![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I just made an edit that references secondary sources that explain the concept, rather than sources that use the concept, to address the neologism claim: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Domain_hack&oldid=658993449 Xonatron ( talk) 14:05, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
The deletion discussion on this article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Domain_hack showcases very well that the claims of coining the term "domain hack" are not "bogus" or "dubious". There were never any claims about inventing domain hacks, so that's an invalid reason to delete content about coinage. Invention and coinage are two different things. Please do your research! 24.224.184.12 ( talk) 05:50, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
We should mention cr.yp.to as well as ma.tt, too very popular domain hacks. 24.224.184.2 ( talk) 14:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I removed the alledia.com reference because 1) it was a broken link or a link with a lot of extra unwanted content and 2) the xona.com reference is the orignal source of domain hack information. Original sources are more accurate, more interesting, and less spammy. 24.224.184.237 ( talk) 19:57, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't we use the most popular domain hacks as examples? Such as ma.tt and blo.gs, and then del.icio.us and cr.yp.to for examples for 3rd level domains? 24.137.115.73 ( talk) 19:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
This section makes good points, but perhaps data.ma is not notable enough and another example should be used? 24.222.121.193 03:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
I removed this section from the article. More than just "original research", it seemed to me highly speculative and un-encyclopedic. Fluff, to put it bluntly. John Kugelman 13:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Since this article was concidered for deletion, and most google searches for "domain hack" return hackers gaining control of domains, this article should be renamed to "Domain renaming techniques" jraspiprojects 11:33 (PST) 12/21/2018
Note: As per "List of active or registered domain hacks" section (in this discussion article), the domain hacks list no longer exists. 24.222.121.193 17:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
There are currently two lists, both located off-Wikipedia:
As far as I know, these are still being maintained. -- 66.102.80.239 16:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
www.dot.cotton.com???? Saccerzd 21:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
That is like when I owned deleted.com and used the email, no.spam.it.will.be@deleted.com Joseph Slabaugh
I'm not really sure that *.it or *.to using the words "it" or "to" would be a domain hack. cr.yp.to is a domain hack, this is an expansion of "crypto", similarly if there were a bullsh.it, or (Warning: slashdot-themed suggestion) hotgr.it. Thus propose to remove all those simply using the TLD as a word from the list. Chris talk back 21:25, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
I know, it's not strictly a domain hack in some definitions, BUT... It's about a language/toolkit combo named TCL/TK! Isn't that clever enough?
Should dau.pl be in the 'notable' list?
Perhaps the .to's and .tv's can be excluded from the list (whenever they are used as the word "to" and the word "tv") and described elsewhere with a few notable examples. They are almost too abundant to list and not quite as innovative and as rare as using the ccTLD for only a part of the word. So, listing .to's and .tv's, when they are used as full words, almost degrades the quality of the list. Thoughts? 137.186.22.203 14:56, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
Probably not a strict "domain hack", but it was registered in 1990, when Glasgow University built the site to train UK Librarians to use JANET (UK's Joint Academic Network). The Bulletin Board for Libraries was hosted at the University of Bath, making it BUBL@bath.
If others think it fits, please add.
k.greenhill@murdoch.edu.au 10 June 2006
Whocalled.us is a list of caller ID numbers displayed on telemarketing calls - a consumer complaint site. It is notable enough to be worthy of inclusion here.
