This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
ASmallWorld article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
![]() | On 7 September 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to ASMALLWORLD. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. Owen× ☎ 23:53, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
I, for one, find the entire concept of such a website to be incredibly offensive. Anyone else agree?
Yes, excluding people can be useful. However, this entry is an obvious case of shameless self promotion. People arguing about the concept is probably just what was intended.
(1) Invite some celebrities. (2) Start a controversy to increase awareness.
Ads should be deleted.
It has been said that one of the main reason for the creation of aSmallWorld is to provided it's 50 year old owner Erik Wachmeister and his close associates access to young women and to celebrities parties.
Who is he?-- MoMo the Pirate 19:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
This [1] reference is not valid from its appearance. It appears to be a wiki that anyone can create an account login, and edit. Other wikis cannot be used as references here on wikipedia. They are unreliable sources, see WP:V and WP:RS. Does this website operate different than it appears?-- Crossmr 23:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
List of social networking websites is currently a candidate for deletion. You are invited to partake in the discussion.-- Crossmr 14:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Can someone please explain how a site ranked 900,000+ in Alexa and with only 2 sources is on wikipedia? This article: http://en.wikipedia.org/Yuniti , draft: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Marquinho/Yuniti_(draft)
Was deleted despite being in the top 200,000 site in Alexa and having 5+ sources Marquinho Marquinho ( talk) 13:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand "A Big World". Is it a limited version of ASmallWord? Is it just a void space? Can exiles be readmitted? -- Error ( talk) 22:20, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I have updated, i.e. corrected the alexa rank: ca 620,000 ranks up: from 658,892 → 38,861.
Please note that the previous version provided a link to the "asmallworld.net", the website before its mid-2013 relaunch as "asmallworld.com". That's the reason why the ranking dropped from below 10,000 (in August 2012) to above 550,000 (in August 2013).
Currently, "asmallworld.com" is ranked 38,861 -- IIIraute ( talk) 23:53, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
The WP:SYNTH and WP:OR content that was recently added by 67.80.233.89, e.g. here and here - and reverted by User:Coasterlover1994 here, was restored again through consistent edit warring by User:Faceplant2020 and User:Mostlyoksorta.
Later on the IP returned with the proposal to delete the article - this proposal was reinforced by User:Mostlyoksorta.
The article is now nominated for deletion; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ASmallWorld. -- IIIraute ( talk) 00:31, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I have put the page up for deletion. No other people, no sockpuppets or whatever have commented or voted on the deletion as far as I can see. The page is ranked lowly on Alexa, only has citations to the CEO advertising the company, has been on an advertising warning for years, and has also been thought relevant for deletion/G11 for years. I am not waring, I do not understand why edits are getting deleted by IIIraute when they cite the same sources or more independent sources than those that IIIraute replaces them with? In fact, IIIraute, deleted one source in the 'Controvesy' section while leaving the SAME EXACT SOURCE to support advertising claims earlier in the page ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 00:55, 1 April 2014 (UTC))
A bot has replaced the faulty Alexa rankings put up by IIIraute - the ranking again drops below 500,000. I am confused why IIIraute is making accusations when only editing in a non-neutral manner? Is IIIraute employed by asmallworld to monitor their page, a member of the site, what is the reason for the non-neutral (and apparently false in the case of Alexa) editing? ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 01:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC))
IIIraute Listen I'm not a technology person, I can just read what the site says. I also didn't start yelling and screaming and making accusations about fellow editors. Why not just let the facts speak and avoid all the back and forth nonsense, whatever the ranking winds up being it is a) not a deciding factor for deletion under wikipedia rules and b) clearly not blowing the lid off anyone's idea of notability whether it is 500,000th or 38,000th. There is basically no citation on the entire page that isn't a quote of the CEO hyping her product within a month of it's relaunch. And almost all of the edits of the page were created by an IP address about a week before asmallworld's relaunch in 2013. It screams advertising and marketing. I don't understand what argument there is against that. Outside of accusations against editors what basis do you have for believing asmallworld is a)not advertising and b)of relevant notability? ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 01:37, 1 April 2014 (UTC))
I am asking you now, Mostlyoksorta: did you do any recent IP or the User:Faceplant2020 edits? It is not too difficult to find out - see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations -- IIIraute ( talk) 02:00, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I am not the same person as Faceplant2020, though it is rather intimidating to me that you are barreling through my privacy, but I spoke to Faceplant2020 and will you let you know that I know that person. We did discuss edits together, which as far as I know is ok. Faceplant2020 will stay out the deletion debate if that makes you happy? As for any IP address, as you can tell we are both new to this so maybe someone forgot to log on, we're on public computers sometimes? Anyway, I hope that ends the belligerent Sherlock Holmes part of this discussion, and we can focus on whether or not the 500,000th/38,000th most important site on the internet, which is plagued with advertising material and non-neutral should stay on Wikipedia. It's pretty simple. Thanks ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 11:01, 1 April 2014 (UTC)).
