Jump to content

Talk:Facebook

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ILoveSky (talk | contribs) at 20:31, 7 May 2010 (→"become a fan" is now "become a like": new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Good articleFacebook 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
February 21, 2006Good article nomineeListed
March 20, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
April 3, 2006Featured article candidateNot promoted
December 10, 2006Good article reassessmentDelisted
March 19, 2008Good article nomineeListed
April 6, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
May 6, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
May 30, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 8, 2008Good article reassessmentKept
November 6, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
Current status: Good article

Template:Maintained

New layout

{{editsemiprotected}}

At approximately 3:45 GMT, Feb 4, Facebook implemented a new layout.

Do you have a source for that? Thanks! Samwb123Please read 03:55, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.facebook.com/#!/sitetour/homepage.php —Preceding unsigned comment added by PurelyAtomic (talk • contribs) 04:00, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

information Note: Welcome and thanks for the information. The editsemiprotected template is meant to allow non-autoconfirmed users to edit the article using a volunteer as a proxy. The request needs to be specifc to a 'Please change X to Y" or 'Please add X after Z" level of detail. Information, like you provided, is useful to an editor interested in the article and no template is needed to get their attention. Also, the source you provided describes a layout, but doesn't support the details about the date or even that it is new. You might want to look for a news article about the change. Celestra (talk) 15:11, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism section

This section is way to long considering there is an entire separate article on the subject and a lot of the info is duplicated. A short paragraph explaining that criticism exists and citing a couple of examples is sufficient for this article, anything extra should be moved to Criticism of Facebook. Any comments? raseaCtalk to me 15:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the lack of take-up on this note I've gone ahead and removed all non-notable and duplicated material (there was a lot). If anyone objects to something that was removed without appearing on Criticism of Facebook article then I would recommend adding it in that article. I decided against a summarising paragraph in place of the deleted content but wouldn't object if someone wanted to write a short one. raseaCtalk to me 00:53, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There was quite a lot of sourced, detailed info you deleted. You did a terrible job of merging it into the criticisms article. Or rather, you completely failed to. Please make an effort next time. —Pengo 00:35, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article errors

This paragraph is wrong... "The original concept for Facebook was borrowed from a product produced by Zuckerberg's prep school Phillips Exeter Academy which for decades published and distributed a printed manual of all students and faculty, unofficially called the "face book"."

Facebooks were published by a score or more colleges and universities, (some officially called that), for decades. It is not a Phillips Exeter phenomenon, (as much as the inmates of that institution might like to believe). Harvard itself had a facebook since the 70's. As it stands, the paragraph is an unsubstantiated rumor anyway.

I'd make the correction, but the page is locked, so screw it. I get far more amusement from wikipedia's obvious failings than I would otherwise anyway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.247.58.132 (talk) 18:04, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That paragraph is not necessarily wrong as Zuckerberg likely got the idea of calling his site the "face book" because of his experience using Exeter's facebook and the pervasiveness of that term around campus.

See the following links as sources: http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/mark_zuckerberg_inspiration_for_facebook_before_harvard.php http://pulse2.com/2009/05/13/the-facebook-might-have-been-named-after-student-directory-at-phillips-exeter-academy/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.12.32.167 (talk) 21:44, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The University of Chicago was also one of the first schools along with Stanford, Columbia, and Yale to get Facebook back in March 2004. The school is not mentioned and needs to be added, both in the summary section at the top of the article and section 1.2 thefacebook next to the other schools. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Noutbounde (talk • contribs) 19:48, 14 February 2010 (UTC) hi bye —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.167.235.81 (talk) 22:41, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Facebook patent

Facebook was just issued US patent 7669123 on some aspects of their News Feed. I put a link in the article. Many think the patent is clearly invalid since it appears to cover all News Feeds. That's not true. It only covers news feeds where a link is provided so that one user can participate in the "same activity" as another user. If this still sounds like something old, feel free to provide a link to a reference here. It only takes one reference in any language in any country before December 14, 2004 to raise a substantial new question of validity.--Nowa (talk) 21:51, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The inventor of this patent has failed to define what a social networking environment is. This is enough to make the claims indefinte as the patented subject-matter is old and obvious.

