -- which has yet to be directly addressed. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 02:08, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. You haven't assumed anything. I can't imagine you're unfamiliar with WP:AGF. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 02:38, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Turkey

Hi there, can someone add Turkey to the Ebay countries list (reference #1)? They have recently opened a Turkish site as well.. I tried to add it but apparently article is locked.. Cheers —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.28.232 (talk) 15:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

• Done. Thanks! --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:00, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Profits and Transactions

Someone should fact-check this section please. 1) eBay expansion has failed in China, not merely Taiwan and Japan. 2) Not all states require sales tax from out of state sales. 3) The section also seems to deny or ignore the expansions which are not strictly attempts to penetrate markets in new geographical regions. Those are the expansions which have been powering eBay's recent growth, moreso than opening new countries. Wphamilton 08:05, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Profit or net income in the right hand side box

Can some one please inculde the net income or profits of this company as found in all the other companies articles. thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikhilhuilgol (talk • contribs) 06:59, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

Korea

I'm confused...So how big a share in this Korean auction site does ebay have? Do they entirely own it now?--Josquius 18:00, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Re.:Unusual Items

Rush Limbaugh placed a letter that allegedly "smeared" him on Ebay. It went for $2.1 MILLION. this happened two days before the time shown here on sig. Can this be stated ? Google Ebay, Rush Limbaugh to see this matter, and the letter itself. 65.173.104.140 07:53, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

No idea, but I'd also nominate this Titan missile base (which I just read about in Penny Arcade). --DocumentN (talk) 04:40, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Expectation of reasonable behaviour from eBay customer care to its customers.

Not all of us spend all our lives on the computer, and think it reasonable to have a telephone number and correspondence address for eBay to resolve problems. My problem started when out of the blue I received a letter fro a debt collector, stating their client eBay & some reference number that didn’t make any sense to me. I paid the money since I don’t like threats of legal action over me. The money has now been refunded by the debt collector.

The facts are that when I sent an email to eBay using their link to a message box, it bounced back. Other emails were replied to with a questionnaire to which my problem didn’t match any of their “tick boxes”. Other replies were of the brain dead type.

The point is I think it quite reasonable to have a correspondence address & telephone number to sort out problems. There’s something wrong with a company which doesn’t like giving out their address & only has a premium rate number, linked to some section of eBay I’m not interested in.

Anyway I was given eBay’s address in Europe from the debt collector in good faith as:

eBay Europe SARL, The Atrium Building Old Navan Rd Blancharstown Dublin 15 Ireland

The sensible thing would be for one user of wikipedia to check this out. if it is proved correct then it should included in the Customer care section of Ebay on the main pages. I did this but someone took it off, stating vandalism or some other nonsense.

Andybrookestar (talk) 10:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• In my experience, eBay doesn't really want to receive inquiries from its users as then it might have to answer them. One of the employees of eBay who regularly edit this article likely removed your addition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.37.23.57 (talk) 17:28, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

• Our personal experiences, personal opinions, and personal research aren't anything we can use on Wikipedia. If a reliable source has documented such issues, we can use that material. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:20, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Controversy continues

So, why is the VT thing an eBay controversy? Would it be a Wal-Mart controversy if he'd done his deed with a shotgun purchased at Wal-Mart? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 18:36, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. So far as I can tell, the transaction was legal. While tragic in its context, there isn't anything necessarily controversial about the purchase from eBay's perspective. I've removed it. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 19:36, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, now there's another "controversy". An editor has inserted this:

* In November 2007, eBay began this survey of which one of the things it was about was forcing sellers to automatically leave positive feedback for buyers if the buyers paid quickly, making the sellers lose feedback privileges.

I removed it, asking in what way it's a controversy. It's not even a statement of policy; it's asking a question; there's no indication any policy change is in order. So, there might be a debate (not that the insertion points to any such debate), but controversy? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 06:16, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

• I re-removed the feedback concern. If eBay was currently forcing sellers to leave positive feedback if they were immediately paid I could see this as a controversial issue. However a survey asking about hypothetical situations does not seem to be enough to merit inclusion, even if the said survey appears to be an official eBay survey. Kaid (talk) 06:48, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. --ZimZalaBim ^talk 14:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

I am not going to press this issue anymore. William Ortiz (talk) 10:09, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Why is article locked?

eBay has decided to rollout their Finding 2.0 search function just days before the holiday shopping season. This has sent the sellers boards into a turmoil. I'm wondering why this should not be reflected in the article. And why is the article locked? Wuapinmon (talk) 02:40, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

• Provide a reliable source indicating this is a problem, and it might go in. The various eBay chat boards aren't usable. The article's "semi-protected" -- only registered users can edit it -- because the article has been subject to frequent vandalism by unregistered users. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 17:33, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
• Is vandalism when someone adds something to the article that eBay and its employees would rather not see in an article about their company? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.37.23.57 (talk) 17:21, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

eBay is now only allowing paypal for credit card payments

eBay is now only allowing paypal for credit card payments. See this screenshot from http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/5581/00tf9.jpg . So I think this should be uploaded to Wikipedia and put in this article. Please discuss.