Oh yeah and since I got all honest at your request, do you IIIraute accept compensation in any manner from asmallworld? Or do I need to do some background check on that? It's really not nice to act that way. ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 11:05, 1 April 2014 (UTC))
The article says membership is capped at 250,000, and the sidebar says that there are 250,000 members.
Well, I get regular spam-style "invitations" to "reactivate my membership." Since I'm hardly special (I can't have logged in more than 10 times before it became a pay site), I can only infer that they have far fewer than their 250,000 member cap.
I can't find any reliable information on how many actual members the site has. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djcheburashka ( talk • contribs) 05:13, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
IIIraute I saw your edit, quick question - it clearly is unproven that they have delivered any car service to any one, but it is a fact that they have less than 250,000 members, for the reasons stated above. Why did you get rid of the 250,000 but not they several hundred delivered? Just curious ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 21:48, 24 April 2014 (UTC))
"As of October 2013, asmallworld became open to anyone who completed a membership application and paid the membership fee." That's not what the sources say - also, facebook isn't really one → ASW: Access to ASMALLWORLD is for members only. Please complete the form below to be considered for membership. We will be in touch if your application is accepted.
Facebook: Thank you all for your feedback about our decision to start accepting membership applications. One thing to keep in mind: a membership committee will carefully review all applications and vet potential members, giving us control over who joins our community – much like many private membership clubs. -- IIIraute ( talk) 23:09, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes, you can apply - to be considered for invitation! Access to ASMALLWORLD is for members only. Please complete the form below to be considered for membership. We will be in touch if your application is accepted.
Business Insider: "ASmallWorld, the invite-only social network..."
New York Post: "...the invitation-only site A Small World..."
The National: "The exclusive, invitation-only social networking site..." -- IIIraute ( talk) 17:28, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
"Access to ASMALLWORLD is for members only. Please complete the form below to be considered for membership. We will be in touch if your application is accepted. Learn more about ASW membership and offerings here. We also occasionally send emails with editorial content, event invitations and special deals from our partners. Please indicate below if you’d like to be added to our mailing list." https://www.asmallworld.com/apply_for_membership - that is the page where you apply for membership, I am a member, I have no idea why you think I am lying about this, the posted it on their own facebook page which I cited before, and on the board that are open to members only :) ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 17:45, 1 May 2014 (UTC))
You can apply - to be considered for invitation! Access to ASMALLWORLD is for members only. Please complete the form below to be considered for membership. We will be in touch if your application is accepted.
Business Insider: "ASmallWorld, the invite-only social network..."
New York Post: "...the invitation-only site A Small World..."
The National: "The exclusive, invitation-only social networking site..." -- IIIraute ( talk) 17:50, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
You can apply - to be considered for invitation! Access to ASMALLWORLD is for members only. Please complete the form below to be considered for membership. We will be in touch if your application is accepted.