Registered to the net abuse clearinghouse http://abuse.net but not actively in use. (.am is Armenia) -- 66.102.80.239 03:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Redirects to youtube.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.33.4.44 ( talk) 13:48, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Company that hosts the German mirror of project Gutenberg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.195.222.77 ( talk) 11:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
"The most popular domain hack is del.icio.us." — what's the source for this claim? My gut feeling is that cr.yp.to is more popular, because it's been around longer and Dan Bernstein's tools (qmail, ezmlm, tinydns, etc.) are widely used. What's more, I'm not sure what the proper measure of popularity should really be. Given the nature of the site, I'll grant that del.icio.us almost surely gets more pageviews, but I have no doubt that cr.yp.to has received (and continues to receive) far more unique visitors, most of whom simply download one of the tools and never return. -- 158.130.16.191 20:05, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
It would be nice if this information were placed into an easy to read table, which would take far less space, and not require scrolling to browse through them. 137.186.22.143 22:23, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
A few years ago I generated this list of possible domains, with a parser that looked for all valid english scrabble words that could be extended to a second valid english scrabble word with a TLD or SLD. I'd be willing to submit it to en.wp under PD, anyone think it could/should be incorporated? Note: That this is not a full list of all possible english TLD hacks, just ones that are valid both before and after the TLD is added. Also this is a list of only one word hacks. Even so, this list is rather large. Splarka ( rant) 23:36, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Domain hacking was at one time (cca 2000-2001) quite popular in Russia simply because "net" means "no" or "there isn't". So, we have sites like anekdotov.net - "there are no jokes", piva.net - "there is no beer", fishki.net - "there's no point" (slang term) and many others.
i remember dis.org, re.org and theb.org from c. 1992, so inter.net might not be the oldest. Benwing 22:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
What about ja.net? WHOIS shows registered on 17-May-1991.
The "controversy" section doesn't really seem controversial... I mean, who's to say what good domain naming conventions are? In fact, the existence of this article proves that a variety of naming standards can work. But most of all, domains are anyone's to buy, name, and use... so what does it matter if they follow "conventions"?? The section seems more like one person's reaction than an actual "controversy"
Why is there no mention of the effects of domain hacks on web searches, specifically how they make it harder to narrow a search by adding a whitelist or blacklist of TLDs. For example, if I want to find information about sofas, but I'm not looking to buy one, I can search "sofa -site:com -site:biz", or to find scientific information on sex instead of pornography, I can search "sex site:edu". Isn't this an issue with domain hacks? Bostoner ( talk) 20:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Should be noted that GOATSE most likely an acronym for "Guy Opens Ass To Show Everyone", though most people read it as Goat Sex.
The .um TLD (US Minor Outlying islands) is not in active use, but due to wildcard DNS a long list of names like http://deuteri.um http://triti.um http://urani.um do (or did) resolve to the same one page. Typing site:.um into a search engine yields many of these, but are they of any real significance? -- 205.150.76.14 01:09, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I removed this reference as the link no longer works:
I did do a search on CNN Tech but couldn't find the original article anywhere.
As the reference no longer works, I removed this sentence from the article as it is not verifiable:
"The domain are.us which together with a subdomain can be read as an entire sentence (domains.are.us, computers.are.us, etc) is up for sale for a reportedly unprecedented $250,000 [2]."
Feel free to put the above 2 back if you can find another source. Erwinloh 05:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
What does "i.am the shortest domain name on record" mean? There are lots of SLDs registered that contain 1+2 letters, so that's not it. What is it? -- Jao 16:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
The shortest existing TLD is two-characters, the shortest name under an individual TLD could be no less than one character. As such, there is currently no way to make a shorter domain name than "i.am", although it is possible to create something of equal length like "u.nu" ('you knew' is a travel photo album) or "c.la" («c'est là», a redirector - "it's there"). So yes, "i.am the shortest name" but as part of what is inevitably a tie for first place. :) A short name is valuable if building a redirector or issuing subdomains, so as the shortest complete sentence in English, "i.am" is perfect. -- 66.102.80.239 16:12, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