By the way there is already talk of it here and here. William Ortiz (talk) 10:08, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

• Let's see: We noticed that you chose to offer credit card as a payment option. To confirm that you can support this process, please fax a copy of your most recent merchant processing statement to (phone number)...While we confirm your merchant credit card account, you can continue listing items on eBay with PayPal as the payment method. In what way does that say eBay is only allowing paypal? Seems to me (with no other information besides what William has pointed to) that they're requiring verification of credit card processing ability, and suggesting sellers use PayPal while the confirmation is taking place. At any rate, even if we wanted to include this information, we couldn't use those forums as sources; it would be the same as saying "random anonymous people assert that blah blah blah". --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 15:44, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

This article doesn't mention any antitrust lawsuits. Here's a PDF of one from summer 2007. http://www.suspendedebayseller.com/docs/507-cv-03803-PVT_complaint.pdf William Ortiz (talk) 21:11, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Got a reliable source? Anyone can sue anyone for anything in this country, and any lawyer can file a complaint. Was it accepted by some court? Was the class certified by the court? What's the status of it? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 22:45, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Customer Support sources

In reviewing the citations for this section I am concerned that A) they do not support the claims in the section and B) they do not even refer to eBay. The three currently listed are:

1) http://slightlyrandom.com/?p=20 2) http://www.instantservice.com/news/20041230.html 3) http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/01/03/business/service.php

Citation 1 actually discussed how good eBays support is, 2 briefly mentions eBay in a bigger article about customer support on the internet in general and number 3 doesn't even mention eBay at all. I am not the most active or knowledgeable Wikipedian, so I would ask for advice on this. Do these sources support the section? Should we ask for more sources? What is the best way to improve this section? Thanks. (Moved from higher up the page) Kaid (talk) 19:55, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

• I'm surprised this has sat here for so long. Citation 1 isn't acceptable regardless of content; it's just Somebody's Blog. Citation 2 should cite the New York Times article directly, rather than whatever Instantservice.com is; at any rate, it doesn't support the section; neither does the IHT article. The term "rudeness" comment is completely unsourced. A proper customer support section could be written, and one would start by throwing away the existing one completely. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 23:49, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

This thing from the new york times may not be notable, so I'm putting it in talk

This thing from the new york times may not be notable, so I'm putting it in talk

• http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/17/the-depth-of-ebays-problems-1-disappointed-buyers/
• http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/17/the-depth-of-ebays-problems-2-angry-sellers/

These are two good articles. William Ortiz (talk) 00:47, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

• WP:EL pretty much rules out blogs as external sources except those written by a recognized authority; is Saul Hansell such an authority? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 03:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Technology behind eBay

I am surprised this has not been brought up before, but I for one would be very interested in the technology that runs eBay. It must be massive. Any takers? Tolstoy143 - "Quos vult perdere dementat" (talk) 09:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Only simple PHP scripts and some HTML and CSS is enough to replicate eBay. The scripts just run on eBay's huge server. 71.236.95.5 (talk) 21:04, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

• Nah. It's a lot more complicated than that. eBay (and prior to that, AuctionWeb) was originally in Perl, but by 1997 ( or so), the site was so heavily visited that it gained a reputation as the world's slowest website. It was rewritten completely, in C++, right before I arrived there. It was a huge fight to build scalability into the system, and at the time I left (in 2002) the fight was still going on. Probably still is, though exponential growth doesn't seem to be occurring anymore. It's not all C++ anymore, by any means. Here is an excellent presentation of the eBay architecture. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 00:02, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

GA status

I checked the GA guidelines yesterday and it does appear that having an inadequate lead is enough to fail an article. Not meaning to be a 'bad guy', but it will have to be fixed within a week or so or the GA status will have to go. It looks like a nice article otherwise, and it shouldn't be too much work. Richard001 (talk) 00:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

News source

This might be useful in a fraud section but I don't know quite where to put it so I'm just listing it here to be of use to anyone in the future. http://tech.msn.com/howto/articlepcw.aspx?cp-documentid=6053210 William Ortiz (talk) 01:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Auctioneer's License

Should this be included?