ASMALLWORLD: "We are an international, invitation-only club" → www.asmallworld.com -- IIIraute ( talk) 21:00, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Also, please follow the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted; i.e. "leave the article in the condition it was in, before you did your bold edits and change of content" (often called the status quo ante). And no, I am not being compensated by ASW. -- IIIraute ( talk) 00:01, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
So why are you reverting me? This looks very bad. Please stop it.Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:45, 2 May 2014 (UTC)" You deleted this totally appropriate commentary - furthermore you have a long long list of complaints on this topic. I will contact an administrator if this cycle continues. ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 02:58, 2 May 2014 (UTC))
One can apply - "to be considered" for invitation → Access to ASMALLWORLD is for members only. Please complete the form below to be considered for membership. We will be in touch if your application is accepted.
Business Insider: "ASmallWorld, the invite-only social network..."
New York Post: "...the invitation-only site A Small World..."
The National: "The exclusive, invitation-only social networking site..."
Removing this sourced content, based on the argument presented above, is in violation with WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. -- IIIraute ( talk) 01:57, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Hitherto, nothing more than an allegation: "Tonny Uy has filed a gender-discrimination lawsuit against his former empress ployer, A Small World, where he worked as an accountant. He claims he lost his job because he asked for the same amount of paid family leave given to female workers." & "A man says his Manhattan employer — an exclusive online social network for the rich — fired him because he asked for the same amount of paid family leave given to female workers." here
"Man sues employer for alleged firing over paternity leave" & "A gay man socked his snooty employer — a social-networking site that bills itself as a “myspace for millionaires” — with a lawsuit Wednesday alleging that he was wrongfully fired after seeking paternity leave when his daughter was born." here -- IIIraute ( talk) 23:24, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
You are clearly biased - and your edits are not NPOV! -- IIIraute ( talk) 18:12, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
It appears IP address 83.113.255.192 has a COI and is either the company itself or an agent of the company, see edit history ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 17:32, 2 May 2014 (UTC))
Connected contributor/Conflict of Interest (evidence):
From the very first day on the WP - and after an unsuccessful attempt to get this article deleted - Mostlyoksorta has edited the content of this article to the disadvantage of the private social club this article is about - and this editor is a member of. Since account creation, about five weeks ago, this editor has not edited a single other article yet - while violating WP:RS, WP:SYNTH and WP:MEAT at this article.
"If they don't accept you don't worry I'll send you an invitation"
"...don't be jealous that I am the member of an ultra exclusive club and your not..."
"I have emails from asmallworld confirming these facts..." -- IIIraute ( talk) 17:49, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Connected contributor/Conflict of Interest (evidence) for ASMALLWORLD EMPLOYEES Kabirsa91 and Muriellefinster have admitted to being ASMALLWORLD employees and should be blocked - "I work at ASMALLWORLD, and although I am not advocating a biased page, I am requesting you, or the appropriate individual to edit the spammy information off this page. " and "We're operating from the same location, that is correct" ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 16:47, 5 May 2014 (UTC))
Hi- There is some information on this page that is highly biased, and frequently untrue. Please may I edit this with a neutral perspective? Thank you very much -- Kabirsa91 ( talk) 14:23, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.
Hi, In that case, may we please remove the controversies section? The information is personal in nature, not cited, and even irrelevant. For example, the St. Kitts partnership is not a controversy at all since ASW members have been routinely informed of its progress with renovations. The last sentence of paragraph 1 is not cited, AND it is extremely specious.
A lot the sources cited in this section have been acquired from celebrity gossip blogs, which are specious and unreliable sources to begin with.
Please review the matter, and revert to me. I await your response.
Thank you, Best,— Preceding unsigned comment added by Muriellefinster ( talk • contribs)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
We're operating from the same location, that is correct- Also nobody denied Kabirsa91's request? He didn't even ask for one. So may we please remove the sections or not? Thank you, Best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muriellefinster ( talk • contribs)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.
Hi Mostlyoksorta, There is no reason to be rude. I am requesting you for help. I work at ASMALLWORLD, and although I am not advocating a biased page, I am requesting you, or the appropriate individual to edit the spammy information off this page.
