Talk:Nymwars

WP:NEO

I would vote against deleting due to NEO. While new, the term is unique and identifiable, and not the sole creation of the page author. The term is used to organize information about this topic in a number of notable, high-profile sources, e.g.:

• http://www.zdnet.com/topics/nymwars
• http://boingboing.net/2011/08/20/understanding-the-nym-wars.html

-- Metahacker (talk) 17:16, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

I concur. --Skud (talk) 19:05, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Also, the topic isn't the word, but the controversy, WP:NEO would at worst argue for renaming, not deleting the article in that case. It would be possible to argue the notability of the controversy, but I personally believe it's notable enough, as per the above. --joe decker^{talk to me} 17:09, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

[1], [2], [3], [4], [5] -- a few of these don't use the term, but that's irrelevant to whether an article on the controversy should exist. --joe decker^{talk to me} 17:20, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

I concur as well. Although new and currently focused on one social site, it seems reasonable to anticipate future applications would benefit from historical records. Filterbob (talk) 17:13, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Sources

I've roughly edited the page to include an overview of what's been happening and some links to sources. They're not in full citation style though... if someone wanted to clean them up and make them use the Citation templates and put access dates and all that, that would be great. --Skud (talk) 19:05, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

Reference of all the articles

I've tried to add the full reference of the NymWars articles but it's been reverted calling it WP:EL or WP:NOTLINK or WP:IF-WE-PUT-IT-IN-THE-DELETIONISTS-MAY-WIN, so I'm inserting it here for the interest of the readers.

• Nymwars article timeline (continuously updated)

Peace. --grin ✎ 22:24, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Telemediengesetz

I don't speak much German, but a Google translation of the Telemediengesetz law says that anonymous access should be allowed where possible and reasonable - this doesn't sound like an absolute requirement, like this article currently suggests. Is there a third-party source on Telemediengesetz, preferably in English, which is clear on this point? 81.142.107.230 (talk) 14:38, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

Planned Changes

Hi, I'm going to be adding to this page, mostly in the "criticism" section since that section could do with some expanding. In fact, all of the sections could do with some fleshing out, and I'm thinking of including Google's recent reactions to the backlash. I'm pretty new to Wiki editing, so feel free to correct me when I make mistakes. Cheers! BethHuff (talk) 16:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Just make sure you stick to reliable sources. There is a lot of criticism and reaction that we can't really cover because it's only in blogs and other unreliable sources. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:05, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up, I'll keep that in mind BethHuff (talk) 20:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

BethHuff and I are both in a graduate course on knowledge and information, and we're trying to make some constructive Wikipedia edits as part of that course. I'm going to add to the criticism section of this article, using references from 'reliable' media but reflecting the views shared more broadly by critics of the Google+ policy. Your comments and edits are welcome and encouraged. Elsiewolfe (talk) 22:43, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

CNet resource

Google+ updates policy to address identity crisis by Jay Greene January 23, 2012 3:06 PM PST ... "The company wanted to create a service without pseudonyms or impersonation. But the service, which now claims 90 million users, had plenty of people sign up who are better known by some other identity than their real name. Google has suspended many of those accounts, much to their users' chargin. Google is changing the policy to "broaden support" for some pseudonyms, Bradley Horowitz, a co-leader of Google+, wrote this afternoon in a Google+ post. Now Google+ will allow users to be known by "established" pseudonyms, such as Madonna. Google will be the final arbiter of what is established."

99.181.152.120 (talk) 23:38, 23 January 2012 (UTC)