The shortest domain name is "i.is", it is only 4 mm long. The above mentioned domain ". i.am" is on the other hand at least 5 mm long :) Jens 16:29, 11 March 2011 (UTC) (talk). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenspeturjensen ( talk • contribs)
New domain hack added; Rammste.in —Preceding unsigned comment added by Liquinn ( talk • contribs) 07:15, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
A finnish comedy site, means "tank". (panssari means "armor" and vaunu means "vehicle" - "armored vehicle") —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.197.39.178 ( talk) 15:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
As a joke ccTLD, .us is almost too ea.sy a target. It see.ms to host more sil.ly domains than mo.st other two-letter dictionary word ta.gs, including .it and .me -- 66.102.80.212 ( talk) 02:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
The most famous "Matt" on the internet has registered "ma.tt". Richard W.M. Jones ( talk) 14:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I put it in, got deleted, I just put it in again. I bet it's the second or third most visited domain hack on the net. Deserves a mention. 24.215.121.195 ( talk) 18:20, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I note that one user seems to have an axe to grind with respect to the inclusion of telemarketing consumer complaint site "whocalled.us" as a well-known domain hack. I did check Alexa, and that site does report "whocalled.us" as being near the top 40,000 most-used websites out of however million are online, so it would appear to be a notable example if it is indeed a domain hack. -- 66.102.80.212 ( talk) 21:16, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
I propose that we keep expression domain name hack — the one used in the original article from Wikia — instead of domain hack which I think should be the one between parentheses given that the word domain can refer to many things and not just domain names and therefore can be confusing for people who are not familiar with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CDumier ( talk • contribs) 16:04, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
i.am is dead. What happend?-- Baruch ben Alexander - ☠☢☣ 21:17, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
This whole article seems to be a one sentence topic that is only growing longer because of the miracle of advertisement. I.e. 90% of article bulk is "examples." -- Bxj ( talk) 14:40, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree with this. It seems unusual to include all these languages. They do not make the example any more easy to understand - and is in my opinion just advertisement and SEO. Atomicbre ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC).
Maybe one of the authors wants to mention http://domai.nr/ as link under "See Also", i find this page very useful - but i'm not sure if this would be spam. 84.119.64.25 ( talk) 10:09, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
User 75.145.190.85 left the following message on my talk page on 5 August 2011: "I see you originated the mention of "mec.ca" on Domain hack. I've tagged it cn because I'm unaware of any intention of the word "mecca" by MEC. If they only meant it as MEC (their initials) + ca (ccTLD for Canada), then it's not really a domain hack and doesn't belong there. But if they also play it as a pun (e.g. advertising themselves as "the mec.ca for sportsmen" or so, then it would be ok; hoping since you added it you'll know where to start..."
I replied on 75.145.190.85's talk page on 7 August: "Thanks for your message re Mountain Equipment Co-op and mec.ca. I have no inside knowledge of their marketing strategy, I only know what I can see on their posters (where they prominently give their address simply as "mec.ca", with no www) and the fact that it's simply not credible to suppose they wouldn't have been aware of it. Of course it started because it happened also to be their initials, but there are plenty of other ways to make a URL out of "Mountain Equipment Co-op", and they chose this one no doubt largely because of the delicious conjunction with a well-known name that also had connotations of a centre to which people flock in large numbers. They don't need to make any more of it than that precisely because the connotation is self-evident. The fact that it's their name doesn't cancel out its value as a domain hack, as your comment suggested; if anything, it enhances it by providing an additional layer of pleasing coincidence. Google "Mountain Equipment Co-op" plus Mecca and you'll see that many reviewers of their products are also pleased by this coincidence, describing it as a mecca for outdoor enthusiasts etc. To require a citation is a bit like asking for a citation that Austin Powers is meant to be a spoof of James Bond. If you couldn't find a quote where Mike Myers says "Austin Powers is a spoof of James Bond" would you consider that statement to be unsupported or conjectural? No. It's self-evident"
But on 25 August 75.145.190.85 went ahead and deleted my reference from this article anyway, citing "mec.ca's domain hack status not WP:V, removed".