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muriellefinster ( talk • contribs)
The entire 'Member Vetting Section' is unsourced and I would propose it's deletion. The two citations given are not relevant to the statements that precede them. ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 14:11, 6 May 2014 (UTC))
Since the story is complicated, and I have issues with page protection before, let me record it here. I was patrolling WP:RFPP and went to investigate this request. I have never heard of ASmallWorld and I am completely uninvolved. I saw that there is indeed persistent disruption (unexplained removal of sourced material), but all this removal was done by an IP editor who even overstepped four reverts. I blocked the IP, reverted the last removal, and decided not to protect the page for the time being and instead add it to the watch list and wait. Within an hour, my removal was reverted by a different IP. Then I protected the page and reverted the removal again. I have no horse here and I am not interested in mediation, therefore I am unwatching the page. Pls ping me if more explanations are needed. If this is a content dispute please resolve it at the talk page.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 19:24, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
This page can clearly not be taken seriously and has become the playground for users who are definitely not interested in facts but rather pro-actively harm ASW and it's chairman. The fact that boulevard press reports which have been proven to be wrong are taking up such a large portion of the companies "history" is just pathetic and clearly against the spirit of Wikipedia. If you take the time to follow the case you will understand that Patrick Liotard-Vogt left for St.Kitts a while ago after investing a large amount of money (600m USD) when buying out the government in the Kittitian Hill project. Furthermore, the claims were made by Diners Club and not it's CEO as stated in the article. In addition to that, one has to note, that PLV was main investor in Diners Club and served on the BoD and the business closed down in march 2014 a clear indication for a shareholder dispute. It should also be mentioned, that a claim (Betreibung) in Switzerland is not a lawsuit and can be filed by anyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swisstruth ( talk • contribs)
what information should be included in the lead? I believe the this lead includes too many peacock terms 'exclusive', 'myspace for millionaires' etc. are self-serving and created by the company. Rather than engage in an edit war with IIIraute on this topic I would like to solicit third party opinions here ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 23:49, 20 May 2014 (UTC))
all of them seem to have a very strong interest in showcasing a very negative aspect of ASW going as far as hiding the truth. I would doubt their good faith and honesty, especially the ones claiming to be independent and having never heard of ASW although writing extensively about Henley & Partner, a former partner of ASW? Come on guys, stop your fraudulent approach, respect Wikipedia, fight your personal wars somewhere else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swisstruth ( talk • contribs) 10:56, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
It is impossible to have a Betreibung without a debt ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 16:38, 14 June 2014 (UTC))
External link / source n° 21 is inexistent, please correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.73.252.2 ( talk) 10:56, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on ASmallWorld. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:51, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Lightoil ( talk) 04:55, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
ASmallWorld → ASMALLWORLD – The name stylised as 'aSmallWorld' fell out of use in the late 2000s, since which time its been ASMALLWORLD RoryASW ( talk) 11:27, 7 September 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request ( permalink). RoryASW ( talk) 11:49, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks and apologies in advance if i'm committing some faux pas, but i'm keen to see if we can make this change.
I understand that 'official names' are not necessarily used for article titles, but I would argue that 'aSmallWorld' is already an unusually styled title. I think we would prefer 'ASMALLWORLD' ideally but would be happy with 'asmallworld' which I guess would be capitalised 'Asmallworld'.
The result of the move request was: not moved. While there was disagreement over which capitalization would be most in keeping with policy, a consensus was reached that the camel-case format is the most readable version of the title. ( closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 14:47, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
ASmallWorld → Asmallworld – As noted above, WP:TITLETM, MOS:TM, and MOS:ALLCAPS indicate that we should not use an all-caps format, even though that's the common usage. Since common usage is no longer the camel case styling, MOS:CAMELCASE indicates that we should no longer use camel case as the title of the article or in the prose. — C.Fred ( talk) 12:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Edward-Woodrow • talk 13:51, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
ASmallWorld article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include
conflict of interest,
autobiography, and
neutral point of view.
|
![]() | On 7 September 2023, it was proposed that this article be moved to ASMALLWORLD. The result of the discussion was not moved. |
This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. Owen× ☎ 23:53, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
I, for one, find the entire concept of such a website to be incredibly offensive. Anyone else agree?
