Jump to content

Talk:Myspace

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.56.156.46 (talk) at 05:19, 15 September 2006 (typo fix: changed "to" to "too"). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Archives

Dispute the Neutrality of this Article

1) "...and knowledge about who is visiting or 'stalking' the profiles of women and children." Sexist - implies that it is ok or at least a lesser crime to stalk men, than it is to stalk women.

2) There are dozens of similar profile/social networking websites that all have the same issues regarding youngsters and paedophilia. If Myspace did not exist, then all the 'bad apples' would simply be using similar sites, sites that would other wise share the load that Myspace takes.

Anon - 12/09/2006 23:12GMT

Good point... I think. I can sort of see where you're coming from, sort of. IE im lazya nd will look it up later. -- Chris chat edits essays 04:58, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

anons!

Some anon reverted my changes gradually to the old version which gave "groups" and "bulletin surveys" huge sections. I reverted back, cause mine was better. Maybe this should be semi protected because thye didnt discuss the changes at all.

oh sorry, this is me. -- Chris chat edits essays 00:38, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey guys, before reverting my work, lets discuss this stuff, OK? Now it's stuck at the crappy version cause I cant break 3rr...-- Chris chat edits essays 00:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What makes you think that it's crappy? 203.49.223.254 00:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry (thats a little uncivil of me) but I don't think "bulletin surveys", an entirely user-made feature, deserves a Level 2 section. Groups and bulletins are standard features that should go in one community section, like I put them. Censorship is also a bit of a weasel word. If you have any specific objections to my revision (other than some valdalism I missed reverting), please cite it now. -- Chris chat edits essays 00:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bulletins are not a user made feature. It deserves its own section. 203.49.223.254 00:48, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
bulletins maybe ( a lvevl 3 one under an "other features" roof). Surveys, hell no. -- Chris chat edits essays 00:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Why do the anons think they can make hundereds of edits but I, an experienced editor, can't touch their work without discussion? If you don't want your work to be edited mercilessly, don't submit it!-- Chris chat edits essays 13:47, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Media outlets on MySpace section

I removed this section because...
1. It doesn't seem encyclopedic
2. It mainly mentions low-key radio and tv stations
3. I'm sure that a lot of other radio and tv stations have MySpace profiles
4. It's mainly US-centric
Comments?
58.163.144.86 13:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Top Friends?

Why is the top friends thing in here? really it seems to me that people should grow up. not being on someone top friends is something you got upset over in grade school. so i dont see how that should effect someones life. i think it should be removed. any takers? Thenewjackblackk 20:51, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Something about top friends should be in this article, it's sort of what gave myspace it's own niche, and is a constant source of teen angst lol. However, it's a lot less relevant these days than it was when there was only a top 8 friends.

BIG QUESTION

Is it possible to see who exactly visited your profile? THis is clearly a privacy issue...For example, if i visit a person's space through MSN Messenger (because they are one of my contacts) will they know that I visited their space? Thanks.

  1. Wikipedia Discussion pages are for discussing the article, not MySpace itself.
  2. No. If you care about privacy, make your profile private.-- Chris chat edits essays 01:36, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  3. It is possible. There is at least one site which allows this functionality. It's not a privacy issue because you are not on public property while surfing MySpace.

No.. Myspace trackers are illegal.--168.254.226.35 14:34, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, that last Annon.. IP comment was from me.--XMBRIAN 19:35, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protected page

Due to an editorial dispute, I have protected this page. Please reach consensus on these editorial issues here. B/c I have no vested interest in this article, I am willing to try to mediate any disputes--if the editors wish me to do so.--Alabamaboy 20:02, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What?