The removal strikes me as petty because the requirement for some specific authority is, in this case, misconceived -- i.e. irrelevant to the nature of the information. What do other people think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathandore ( talk • contribs) 16:06, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
In the international names section, there is a link "Further information: ccTLD#Commercial and vanity use" which currently points to a non-existing section in the destination article. Anyone care to dig out what it was pointing to and thus what the point of the reference is? Katana ( talk) 23:06, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
The article says: «Family names in many Slavic languages end with ch (i.e. -ich, -vich, -vych, -ovich), so .ch (ccTLD for Switzerland) are very interesting to them.», on to which I added {{ citation needed}}. The thing is, no Slavic language actually uses "ch" for the mentioned ending, but rather "cz", "ć", "č", "ч", or "ћ". Using the Swiss TLD in this manner makes only sense for emmigrants and their descendents in English or Spanish speaking countries, where said name ending is trivially assimilated as "ch". I suspect that this sentence in the article is nothing but original research, and a sloppy one, too. Tuvalkin ( talk) 00:42, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry for coming out of nowhere with this issue. In my defense, I have to say that I have never wrote anything to the Wikipedia encyclopedia before. So if I came across in an inappropriate way, I would like to apologize at this point, but it's due to my lacking wiki skills. While writing this right now, I'm not even sure if this is directed to the expected recipient. I thought that wiki was the right source to pronounce this subject. I'm a media designer located in Germany and very interested in this theme. As you can imagine, I can not post or name a source, actually proving what I'm trying to define, because it's new. The term pictomain has never been mentioned in this, or any other context before. The possibility to create a so called "pictomain" has never occurred before! Therefore I would truly admire your companionship and innovative vision. The domains mentioned in the text are not commercial! To speak for ix0xi.islam in particular, it is a preordered domain, not officially available yet, but soon will be. It does not have any relation to religious orientation. I'm unaffiliated with any religion.
Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piktomain ( talk • contribs) 07:46, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Domain hack. 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.
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.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:36, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I think it would be useful to list in this article some online resources helping to find domain hacks. I've checked several ones and looks like the best I found for now is tld-hack.com ( link). It works with the latest TLDs including IDNs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chikipikiwiki ( talk • contribs) 07:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect TehSpe.de. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 15:37, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
I just made an edit that references secondary sources that explain the concept, rather than sources that use the concept, to address the neologism claim: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Domain_hack&oldid=658993449 Xonatron ( talk) 14:05, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
The deletion discussion on this article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Domain_hack showcases very well that the claims of coining the term "domain hack" are not "bogus" or "dubious". There were never any claims about inventing domain hacks, so that's an invalid reason to delete content about coinage. Invention and coinage are two different things. Please do your research! 24.224.184.12 ( talk) 05:50, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
We should mention cr.yp.to as well as ma.tt, too very popular domain hacks. 24.224.184.2 ( talk) 14:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
I removed the alledia.com reference because 1) it was a broken link or a link with a lot of extra unwanted content and 2) the xona.com reference is the orignal source of domain hack information. Original sources are more accurate, more interesting, and less spammy. 24.224.184.237 ( talk) 19:57, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't we use the most popular domain hacks as examples? Such as ma.tt and blo.gs, and then del.icio.us and cr.yp.to for examples for 3rd level domains? 24.137.115.73 ( talk) 19:04, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
This section makes good points, but perhaps data.ma is not notable enough and another example should be used? 24.222.121.193 03:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
I removed this section from the article. More than just "original research", it seemed to me highly speculative and un-encyclopedic. Fluff, to put it bluntly. John Kugelman 13:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Since this article was concidered for deletion, and most google searches for "domain hack" return hackers gaining control of domains, this article should be renamed to "Domain renaming techniques" jraspiprojects 11:33 (PST) 12/21/2018
Note: As per "List of active or registered domain hacks" section (in this discussion article), the domain hacks list no longer exists. 24.222.121.193 17:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
There are currently two lists, both located off-Wikipedia:
As far as I know, these are still being maintained. -- 66.102.80.239 16:56, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
www.dot.cotton.com???? Saccerzd 21:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
That is like when I owned deleted.com and used the email, no.spam.it.will.be@deleted.com Joseph Slabaugh
I'm not really sure that *.it or *.to using the words "it" or "to" would be a domain hack. cr.yp.to is a domain hack, this is an expansion of "crypto", similarly if there were a bullsh.it, or (Warning: slashdot-themed suggestion) hotgr.it. Thus propose to remove all those simply using the TLD as a word from the list. Chris talk back 21:25, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
I know, it's not strictly a domain hack in some definitions, BUT... It's about a language/toolkit combo named TCL/TK! Isn't that clever enough?