Yes, excluding people can be useful. However, this entry is an obvious case of shameless self promotion. People arguing about the concept is probably just what was intended.
(1) Invite some celebrities. (2) Start a controversy to increase awareness.
Ads should be deleted.
It has been said that one of the main reason for the creation of aSmallWorld is to provided it's 50 year old owner Erik Wachmeister and his close associates access to young women and to celebrities parties.
Who is he?-- MoMo the Pirate 19:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
This [1] reference is not valid from its appearance. It appears to be a wiki that anyone can create an account login, and edit. Other wikis cannot be used as references here on wikipedia. They are unreliable sources, see WP:V and WP:RS. Does this website operate different than it appears?-- Crossmr 23:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
List of social networking websites is currently a candidate for deletion. You are invited to partake in the discussion.-- Crossmr 14:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
Can someone please explain how a site ranked 900,000+ in Alexa and with only 2 sources is on wikipedia? This article: http://en.wikipedia.org/Yuniti , draft: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Marquinho/Yuniti_(draft)
Was deleted despite being in the top 200,000 site in Alexa and having 5+ sources Marquinho Marquinho ( talk) 13:45, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
I don't understand "A Big World". Is it a limited version of ASmallWord? Is it just a void space? Can exiles be readmitted? -- Error ( talk) 22:20, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
I have updated, i.e. corrected the alexa rank: ca 620,000 ranks up: from 658,892 → 38,861.
Please note that the previous version provided a link to the "asmallworld.net", the website before its mid-2013 relaunch as "asmallworld.com". That's the reason why the ranking dropped from below 10,000 (in August 2012) to above 550,000 (in August 2013).
Currently, "asmallworld.com" is ranked 38,861 -- IIIraute ( talk) 23:53, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
The WP:SYNTH and WP:OR content that was recently added by 67.80.233.89, e.g. here and here - and reverted by User:Coasterlover1994 here, was restored again through consistent edit warring by User:Faceplant2020 and User:Mostlyoksorta.
Later on the IP returned with the proposal to delete the article - this proposal was reinforced by User:Mostlyoksorta.
The article is now nominated for deletion; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ASmallWorld. -- IIIraute ( talk) 00:31, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I have put the page up for deletion. No other people, no sockpuppets or whatever have commented or voted on the deletion as far as I can see. The page is ranked lowly on Alexa, only has citations to the CEO advertising the company, has been on an advertising warning for years, and has also been thought relevant for deletion/G11 for years. I am not waring, I do not understand why edits are getting deleted by IIIraute when they cite the same sources or more independent sources than those that IIIraute replaces them with? In fact, IIIraute, deleted one source in the 'Controvesy' section while leaving the SAME EXACT SOURCE to support advertising claims earlier in the page ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 00:55, 1 April 2014 (UTC))
A bot has replaced the faulty Alexa rankings put up by IIIraute - the ranking again drops below 500,000. I am confused why IIIraute is making accusations when only editing in a non-neutral manner? Is IIIraute employed by asmallworld to monitor their page, a member of the site, what is the reason for the non-neutral (and apparently false in the case of Alexa) editing? ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 01:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC))
IIIraute Listen I'm not a technology person, I can just read what the site says. I also didn't start yelling and screaming and making accusations about fellow editors. Why not just let the facts speak and avoid all the back and forth nonsense, whatever the ranking winds up being it is a) not a deciding factor for deletion under wikipedia rules and b) clearly not blowing the lid off anyone's idea of notability whether it is 500,000th or 38,000th. There is basically no citation on the entire page that isn't a quote of the CEO hyping her product within a month of it's relaunch. And almost all of the edits of the page were created by an IP address about a week before asmallworld's relaunch in 2013. It screams advertising and marketing. I don't understand what argument there is against that. Outside of accusations against editors what basis do you have for believing asmallworld is a)not advertising and b)of relevant notability? ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 01:37, 1 April 2014 (UTC))
I am asking you now, Mostlyoksorta: did you do any recent IP or the User:Faceplant2020 edits? It is not too difficult to find out - see: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations -- IIIraute ( talk) 02:00, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
I am not the same person as Faceplant2020, though it is rather intimidating to me that you are barreling through my privacy, but I spoke to Faceplant2020 and will you let you know that I know that person. We did discuss edits together, which as far as I know is ok. Faceplant2020 will stay out the deletion debate if that makes you happy? As for any IP address, as you can tell we are both new to this so maybe someone forgot to log on, we're on public computers sometimes? Anyway, I hope that ends the belligerent Sherlock Holmes part of this discussion, and we can focus on whether or not the 500,000th/38,000th most important site on the internet, which is plagued with advertising material and non-neutral should stay on Wikipedia. It's pretty simple. Thanks ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 11:01, 1 April 2014 (UTC)).
