Talk:Doiop

I have no affiliation with doiop. I feel that as tinyurl is discussed on wikipedia it is necessary to also include an article on doiop. I believe doiop was the first service to enable user defined urls, whereas tinyurl exists purely to make URLs shorter. From this respect some may consider doiop to enhance the user experience. Although I am not convinced that I personally subscribe to this view! I mainly use tinyurl but on the odd occassion when I need a user defined url I use doiop.Bah23 12:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS, sorry you need a better argument than that. The Kinslayer 12:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Direct comparison

``Direct comparison to another brand is classed as advertising." So if I were to compare the merits of Elgamal and RSA encryption schemes I would be advertising - I think not. Similarly there are pages on wp which do just that! (Comparision lists). I don't produce a vast amount of wp content and this is the first article I have produced of this nature. (I normally contribute to technical computer security issues.)

If it is felt that this article should be deleted then I would suggest also deleting the tinyurl article. In replacement for tinyurl and doiop may I suggest producing an article on shortening URLs with discussion of the available services and comparision of each. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bah23 (talk • contribs) 12:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Already ahead of you whiner. The Kinslayer 12:47, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please take the time to read Wikipedia:No_personal_attacks Bah23 12:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

<sarcasm>Never had the slightest clue they had a page about that.</sarcasm> The Kinslayer 12:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]