This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Websites: Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

New Page

Apparently there used to be a Wikipedia page on Docstoc, but someone permanently deleted it on the grounds of "blatant copyvio" and "blatant advertising". Which is kinda annoying, because I've not read it, and it'd have been nice to have a look at what was supposedly wrong with the original page before starting this one from scratch.

However, since this one isn't copyvio, and isn't blatant advertising (multiple sources used, I have no links with the company, etc. etc.), hopefully any pre-existing feuds on the subject won't apply here. ErkDemon (talk) 19:36, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! The article looks decent. The references are enough to keep it from being deleted. As for the previous article, if it was deleted as a blatant copyvio, it most assuredly was copied and pasted from a copyrighted website (most likely from Docstoc). As for the advertising part, a lot of people don't have a good grasp on what advertising on Wikipedia looks like. Talking about business practices is not advertisement while listing menus (resturaunt), prices, or including weasel words is. If you want to see a copy of the previous article, you can ask the deleting admin on his talk page to userfy the article which basically just means copy it to your user space. I did remove the competitor section as they didn't have their own Wiki pages, external links should not be used in the body of the article, and I felt that it's not pertinent to readers. OlYeller^Talktome 04:24, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Docstocscreenshot.png Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Docstocscreenshot.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Docstocscreenshot.png)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 00:26, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

bait-and-switch business model

They now offer PDF downloads that appear free, but the click-throughs first ask for your email address, and then want your credit card details. This is a bait-and-switch model commonly employed by dodgy online businesses. Roidroid (talk) 09:56, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. They do offer links saying "click here to download for free now" and when you enter your e-mail and click, they don't allow you to download for free and send you to a page where you can sign up to download, must enter credit card info, and must pay. VERY shady.

Shouldn't this be announced in the article? This page is a scam. --77.187.153.96 (talk) 14:34, 3 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Docstoc. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120213061109/http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/gigaom/startups/2010_02_23_docstoc_launches_online_document_store.html to http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/gigaom/startups/2010_02_23_docstoc_launches_online_document_store.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:18, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]