Should dau.pl be in the 'notable' list?
Perhaps the .to's and .tv's can be excluded from the list (whenever they are used as the word "to" and the word "tv") and described elsewhere with a few notable examples. They are almost too abundant to list and not quite as innovative and as rare as using the ccTLD for only a part of the word. So, listing .to's and .tv's, when they are used as full words, almost degrades the quality of the list. Thoughts? 137.186.22.203 14:56, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
Probably not a strict "domain hack", but it was registered in 1990, when Glasgow University built the site to train UK Librarians to use JANET (UK's Joint Academic Network). The Bulletin Board for Libraries was hosted at the University of Bath, making it BUBL@bath.
If others think it fits, please add.
k.greenhill@murdoch.edu.au 10 June 2006
Whocalled.us is a list of caller ID numbers displayed on telemarketing calls - a consumer complaint site. It is notable enough to be worthy of inclusion here.
Registered to the net abuse clearinghouse http://abuse.net but not actively in use. (.am is Armenia) -- 66.102.80.239 03:46, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Redirects to youtube.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.33.4.44 ( talk) 13:48, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Company that hosts the German mirror of project Gutenberg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.195.222.77 ( talk) 11:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
"The most popular domain hack is del.icio.us." — what's the source for this claim? My gut feeling is that cr.yp.to is more popular, because it's been around longer and Dan Bernstein's tools (qmail, ezmlm, tinydns, etc.) are widely used. What's more, I'm not sure what the proper measure of popularity should really be. Given the nature of the site, I'll grant that del.icio.us almost surely gets more pageviews, but I have no doubt that cr.yp.to has received (and continues to receive) far more unique visitors, most of whom simply download one of the tools and never return. -- 158.130.16.191 20:05, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
It would be nice if this information were placed into an easy to read table, which would take far less space, and not require scrolling to browse through them. 137.186.22.143 22:23, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
A few years ago I generated this list of possible domains, with a parser that looked for all valid english scrabble words that could be extended to a second valid english scrabble word with a TLD or SLD. I'd be willing to submit it to en.wp under PD, anyone think it could/should be incorporated? Note: That this is not a full list of all possible english TLD hacks, just ones that are valid both before and after the TLD is added. Also this is a list of only one word hacks. Even so, this list is rather large. Splarka ( rant) 23:36, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Domain hacking was at one time (cca 2000-2001) quite popular in Russia simply because "net" means "no" or "there isn't". So, we have sites like anekdotov.net - "there are no jokes", piva.net - "there is no beer", fishki.net - "there's no point" (slang term) and many others.
i remember dis.org, re.org and theb.org from c. 1992, so inter.net might not be the oldest. Benwing 22:54, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
What about ja.net? WHOIS shows registered on 17-May-1991.
The "controversy" section doesn't really seem controversial... I mean, who's to say what good domain naming conventions are? In fact, the existence of this article proves that a variety of naming standards can work. But most of all, domains are anyone's to buy, name, and use... so what does it matter if they follow "conventions"?? The section seems more like one person's reaction than an actual "controversy"
Why is there no mention of the effects of domain hacks on web searches, specifically how they make it harder to narrow a search by adding a whitelist or blacklist of TLDs. For example, if I want to find information about sofas, but I'm not looking to buy one, I can search "sofa -site:com -site:biz", or to find scientific information on sex instead of pornography, I can search "sex site:edu". Isn't this an issue with domain hacks? Bostoner ( talk) 20:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Should be noted that GOATSE most likely an acronym for "Guy Opens Ass To Show Everyone", though most people read it as Goat Sex.