Oh yeah and since I got all honest at your request, do you IIIraute accept compensation in any manner from asmallworld? Or do I need to do some background check on that? It's really not nice to act that way. ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 11:05, 1 April 2014 (UTC))
The article says membership is capped at 250,000, and the sidebar says that there are 250,000 members.
Well, I get regular spam-style "invitations" to "reactivate my membership." Since I'm hardly special (I can't have logged in more than 10 times before it became a pay site), I can only infer that they have far fewer than their 250,000 member cap.
I can't find any reliable information on how many actual members the site has. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djcheburashka ( talk • contribs) 05:13, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
IIIraute I saw your edit, quick question - it clearly is unproven that they have delivered any car service to any one, but it is a fact that they have less than 250,000 members, for the reasons stated above. Why did you get rid of the 250,000 but not they several hundred delivered? Just curious ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 21:48, 24 April 2014 (UTC))
"As of October 2013, asmallworld became open to anyone who completed a membership application and paid the membership fee." That's not what the sources say - also, facebook isn't really one → ASW: Access to ASMALLWORLD is for members only. Please complete the form below to be considered for membership. We will be in touch if your application is accepted.
Facebook: Thank you all for your feedback about our decision to start accepting membership applications. One thing to keep in mind: a membership committee will carefully review all applications and vet potential members, giving us control over who joins our community – much like many private membership clubs. -- IIIraute ( talk) 23:09, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
Yes, you can apply - to be considered for invitation! Access to ASMALLWORLD is for members only. Please complete the form below to be considered for membership. We will be in touch if your application is accepted.
Business Insider: "ASmallWorld, the invite-only social network..."
New York Post: "...the invitation-only site A Small World..."
The National: "The exclusive, invitation-only social networking site..." -- IIIraute ( talk) 17:28, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
"Access to ASMALLWORLD is for members only. Please complete the form below to be considered for membership. We will be in touch if your application is accepted. Learn more about ASW membership and offerings here. We also occasionally send emails with editorial content, event invitations and special deals from our partners. Please indicate below if you’d like to be added to our mailing list." https://www.asmallworld.com/apply_for_membership - that is the page where you apply for membership, I am a member, I have no idea why you think I am lying about this, the posted it on their own facebook page which I cited before, and on the board that are open to members only :) ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 17:45, 1 May 2014 (UTC))
You can apply - to be considered for invitation! Access to ASMALLWORLD is for members only. Please complete the form below to be considered for membership. We will be in touch if your application is accepted.
Business Insider: "ASmallWorld, the invite-only social network..."
New York Post: "...the invitation-only site A Small World..."
The National: "The exclusive, invitation-only social networking site..." -- IIIraute ( talk) 17:50, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
You can apply - to be considered for invitation! Access to ASMALLWORLD is for members only. Please complete the form below to be considered for membership. We will be in touch if your application is accepted.
