![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 9 |
Czj switched off autosorting, referring to an already obsolete discussion. Correct number sorting can be forced using sorting templates. The way to do this is already explained in a comment at the beginning of the table, but i'll it copy here:
Please use {{nts}} and no commas for the user counts so they don't not mess up sorting. For examle: {{nts|1234567}} Use {{ntsh}} with non-numeric user counts, for example: {{ntsh|0}}Unknown {{ntsh|1000}}Thousands
(Look into the wikicode if it's still not clear.)
It's a bit of a hack, but it's invisible to readers, and not too difficult to maintain; and I think the ability to sort by community size is important enough to do the extra work. Any objections against switching it back? -- Tgr 11:46, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I didn't find any mention of browser compatibility issues at m:Help:Sorting, nor at Template talk:Sort. If there are, they should be reported at these places. But I don't think that was the problem; somebody just forgot to add the proper sorting template. (There was at least one missing in the last revision that had sorting.) -- Tgr 18:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I would like to add http://www.powerfulintentions.com an online community based on the Law of Attraction and the home of the official forum for the 2006 film "The Secret" by Rhonda Byrne. The current membership count is 113,000. I am the CTO and part owner of this community. Not sure of the guidelines nor how to add our community to the list. Bob OConnor 17:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC) Rocnet
I'd like to see this same chart, sorted by usercount. The number of users isn't a bad way to judge the notability of a Social Networking Site. Mathiastck 20:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Dear Author,
I request you to visit my analysis on 100+ Social Networking Portals categoriezed in 6-7 categories. Analysis & ranking is given on the basis of popularity and traffic genereated by portals. Hope this link will be helpful to readers. Here is the link:
(removed external link)
I am now aware whom to ask to add external link so i am using this page.
Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Voyage2mail ( talk • contribs) 22:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC).
Azerbaijanian social network site, with over 1500 verified members, blogs, videos, photos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.215.217.197 ( talk • contribs) 17:58, April 25, 2007 (UTC)
So long as it has a Wiki article, it can be added to this list.-- MonkeyTimeBoy 18:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I was just recently introduced to a social networking site "Zorpia" -- I turned to Wikipedia to give me the skinny and it's not there -- anywhere -- positive or negative ???
What gives, shouldn't Zorpia at least be on this list??
Help me understand.
And maybe I'm answering my own question here. I just found a "complaint site" from Zorpia complaining that they're not on this list --- is it because they don't have an article elsewhere on Wikipedia -- and are they unable to keep an article up because there's nothing "new" about them? That seems a bit of a catch-22 --- I like this compiled list *because* of its breadth -- I want it to list ALL KNOWN MEMBERS OF THE SPECIES. But if it will only list those that have articles on Wikipedia elsewhere and somebody has decided that only unique businesses can have articles, then the two virtues are rather fighting against each other, aren't they?
85.178.14.24
07:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Not logical enough? Just joking, but a new website that seems to be of interest. Seems to be a cross between a Who's Who and a social networking site. Registration is open, but most of the 'members' appear to be stubs that they've created for the owner to claim. I think I joined out of the blue, but most of the people I found were famous alumni in the form of unclaimed stubs. The tagging system is attribute-based, but with cumulative voting from yourself and other members. So what are the criteria for inclusion here on Wikipedia? Shanen 00:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
What is this "notable" standard, anyway? It really sounds a little evil, to be honest. I thought one of the virtues of Wikipedia was the nearly unlimited data-space --- notable to whom? What gives? (please direct me to the, I'm sure, quite extensive discussion of this matter elsewhere in Wikipedia-land). 85.178.14.24
I stumbled over this, not sure if the user number is notable enough. 85.3.151.176 20:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
is it possible to add the two main social business network to the list of this article?
it's called viadeo.com and 6nergies.com ... both are more than 100 000 members
Julien (no user account on wikipedia) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.162.134.247 ( talk) 22:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC).
Hi. Editors are once again inserting sortable tables without reference to consensus on the matter, gleaned by looking at this talk page. So I've added a hidden source message in the article asking them to visit the talk page to judge consensus before they make the edit. As of this timestamp, consensus is broadly against due to incorrect number sorting, e.g. 11,000 comes above 10,000,000 which is patently wrong. A true sortable numbering table would be most welcome. Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 10:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Can someone add www.deafbuddy.com? -- 169.139.19.106 14:49, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Wakoopa has it's own article on wiki, so I am not sure why it would be deemed "unworthy". Furthermore, it has been mentioned on several external sites that are themselves noteworthy. One such example is the article. I will be glad to point to more articles if need be but please do not remove content that is obviously relevant. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tecmobowl ( talk • contribs).
I added izimi to the list. Where did it go? 90.199.50.13 13:34, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
OK, well I think izimi should be in the list, so how do I encourage a Wikipedia contributor to create a valid and notable article on izimi, so it can then appear in the list? I know I wouldn't do it justice. 90.199.50.13 23:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Updated the registered user count from 31 million to 34 million. For reference, please see the about page on Bebo which was just officially edited to say 34 million.
http://bebo.com/StaticPage.jsp?StaticPageId=2517103831
Jozecuervo 21:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Why was my contribution of GoodReads deleted? 128.101.134.38 14:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 22:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
99.246.57.23
19:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)Why was FraternityLive removed from the list? It is the largest private Greek social network on the internet!
shouldn't Rooster Teeth Networks be put into this list? - 007bond aka Matthew G aka codingmasters 07:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I wonder why TravelersTable.com was removed. The reason stated that it included an external link but several of these do. I think that this site deserves mentioning as it is more innovative than many others. Please advise. Thanks! Gidge-it 23:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)gidge
TravelersTable.com is a recently launched patented business/social networking tool. Users can set up in-person meetings for any purpose including business or social networking. It offers a quick and easy way to set up meetings that offer you the opportunity to do many things including network with others in your profession, meet others in your industry, get together with fellow alumni from your high school, college or graduate school, investigate a job opportunity, introduce yourself to prospective employers or employees or potential customers, organize a play date for your kids, etc. You can set up an invite through TravelersTable.com for lunch, dinner, coffee, drinks, jogging, golf, cards, a sporting event, movie, or any other activity. What would it be considered "non-notable"? Because its just getting started?
