Jump to content

Talk:Twitter

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 183.83.147.38 (talk) at 02:45, 25 May 2021 (→‎Criticism missing). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Good articleTwitter has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 28, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
May 25, 2009Good article nomineeListed
June 14, 2009Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 19, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
September 1, 2009Good article reassessmentKept
June 13, 2010Good article reassessmentKept
Current status: Good article

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Piatigda, Kragw (article contribs).

"Twestival" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Twestival. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 24#Twestival until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:13, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Super follows"

Twitter is adding super follows, see [1][2][3][4]

  1. ^ "Twitter explores Super Follows for creators to earn money". www.msn.com. Retrieved 2021-02-25.
  2. ^ Conger, Kate (2021-02-25). "Twitter Shakes Off the Cobwebs With New Product Plans". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2021-02-25.
  3. ^ News, A. B. C. "Twitter to let users charge followers to see premium posts". ABC News. Retrieved 2021-02-25. {{cite web}}: |last= has generic name (help)
  4. ^ "Twitter Floats Letting Users Charge Followers for Special Access". Bloomberg.com. 2021-02-25. Retrieved 2021-02-25.

Cite error: A list-defined reference has no name (see the help page). Should this be included in the article, or is this TOOSOON? WhoAteMyButter (📨📝) 21:23, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism missing

Where is the criticism section? The page "Criticism of Twitter" is a redirect to a "criticism" section that doesn't exist. Why does the article contain only positive things about it? By contrast, the Facebook page has not only a rogue's gallery of criticism about it, but also an entire gigantic article related to Criticism of Facebook. 183.83.147.38 (talk) 13:08, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:CSECTION. Wikipedia writing style discourages separate criticism/controversy sections, because they lead to WP:NPOV problems and can also become a WP:COATRACK. Criticism should be integrated into the main text of the article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 13:24, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ianmacm: Then why does the Facebook article contain it, and that too a very large section? It has a para about it in the lede as well. 183.83.147.38 (talk) 15:07, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This is a WP:OTHERCONTENT argument. The WP:CSECTION essay says "In most cases separate sections devoted to criticism, controversies, or the like should be avoided in an article because these sections call undue attention to negative viewpoints." Amen to that. I don't like seeing a criticism/controversy section because it isn't good writing style. It should be possible to write a neutral article without doing this.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 15:43, 24 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ianmacm: In that case, can I remove the criticism section from the Facebook article? 183.83.147.38 (talk) 02:45, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]