There's nothing wrong with the edits made by the anonymous IPs. They were in fact constantly reverted by User:Ccool2ax. Ccool2ax made the article worse by forcing his opinion "that's not a feature", etc. and reverted changes and in doing so actually made the article worse. Myspaceaddictaust 20:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The protection is neither an endorsement of or disapproval of User:Ccool2ax's edits. The fact that a building edit war appears to be taking place here is why the protection was placed. As I said, I'm happy to help mediate this disagreement. In addition, anonymous and registered editors can take part. Best, --Alabamaboy 20:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, aren't you one of the anons, Myspaceaddict? -- Chris chat edits essays 03:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
To be completely open about the latest editing on this page, a large number of the Australian IP edits were by the same user (often going back over sections that were reverted or changed and reverting them again to their exact version using the same editorial style). Until the page was sprotected, this common editor (using multiple IP addresses) was pushing a particular direction on the article (and also made similar style contributions to the DOPA Act of 2006 article, Windows Live Messenger, and a few others from each of the IPs). Once sprotected, a new user, Myspaceaddictaust, appears and continues the same editorial style and has all of these same articles on their watchlist. To speak about "the anonymous IPs" in the third person is a bit disingenuous.
Specifically to article content now, I had removed and fixed up a number of sections for PoV, lack of verifiability, extremely original research-based additions...just to return the next day and find the anonymous IP editor from Australia had undone everything I had accomplished in complete ignorance of my edit summaries asking for discussion and spelling out how my changes fixed OR/V/RS problems with the article. I figured someone else could take up the cause since I was getting nowhere and my appeals to the AI boards were ignored. It looks like Ccool2ax tried to take up the gauntlet, but is finding the exact same issues of reversion and article ownership from other editors. ju66l3r 21:44, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any problems with the current version of the article? Myspaceaddictaust 21:58, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes. that's why were, i don't know.. editing it. Now let use edit our page without reversion s we don't have to keep it protected. I'll make a /Temp:Ccool2ax revisons page so I can work on a propsed revision to discuss. -- Chris chat edits essays 03:39, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Subpage done. My main objection to the anon/Myspaceaddict was that he told me to discuss changes, yet made major changes without any discussion. Huge violation of WP:OWN. He claims that my opinion shouldnt influence the article, like I'm less worthy or something. -- Chris chat edits essays 04:26, 6 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Top Friends Criticism NOT NEEDED

I think someone took criticism a bit too far. I deleted it once, and when it becomes unprotected I'll do it again. There is no need for a top 8 criticism becuase friends don't put you on there. Crticism is when a company (MySpace) does something that is sneaky or untruthful. This is friends doing untruthful things. If there was a Wikipedia page of Christina's friends and someone added that to her article that criticism is upon her that she didn't add Olivia as a friend, then fine. But it is NOT MySpace's fault that Christina did not add Olivia into her top friends. Anom8trw8 00:52, 7 September 2006 (UTC) Anom8trw8 Septmember 6, 2006 4:51 PM PST[reply]

It's deleted in my temp revision page, which hopefully will gather consensus to edit. -- Chris chat edits essays 04:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

proposed revision

So, guys, let's have a straw poll about this revision to the article: /Temp:Ccool2ax revisions. What do you think? Comment here. After I think we've got consensus, ill use {{editprotected}}. -- Chris chat edits essays 04:19, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with your version. Myspaceaddictaust 04:46, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Did you bother to look at my version? Myspaceaddictaust
what's wrong ith it? Point out examples so we can work together to make the MySpace article suck less. (Also, I haven't checked yet, but don't edit the subpage I made.. make your won so that they can more easily be compared). -- Chris chat edits essays 04:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
nm what you did is fine. -- Chris chat edits essays 04:51, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is a comparison of our versions. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AMySpace%2FTemp%3ACcool2ax_revisions&diff=74271303&oldid=74253753

Myspaceaddictaust 04:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok let's go through it one difference at a time. Myspaceaddictaust 04:57, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what I don't like about your proposal!

here's the diff

  1. MySpace is commercial. Just because it's free does not make it non commercial.
  2. The "Top Friends" feature causing despair doesn't need to be in the article. It's like saying "basketball makes people angry" in the Basketball article.
  3. Get rid of the Virus Bulletin, Survey, and Chain Bulletin sections. Please. It is original research and is not too important to the context of the article.
  4. I don't see what wrong with my International or Mobile sections at all.
  5. Some of the stuff in your Censorship category has little to do with censorship at all.
  6. Use my shortened version with the word "blocking" because it's not censorship... censorship would be burning down MySpace's servers.
  7. I'm logging off at 12:00 CDT, so if this gets unprotected, stop reverting it when someone other than you cahnges it please. -- Chris chat edits essays 04:58, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

my response

1. MySpace is commercial. Just because it's free does not make it non commercial.

DISAGREE: It said that it was mixed before but I changed it to yes without being sure.

2. The "Top Friends" feature causing despair doesn't need to be in the article. It's like saying "basketball makes people angry" in the Basketball article.

DISAGREE: I believe that I made a reasonable compromise by removing it from the Criticism of MySpace section and it should remain in the article under Friends Space.

3. Get rid of the Virus Bulletin, Survey, and Chain Bulletin sections. Please. It is original research and is not too important to the context of the article.

DISAGREE: It is important enough to be left in the article. I'm sure we can find a source.