The .um TLD (US Minor Outlying islands) is not in active use, but due to wildcard DNS a long list of names like http://deuteri.um http://triti.um http://urani.um do (or did) resolve to the same one page. Typing site:.um into a search engine yields many of these, but are they of any real significance? -- 205.150.76.14 01:09, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
I removed this reference as the link no longer works:
I did do a search on CNN Tech but couldn't find the original article anywhere.
As the reference no longer works, I removed this sentence from the article as it is not verifiable:
"The domain are.us which together with a subdomain can be read as an entire sentence (domains.are.us, computers.are.us, etc) is up for sale for a reportedly unprecedented $250,000 [2]."
Feel free to put the above 2 back if you can find another source. Erwinloh 05:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
What does "i.am the shortest domain name on record" mean? There are lots of SLDs registered that contain 1+2 letters, so that's not it. What is it? -- Jao 16:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
The shortest existing TLD is two-characters, the shortest name under an individual TLD could be no less than one character. As such, there is currently no way to make a shorter domain name than "i.am", although it is possible to create something of equal length like "u.nu" ('you knew' is a travel photo album) or "c.la" («c'est là», a redirector - "it's there"). So yes, "i.am the shortest name" but as part of what is inevitably a tie for first place. :) A short name is valuable if building a redirector or issuing subdomains, so as the shortest complete sentence in English, "i.am" is perfect. -- 66.102.80.239 16:12, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
The shortest domain name is "i.is", it is only 4 mm long. The above mentioned domain ". i.am" is on the other hand at least 5 mm long :) Jens 16:29, 11 March 2011 (UTC) (talk). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenspeturjensen ( talk • contribs)
New domain hack added; Rammste.in —Preceding unsigned comment added by Liquinn ( talk • contribs) 07:15, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
A finnish comedy site, means "tank". (panssari means "armor" and vaunu means "vehicle" - "armored vehicle") —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.197.39.178 ( talk) 15:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
As a joke ccTLD, .us is almost too ea.sy a target. It see.ms to host more sil.ly domains than mo.st other two-letter dictionary word ta.gs, including .it and .me -- 66.102.80.212 ( talk) 02:15, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
The most famous "Matt" on the internet has registered "ma.tt". Richard W.M. Jones ( talk) 14:02, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I put it in, got deleted, I just put it in again. I bet it's the second or third most visited domain hack on the net. Deserves a mention. 24.215.121.195 ( talk) 18:20, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
I note that one user seems to have an axe to grind with respect to the inclusion of telemarketing consumer complaint site "whocalled.us" as a well-known domain hack. I did check Alexa, and that site does report "whocalled.us" as being near the top 40,000 most-used websites out of however million are online, so it would appear to be a notable example if it is indeed a domain hack. -- 66.102.80.212 ( talk) 21:16, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
I propose that we keep expression domain name hack — the one used in the original article from Wikia — instead of domain hack which I think should be the one between parentheses given that the word domain can refer to many things and not just domain names and therefore can be confusing for people who are not familiar with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CDumier ( talk • contribs) 16:04, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
i.am is dead. What happend?-- Baruch ben Alexander - ☠☢☣ 21:17, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
This whole article seems to be a one sentence topic that is only growing longer because of the miracle of advertisement. I.e. 90% of article bulk is "examples." -- Bxj ( talk) 14:40, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
I agree with this. It seems unusual to include all these languages. They do not make the example any more easy to understand - and is in my opinion just advertisement and SEO. Atomicbre ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC).
Maybe one of the authors wants to mention http://domai.nr/ as link under "See Also", i find this page very useful - but i'm not sure if this would be spam. 84.119.64.25 ( talk) 10:09, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
User 75.145.190.85 left the following message on my talk page on 5 August 2011: "I see you originated the mention of "mec.ca" on Domain hack. I've tagged it cn because I'm unaware of any intention of the word "mecca" by MEC. If they only meant it as MEC (their initials) + ca (ccTLD for Canada), then it's not really a domain hack and doesn't belong there. But if they also play it as a pun (e.g. advertising themselves as "the mec.ca for sportsmen" or so, then it would be ok; hoping since you added it you'll know where to start..."
