From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


This does not meet criteria for as it is about a new of software. is the first site and testbed for, an significant new entrant into the microblogging arena

Mattlhanson (talk) 14:57, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

227 posts about it in the past 24 hours: [1] (talk) 15:30, 3 July 2008 (UTC)


It's not much, but . --ESP (talk) 01:23, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Better than nothing! VanTucky 02:58, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal[edit]

Concern has been raised by an editor on Talk:Laconica as to whether it is notable enough for an article. I think it would be better suited as part of this article, not least because I have heard it will probably be renamed to "" as well. — Hex (❝?!❞) 23:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I haven't been able to add criticism[edit]

I added some criticism about Wikipedia. Some things I came across, while I researched about for my own. So I added it. It got removed, because of the lack of references. I haven't added them, because I did my research in other languages. I made a note about that it needs more references. Later I added some references. Some things from the original site. I 'claimed' there were some 'remove me' accounts, so I added links to them of references, so everyone can see this is true. I 'claimed' that you can only remove your account by directly contacting the admin. As reference, I added the official Wiki stating this, as well as a blog and an ask-like website. Besides this I verified this myself - I know and understand, why this isn't valid, but I just want you to know it is true. The paragraph got removed "The notability of this weasel-word-heavy section is unsupported by any reliable sources. Removing." Okay, maybe it weasel-word-heavy. So, why don't you fix it? However, the argument that there are no reliable sources is simply not true. It's a fact and besides some website the official wiki confirms it. Notability? It seems is the only social network without an option to remove an account, which does make a difference when everyone complains about everything staying online forever in social networks. Yes, maybe the quality was bad. So it would be nice, if someone with more experience could write this. I just wanted to give some feedback and so I give up. Good luck to all future editors! -- (talk) 11:50, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi. The question is, is this actually criticism? Is it notable criticism I guess is what I mean. Has this been covered in third party sources? That would be the key thing for me. Dbrodbeck (talk) 12:35, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

infobox: licence?[edit]

Most software has licence info in infoboxes, can we put licence info on the identica/reddit/etc. infoboxes too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kiwibird (talkcontribs) 12:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

 Done. I modified {{Infobox Website}} to have a "content license" parameter, and have added it to this article. — Hex (❝?!❞) 11:34, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Language : only english since the migration to — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:47, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. --AVRS (talk) 11:38, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Did change in 2013 to a promotional tool for[edit]

I've only visited the site a half dozen times, but I thought I used to be able to go to and search for friends or topics etc. Now all I see is a big notice about Am I remembering wrong? If not, this should be noted in the article (beyond the current note about using Gronky (talk) 19:11, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:20, 24 January 2016 (UTC)