4. I don't see what wrong with my International or Mobile sections at all.

DISAGREE: It's clearly erroneous, the spelling and the terms you use. There's no need to call it access when my version specifies the proper term used on MySpace.

5. Some of the stuff in your Censorship category has little to do with censorship at all.

DISAGREE: How so?
second and third paragraph. -- Chris chat edits essays 12:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'll remove it from my version. Myspaceaddictaust 12:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

6. Use my shortened version with the word "blocking" because it's not censorship... censorship would be burning down MySpace's servers.

DISAGREE: Maybe we should just incoporate into the Criticism of MySpace section.
This one kind of makes sense, although the people blocking MySpace aren't doing it to criticize it. -- Chris chat edits essays 12:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

7. I'm logging off at 12:00 CDT, so if this gets unprotected, stop reverting it when someone other than you cahnges it please.

DISAGREE: I've already compromised on this enough. If it was such a big a deal other editors would be involved in this petty argument.
So you disagree that when this becomes unprotected, you'll stop reverting it? Basically, you've just stated that once an admin unblocks this article, youw ilol keep it your way, allowing no one else to edit but you. Way to compromise. I suggest you talke a long hard look at WP:OWN. -- Chris chat edits essays 12:06, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Myspaceaddictaust 05:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Does CDT = Central Daylight Savings Time? Myspaceaddictaust 05:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yes. Of curse you disagree.. but luckily, you don't own this article, so I can gather consensus without your personal opinion. -- Chris chat edits essays 11:54, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

editprotected

Chris chat edits essays 18:37, 7 September 2006

make it match /Temp:Myspaceaddictaust_revisions. We agree on the edit. -- Chris chat edits essays 18:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the change. Please check the page and make sure it is correct. Once the involved parties verify here that consensus is achieved (just say aye or yep or something) I'll remove the protection from the article. Best, --Alabamaboy 18:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just recently, I've noticed a few minor changes I might make, but otherwise this page should be semi-stable. This should be unprotected if we promise notto simply revert, but work with each other. -- Chris chat edits essays 18:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. In future I'll use edit summaries more and discuss dramatic changes. Besides there's not many articles on my watchlist anyway so it should be easy! Myspaceaddictaust 18:49, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. I'll unprotect the page in a moment. If either of you ever need any assistance, just drop me a line. Best, --Alabamaboy 18:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Date format

About this. When showing the difference between the American and other date systems, it is traditional to use day numbers which are greater than 12 to show which are days, and which are months. e.g. 30/09/2006 vs. 09/30/2006. If this example is going to be tediously incremented each day, on the 9th of September it will say that the difference between the US and other date system is that one says 09/09/2006 and the other says 09/09/2006, which doesn't make sense. Those are two reasons for the change. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:45, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If nobody objects I will change it back. Because you don't understand something doesn't mean you have to revert it. See WP:OWN. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:59, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is bullshit. You're arguing about stupid topics. Just leave it the way it is, gees. Myspaceaddictaust 21:13, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've raised two reasons to explain why this minor edit would be an improvement. Could you address those instead of profaning? -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. Myspaceaddictaust 21:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

have you read WP:OWN yet? if an edit isn't what you'd do, theres not reason to revert it. only change it bcak if it makes the article dramatically worse (e.g. vandalism). -- Chris chat edits essays 22:20, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
On a similar note, I re-wrote the copy for the entire International sub-section, clarifying it (and improving the English and the accuracy) only to have it reverted back in a series of bite-size edits - twice now - for no other reason (as far as I can see) other than it wasn't what they'd written before. This is tedious and pointless.
  1. MySpace doesn't "have" the option, it "offers" it - that's just plain good English.
  2. It doesn't actually work - you get what you're given not what you choose.
  3. The addition of the fact that it was introduced earlier this year. (Historical perspective.)
  4. Clearer explanation of what the regionalisation is attempting to achieve. (Localised content and advertising, and networking.)
  5. Proper English as regards the dates and languages, not the pidgin it was written in before.
Add to that a couple of other tweaks (visual edits to the source ot make comparisons and editing on the citations easier in future (as I've explained before), for instance.
All improvements in one form or another. All reverted out of hand. That's not just reversion, it's vandalism itself. Cain Mosni 16:57, 8 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Luckily Myspaceaddict is premablocked. He wouldn't let anyone change it.. y'know, thats what wikis are for. -- Chris chat edits essays 21:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Software

I looked up this article to see what OS and webserver software MySpace uses. But there was no information on that. That would be a good thing to add, if someone knows the answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.21.109 (talk • contribs)

Added. Thanks for the suggestion. If someone has a better location/sub-topic to put that information in, feel free to move it. As an aside, if you need OS/webhost software info in the future, you can try http://www.netcraft.com for most websites. ju66l3r 06:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]



better version?