The state of Pennsylvania has shut down the eBay business of Mary Jo Pletz, who started the endeavor so she could earn money at home while caring for her 6-month-old daughter, who had developed a brain tumor.

Pletz launched her business in 2004, when she realized she couldn't work full time because of Julia's medical tests and doctors visits. Her business, D&J Virtual Consignment, had 11,000 feedback comments on eBay and 14 were negative, Pletz said, giving her a 99.9 percent satisfaction rating. A few days after Christmas 2006, the state investigator drove up. She recalls his warning that the state was "drawing a line in the sand." Her crime? Selling goods on the Internet without an "auctioneer's license."

She cooperated with the government and shut down her successful business. However, not content with merely running her out of business, state officials are also prosecuting her, with a potential penalty of $1,000 per violation.

After shutting down her auction business, Pletz went back to work as a dental hygienist. Because of the complaint, Pletz worries the state also could revoke her dental hygienist's license, which she earned by attending community college for seven years at night.

The source is the Philidelphia Inquirer, [5] --75.181.81.73 (talk) 09:01, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

• Hm. It's an interesting article, certainly, but I don't really see where it fits in. Scratching head...is it encyclopedia material, as opposed to newspaper material? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 06:53, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

• • I was thinking controversy. This is the first time I've heard of someone getting in trouble with the law and hasn't violated any eBay rules. You can only get one feedback per sale, and not everyone leaves feedback, so she is looking at a minimum of a elven million dollar fine. I believe it is encyclopedic because it does not just effect eBay, but anyone that sells online. What if all eBay sellers had to get auctioneer's licenses? --75.181.81.73 (talk) 08:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
    • In what way is it a controversy? Pennsylvania has a law which is sporadically enforced, and their legislature is considering changing it, and one eBay seller is getting messed up. Do you have any good sources describing this as a controversy or as a problem anywhere but Pennsylvania? --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 17:48, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

The controversy is should eBay sellers need an auctioneer's license? Are you saying it's not notable because it only effects people living in Pennsylvania? --MahaPanta (talk) 19:09, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

The only problem with the whole auctioneer's license is that the auctioneer would need one. EBay would be considered the auctioneer. Users are only presenting items for auction. ~QuasiAbstract (talk/contrib) 00:00, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

That's the controversy. EBay was the auctioneer, and she was only presenting items for auction, yet she is still facing a fine of over $11,000,000 for not having an auctioneer's license. --75.181.81.73 (talk) 08:01, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

So what's the controversy? Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the usage of the term. PA has a law which they're selectively enforcing (saying it's "complaint-driven"), and the PA legislature is making moves to modify the law so the whole issue goes away. Anyway, find some reliable sources that describe it as a "controversy" and you might have a point; you might want to do a search for "ebay auction licensing" -- maybe someone has written a article we can use as a source about the several states that are doing or want to do the same thing: require secondary eBay sellers (that is, people who sell goods for other people) to be licensed as auctioneers. --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 16:35, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

You can sell (Human parts and remains)

Sorry to tell you even though ebay does not allow you to sell human remains, they do. There are dozen of human bones on ebay for sale, and sometimes whole skeletons. As long as you place them in the medical section the auction shall not be removed.--Margrave1206 (talk) 17:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Trade enabled in 2007 by eBay's Market place

What was the total volume of $USD exchanged over the eBay market place on an annual bases? Let's get a chart of the total every year since inception in 1998. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.130.21.76 (talk) 06:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

EBay Boycott of 2008

This AfD is likely relevant for watchers of this article: EBay Boycott of 2008. -ZimZalaBim ^talk 04:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Locked for editing...?

Why is this article locked for editing? (Or is it open for editing only for current and former eBay employees?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.37.23.57 (talk) 05:44, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

It's semi-protected to prevent vandalism from editors who are not, or very newly registered. Since you have chosen to remain anonymous, well, you cannot edit it. Now if you're willing to properly register yourself, then you can edit after 4 days. It's not an eBay conspiracy if that's what you're suggesting. However, if your goal is to criticize eBay's new policies, it may get reverted if you go to far from NPOV (Neutral Point of View). Mattnad (talk) 14:14, 23 February 2008 (UTC)