I replied on 75.145.190.85's talk page on 7 August: "Thanks for your message re Mountain Equipment Co-op and mec.ca. I have no inside knowledge of their marketing strategy, I only know what I can see on their posters (where they prominently give their address simply as "mec.ca", with no www) and the fact that it's simply not credible to suppose they wouldn't have been aware of it. Of course it started because it happened also to be their initials, but there are plenty of other ways to make a URL out of "Mountain Equipment Co-op", and they chose this one no doubt largely because of the delicious conjunction with a well-known name that also had connotations of a centre to which people flock in large numbers. They don't need to make any more of it than that precisely because the connotation is self-evident. The fact that it's their name doesn't cancel out its value as a domain hack, as your comment suggested; if anything, it enhances it by providing an additional layer of pleasing coincidence. Google "Mountain Equipment Co-op" plus Mecca and you'll see that many reviewers of their products are also pleased by this coincidence, describing it as a mecca for outdoor enthusiasts etc. To require a citation is a bit like asking for a citation that Austin Powers is meant to be a spoof of James Bond. If you couldn't find a quote where Mike Myers says "Austin Powers is a spoof of James Bond" would you consider that statement to be unsupported or conjectural? No. It's self-evident"
But on 25 August 75.145.190.85 went ahead and deleted my reference from this article anyway, citing "mec.ca's domain hack status not WP:V, removed".
The removal strikes me as petty because the requirement for some specific authority is, in this case, misconceived -- i.e. irrelevant to the nature of the information. What do other people think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathandore ( talk • contribs) 16:06, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
In the international names section, there is a link "Further information: ccTLD#Commercial and vanity use" which currently points to a non-existing section in the destination article. Anyone care to dig out what it was pointing to and thus what the point of the reference is? Katana ( talk) 23:06, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
The article says: «Family names in many Slavic languages end with ch (i.e. -ich, -vich, -vych, -ovich), so .ch (ccTLD for Switzerland) are very interesting to them.», on to which I added {{ citation needed}}. The thing is, no Slavic language actually uses "ch" for the mentioned ending, but rather "cz", "ć", "č", "ч", or "ћ". Using the Swiss TLD in this manner makes only sense for emmigrants and their descendents in English or Spanish speaking countries, where said name ending is trivially assimilated as "ch". I suspect that this sentence in the article is nothing but original research, and a sloppy one, too. Tuvalkin ( talk) 00:42, 1 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm sorry for coming out of nowhere with this issue. In my defense, I have to say that I have never wrote anything to the Wikipedia encyclopedia before. So if I came across in an inappropriate way, I would like to apologize at this point, but it's due to my lacking wiki skills. While writing this right now, I'm not even sure if this is directed to the expected recipient. I thought that wiki was the right source to pronounce this subject. I'm a media designer located in Germany and very interested in this theme. As you can imagine, I can not post or name a source, actually proving what I'm trying to define, because it's new. The term pictomain has never been mentioned in this, or any other context before. The possibility to create a so called "pictomain" has never occurred before! Therefore I would truly admire your companionship and innovative vision. The domains mentioned in the text are not commercial! To speak for ix0xi.islam in particular, it is a preordered domain, not officially available yet, but soon will be. It does not have any relation to religious orientation. I'm unaffiliated with any religion.
Best regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piktomain ( talk • contribs) 07:46, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Domain hack. 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.
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.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 11:36, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
I think it would be useful to list in this article some online resources helping to find domain hacks. I've checked several ones and looks like the best I found for now is tld-hack.com ( link). It works with the latest TLDs including IDNs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chikipikiwiki ( talk • contribs) 07:48, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect TehSpe.de. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. UnitedStatesian ( talk) 15:37, 12 April 2019 (UTC)