Claim 17 defines social networking environment as a "segmented community". However this claim has no support from the specification which is supposed to define what a segmented community is or, consists of. Without the defintion nobody knows whether a segmented community referes to Facebook only or any community of the internet...... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.212.23 (talk) 01:18, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where people live

I have fact tagged "and not residing in one of the countries where it is banned can become a Facebook user". Are we claiming that facebook bans users in countries where it is banned, or what precisely are we saying. Whatever it is we are saying should be sourced. Thanks, SqueakBox talk contribs 01:20, 24 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And removed. If you reside in a country where facebook is banned and you go somewhere else visiting are we claiming you still cannot have a facebook account. No? hence the removal, let alone the fact that this law is not enforceable whereas the statement assumes it is enforced. Thanks, SqueakBox talk contribs 14:03, 25 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

sdfsdfsdfs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.212.23 (talk) 01:03, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"In his Harvard dorm room"

Surely, Mark Zuckerberg did not create Facebook "in his Harvard dorm room", did he? Predecessors of Facebook, maybe, but "creating Facebook in his dorm room" is surely Facebook-lore? I suggest rephrasing to something less tabloidesque, and will rephrase in a while, if there are no objections. 89.27.124.152 (talk) 16:12, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Add in "Reception" please...

Add in "Reception" please: 

In Chile, according to studies by prestigious universities, 73% of the Chilean youth between 18 and 19 years has a Facebook account.


Ref: http://www.latercera.com/contenido/659_192936_9.shtml (in spanish).

←–

Edit request from Traviscunningham, 1 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} Under server infrastructure, Nginx is also used for Facebook CDN for image delivery (fbcdn.net)

Traviscunningham (talk) 04:30, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what that means. Care to elaborate?  f o x  11:26, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your suggestion, however, 'edit semi-protected' requests need to be something like, "Please change THIS to THAT", along with a reference to a reliable source. Please could you make a more specific request, and ask again. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  13:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done

Crowdsourcing

I heard that facebook was used as a form of crowdsourcing for businesses in which businesses gain knowledge about facebook users interested in their products. I also heard that facebook monitors people and sells information about them to companies. How do you feel about this, and do you think it is something worth noting on the wiki page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dracothejuggler (talk • contribs) 04:16, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism Merge

I've had a stab at the criticism merge again. There is a lot of non-notable, repeated info but deleting that last time was met with whinging last time. The summary paragraph on this page could probably do with a little work, it's possible slightly too brief at the moment. The refs below were just dumped in the article with no context so I've put them here incase they can be any use in the future. raseaCtalk to me 11:24, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

"become a fan" is now "become a like"

Perhaps someone should mention this highly criticized change?--ILoveSky (talk) 20:31, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ "Sophos Facebook ID probe shows 41% of users happy to reveal all to potential identity thieves (Sophos 2007 study)". Retrieved 2010-02-02.
  2. ^ "Facebook 'costs businesses dear' (Peninsula 2007 study)". BBC News. 2007-09-11. Retrieved 2010-02-02.
  3. ^ "Block Facebook and watch your staff walk (Deacons 2008 study)". Retrieved 2010-02-02.
  4. ^ "Facebook ban could lead to staff exodus (Telindus 2008 study)". Retrieved 2010-02-02.
  5. ^ "Facebook botnet risk revealed (Institute of Computer Science and Institute for Infocomm Research 2008 study)". Retrieved 2010-02-02.
  6. ^ "Sophos Australia Facebook ID probe 2009 (Sophos 20009 study)". Retrieved 2010-02-02.
  7. ^ (Sophos 2010 study) "Security Threat Report: 2010". Retrieved 2010-02-02. {{cite web}}: Check |url= value (help)
  8. ^ "Study: 54 Percent of Companies Ban Facebook, Twitter at Work (Robert Half Technology 2009 study)". Retrieved 2010-02-02.
  9. ^ "Facebook: Measuring the cost to business of social notworking (Nucleus Research, July 2009 - Report J57)". Retrieved 2010-02-02.
  10. ^ "STUDY FINDS LINK BETWEEN FACEBOOK USE, LOWER GRADES IN COLLEGE (OSU 2009 study)". Retrieved 2010-02-02.
  11. ^ "Facebook Users -- and Research -- Need Further Study (OSU 2009 study)". Retrieved 2010-02-02.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Facebook&oldid=360785350"