I've created a better version of the article with some minor tweaks here... [1] MySpacefreak 10:57, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't suppose you'd like to tell us exactly what you've changed, so that we don't have to sit comparing the two articles line by line? Cain Mosni 16:28, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is it... http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AMySpace%2FTemp%3AMySpacefreak_revisions&diff=75511436&oldid=75508761 MySpacefreak 17:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't get very far through. How do you consider the phrase "myspace has 300 employees" is better English than "MySpace employs 300 people"? One should be avoiding the generic use of "has" and "have" wherever possible. Ditto the repetition of "MySpace" where edits have deliberately been introduced in the past to reduce such repetition. Oh, I see why - hello Myspaceaddict... Your sock's showing. Cain Mosni 17:39, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What's wrong with my version?? MySpacefreak 17:55, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Give it up, Pnatt. -- Chris chat edits essays 18:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How can I tell it's you? I used a nonstandard revision form in the talk subpage with my username. NO one else uses that form but me, and Pnatt. Plus, you have the same editing style. -- Chris chat edits essays 18:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I thought my explanation of just the first couple of reason's why it was bad were perfectly lucid and concise. Cain Mosni 18:13, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I wanna quit. MySpacefreak 18:38, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good... because you're not supposed to come back after a permablock. -- Chris chat edits essays 19:24, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care about the gay ass rules and policies. I stopped caring ages ago. Wikipedia is full of unnecessary bureaucracy. 203.49.189.225 19:42, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary? It IS necessary because of people like you. The rules are not "gay," they are in place so that we can make this a legitimate encyclopedia, not some free forum of content. We're not UrbanDictionary over here, ya know. --CanesOL79 22:41, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yay, now we have one more IP adress we know Pnatt uses!

What should we do about this serial sockpuppet user now? User:Pnatt has been at it for months now. Enough is enough. Aflfinals 15:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We'll simply remove each one as it shows up and pretty soon it will become so mundane that people won't even feel compelled to comment on it at the article talk pages, leaving you the tedium of trying to interject your edits around the ban while not gaining any recognition for having done so. ju66l3r 17:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Heather Michelle Kane

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060914/ap_on_fe_st/myspace_murder_plot

This should be added somewhere, but Im not sure exactly where. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Azslande (talk • contribs)

I read that article earlier today and also thought the same thing. The reason I didn't do so is because MySpace does not appear to be involved itself (other than being the source of her evidence for wanting to kill someone). Other than that, it's just any other "murder for hire" scheme and so I don't really see it as notable (to MySpace) that she saw this guy with another woman on MySpace rather than a friend calling her after seeing him around town with the other woman or herself spying them together from across a bar. ju66l3r 21:24, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

additional criticism

I've noticed that Myspace seems to lose a good portion of message traffic. Quite frequently I've sent messages but haven't had them show up in my sent mail, nor did the recipients acknowledge receiving them. Also, three times now I've been notified I had a new message, but looked to find nothing in my inbox, other than the page stating it was displaying 1-3 of 3 messages. Is this phenomenon common enough to list as a criticism of Myspace's reliability? I made a YTMND noting the fact some time ago, and several people (4/9 reviewers, out of ~250 viewers) mentioned that it has happened to them too.

Hello, Myspace has many errors, but messages disappearing are not one of them. But it is annoying. For the record, I can’t see why talking about this as a criticism wouldn’t be okay on the main page here. It is a very major issue on myspace. But they know about it. http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.ListAll&friendID=86892 See, messages mostly disappear when someone deletes their myspace account or is removed my myspace. Even the messages were sent to “you” it is stored on their account. When their account is deleted so is the message you were sent. If you receive an email that you have new messages or “friends” request but when you click to see it and it isn’t there that is because the person who sent a messages or added you was removed from myspace or removed his or her own account for whatever reason. I hope my info helped you.--John4grey 04:54, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~ Eidako 03:48, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, that is what is considered original research and is not useable directly. You need to find an independent reliable source (like a well-read newspaper or magazine) that presents this problem and criticizes MySpace in order for us to be able to point to that source as the verification of the criticism. ju66l3r 04:01, 15 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Myspace&oldid=75834612"