ASMALLWORLD: "We are an international, invitation-only club" → www.asmallworld.com -- IIIraute ( talk) 21:00, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Also, please follow the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, which means retaining the status before the bold edit was made and reverted; i.e. "leave the article in the condition it was in, before you did your bold edits and change of content" (often called the status quo ante). And no, I am not being compensated by ASW. -- IIIraute ( talk) 00:01, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
So why are you reverting me? This looks very bad. Please stop it.Volunteer Marek (talk) 02:45, 2 May 2014 (UTC)" You deleted this totally appropriate commentary - furthermore you have a long long list of complaints on this topic. I will contact an administrator if this cycle continues. ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 02:58, 2 May 2014 (UTC))
One can apply - "to be considered" for invitation → Access to ASMALLWORLD is for members only. Please complete the form below to be considered for membership. We will be in touch if your application is accepted.
Business Insider: "ASmallWorld, the invite-only social network..."
New York Post: "...the invitation-only site A Small World..."
The National: "The exclusive, invitation-only social networking site..."
Removing this sourced content, based on the argument presented above, is in violation with WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. -- IIIraute ( talk) 01:57, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Hitherto, nothing more than an allegation: "Tonny Uy has filed a gender-discrimination lawsuit against his former empress ployer, A Small World, where he worked as an accountant. He claims he lost his job because he asked for the same amount of paid family leave given to female workers." & "A man says his Manhattan employer — an exclusive online social network for the rich — fired him because he asked for the same amount of paid family leave given to female workers." here
"Man sues employer for alleged firing over paternity leave" & "A gay man socked his snooty employer — a social-networking site that bills itself as a “myspace for millionaires” — with a lawsuit Wednesday alleging that he was wrongfully fired after seeking paternity leave when his daughter was born." here -- IIIraute ( talk) 23:24, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
You are clearly biased - and your edits are not NPOV! -- IIIraute ( talk) 18:12, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
It appears IP address 83.113.255.192 has a COI and is either the company itself or an agent of the company, see edit history ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 17:32, 2 May 2014 (UTC))
Connected contributor/Conflict of Interest (evidence):
From the very first day on the WP - and after an unsuccessful attempt to get this article deleted - Mostlyoksorta has edited the content of this article to the disadvantage of the private social club this article is about - and this editor is a member of. Since account creation, about five weeks ago, this editor has not edited a single other article yet - while violating WP:RS, WP:SYNTH and WP:MEAT at this article.
"If they don't accept you don't worry I'll send you an invitation"
"...don't be jealous that I am the member of an ultra exclusive club and your not..."
"I have emails from asmallworld confirming these facts..." -- IIIraute ( talk) 17:49, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Connected contributor/Conflict of Interest (evidence) for ASMALLWORLD EMPLOYEES Kabirsa91 and Muriellefinster have admitted to being ASMALLWORLD employees and should be blocked - "I work at ASMALLWORLD, and although I am not advocating a biased page, I am requesting you, or the appropriate individual to edit the spammy information off this page. " and "We're operating from the same location, that is correct" ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 16:47, 5 May 2014 (UTC))
Hi- There is some information on this page that is highly biased, and frequently untrue. Please may I edit this with a neutral perspective? Thank you very much -- Kabirsa91 ( talk) 14:23, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.
Hi, In that case, may we please remove the controversies section? The information is personal in nature, not cited, and even irrelevant. For example, the St. Kitts partnership is not a controversy at all since ASW members have been routinely informed of its progress with renovations. The last sentence of paragraph 1 is not cited, AND it is extremely specious.
A lot the sources cited in this section have been acquired from celebrity gossip blogs, which are specious and unreliable sources to begin with.
Please review the matter, and revert to me. I await your response.
Thank you, Best,— Preceding unsigned comment added by Muriellefinster ( talk • contribs)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
We're operating from the same location, that is correct- Also nobody denied Kabirsa91's request? He didn't even ask for one. So may we please remove the sections or not? Thank you, Best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muriellefinster ( talk • contribs)
![]() | This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format.
Hi Mostlyoksorta, There is no reason to be rude. I am requesting you for help. I work at ASMALLWORLD, and although I am not advocating a biased page, I am requesting you, or the appropriate individual to edit the spammy information off this page.
Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Muriellefinster ( talk • contribs)
The entire 'Member Vetting Section' is unsourced and I would propose it's deletion. The two citations given are not relevant to the statements that precede them. ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 14:11, 6 May 2014 (UTC))
Since the story is complicated, and I have issues with page protection before, let me record it here. I was patrolling WP:RFPP and went to investigate this request. I have never heard of ASmallWorld and I am completely uninvolved. I saw that there is indeed persistent disruption (unexplained removal of sourced material), but all this removal was done by an IP editor who even overstepped four reverts. I blocked the IP, reverted the last removal, and decided not to protect the page for the time being and instead add it to the watch list and wait. Within an hour, my removal was reverted by a different IP. Then I protected the page and reverted the removal again. I have no horse here and I am not interested in mediation, therefore I am unwatching the page. Pls ping me if more explanations are needed. If this is a content dispute please resolve it at the talk page.-- Ymblanter ( talk) 19:24, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
This page can clearly not be taken seriously and has become the playground for users who are definitely not interested in facts but rather pro-actively harm ASW and it's chairman. The fact that boulevard press reports which have been proven to be wrong are taking up such a large portion of the companies "history" is just pathetic and clearly against the spirit of Wikipedia. If you take the time to follow the case you will understand that Patrick Liotard-Vogt left for St.Kitts a while ago after investing a large amount of money (600m USD) when buying out the government in the Kittitian Hill project. Furthermore, the claims were made by Diners Club and not it's CEO as stated in the article. In addition to that, one has to note, that PLV was main investor in Diners Club and served on the BoD and the business closed down in march 2014 a clear indication for a shareholder dispute. It should also be mentioned, that a claim (Betreibung) in Switzerland is not a lawsuit and can be filed by anyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swisstruth ( talk • contribs)
what information should be included in the lead? I believe the this lead includes too many peacock terms 'exclusive', 'myspace for millionaires' etc. are self-serving and created by the company. Rather than engage in an edit war with IIIraute on this topic I would like to solicit third party opinions here ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 23:49, 20 May 2014 (UTC))
all of them seem to have a very strong interest in showcasing a very negative aspect of ASW going as far as hiding the truth. I would doubt their good faith and honesty, especially the ones claiming to be independent and having never heard of ASW although writing extensively about Henley & Partner, a former partner of ASW? Come on guys, stop your fraudulent approach, respect Wikipedia, fight your personal wars somewhere else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swisstruth ( talk • contribs) 10:56, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
It is impossible to have a Betreibung without a debt ( Mostlyoksorta ( talk) 16:38, 14 June 2014 (UTC))
External link / source n° 21 is inexistent, please correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.73.252.2 ( talk) 10:56, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on ASmallWorld. 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:
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).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:51, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved. ( closed by non-admin page mover) Lightoil ( talk) 04:55, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
ASmallWorld → ASMALLWORLD – The name stylised as 'aSmallWorld' fell out of use in the late 2000s, since which time its been ASMALLWORLD RoryASW ( talk) 11:27, 7 September 2023 (UTC) This is a contested technical request ( permalink). RoryASW ( talk) 11:49, 7 September 2023 (UTC)
Thanks and apologies in advance if i'm committing some faux pas, but i'm keen to see if we can make this change.
I understand that 'official names' are not necessarily used for article titles, but I would argue that 'aSmallWorld' is already an unusually styled title. I think we would prefer 'ASMALLWORLD' ideally but would be happy with 'asmallworld' which I guess would be capitalised 'Asmallworld'.
The result of the move request was: not moved. While there was disagreement over which capitalization would be most in keeping with policy, a consensus was reached that the camel-case format is the most readable version of the title. ( closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite ( talk • contribs) 14:47, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
ASmallWorld → Asmallworld – As noted above, WP:TITLETM, MOS:TM, and MOS:ALLCAPS indicate that we should not use an all-caps format, even though that's the common usage. Since common usage is no longer the camel case styling, MOS:CAMELCASE indicates that we should no longer use camel case as the title of the article or in the prose. — C.Fred ( talk) 12:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC) — Relisting. Edward-Woodrow • talk 13:51, 24 September 2023 (UTC)