Hi. In my opinion, this should not be part of the List, as it plainly states that it is software, offered for download through, but not operated by, the website in question. I have no idea when this addition was made, but I am sure it should be removed. I would like consensus on this in case I have missed something obvious (surely we should allow MSN or Windows Messenger if we allow IMVU - they certainly boast many more users than this one?). Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 15:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Is this an appropriate category to dump the List into? It relates only to the function of the Usercount referencing column in the article, not the article itself, as far as I can see. Too indirect for my liking. Comments? Ref (chew) (do) 16:16, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Should Windows Live Spaces not be in the list? Or are they already there under some other name? 129.142.71.166 17:01, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I think sms.ac is also a notable social network site for mobile users. Bairuz 20:08, 12 July 2007 (UTC)bairuz
I think Naymz.com should be on the list -- they are, like LinkedIn, a way to connect with other professionals. In this case it is to establish the reputability of your name by having others vouch for you. I don't know enough about the number of user accounts, etc. to post on this page. Can some one take a look at that and determine whether it should be added to the table? -- Bill.albing 19:02, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Are y'all listing non-English sites? Here's a list www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2007/06/02/list_of_nonengl.html.-- Bill.albing 19:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
I see someone added Ning to the list today. While I like Ning (I've even used it to create a network of my own), and definitely see its value as a Social Networking tool, it's not a SNS in itself. But before I remove it, I thought I'd ask for a little feedback on this -- as it will set a precedent of not including such SNS "enabling" or "toolbox" sites henceforth.-- MonkeyTimeBoy 15:14, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Since GoPets is listed, why not Neopets? -- Procrastinatrix 15:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
43 Things is a site dedicated to the listing of goals and dreams; this is the content focus. The site links users by a tagging style system. The site itself is not about tagging per say. I changed the description to include the content and did not delete the system of connecting users. Other sites have content as part of their description: music, "dark" blogs, "Green living and activism." Why would 43 Things need to be reverted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.19.46.184 ( talk • contribs) 21:55, August 6, 2007
Renspace.com, a social network for renaissance festival enthusiasts is probably deserving of mention with nearly 3,000 members to date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakeguy929 ( talk • contribs) 19:54, August 9, 2007 (UTC)
I was reading on PCWorld and I saw Nexo At: http://www.nexo.com/. Somebody Should Add A Wikipedia Article About It.
This is a new myspace.com like website which is very similar to it, but its just for wrestling fans. Do you think this should be added? Don.-.J 18:14, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm shocked that Youtube and del.icio.us aren't on this list. Is there a good reason why they're not? IMO, these sites (along with Flickr, which does appear on this list) defined social networking as we know it. Thoughts? — Joey Day ( talk· edits) 19:55, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Dear Author, would you please Babulous.com. Babulous.com is a new music social networking, it is based on new york and the goal is to connect fans and musicians. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alixixi ( talk • contribs) 22:09, August 25, 2007 (UTC)
I wonder why matador Travel is not on the list, i added it twice and the next time i check it it's not on the list anymore. In fact, Matador Travel already has an article on wikipedia. Can anyone tell me why? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThinkTwist ( talk • contribs) 06:21, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Someone please user sorting screwed up by Wirefree. Doesnt work correctly anymore when trying to sort most populace site down. Here is where it worked and then where he messed it up:
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.64.23 ( talk • contribs) 17:06, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
A completely useless page. It is incomplete and contains more unknown and websites that are not worth to be mentioned, solely because they have had the time to write an article about themselves. There are not always internal pages yet on Wikipedia for other websites that would be worth to be mentioned - and some of those website do have some sort of Wikipedia article but are clearly not worth to be mentioned or listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toby78 ( talk • contribs) 22:29, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I would like to see that all the articles this page links to have a website infobox. I would also like to see that under type, they all say social network service, because social network has a dablink at the top:
You list did not have Helloworld! I've been using this site for sometime and I find it most enjoyable! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.234.185.87 ( talk) 15:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
According to the article on the German wikipedia, it had a recorded 1,390,000 members on Sept. 2007. This is quite an increase from last year. 420,000 members (IVW December 2006) (IVW: Informationsgemeinschaft zur Feststellung der Verbreitung von Werbeträgern)
I added Lokalisten to the list of sites only to have my change rolled back. Is this because I didn't have an English article to link to? Thanks. Please don't delete me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.61.24.8 ( talk) 21:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Isn't one of the main purposes for this page the user count column? The foundations for every claim that site has users were wiped a few days ago. 66.93.192.222 13:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
The "Registered Users" tab sorts the list alphabetically, not numerically. Please correct this. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.102.254.33 ( talk) 04:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Facebook is reported to have offered $85 million (£41 million) to buy Zhanzuo.com, its largest Chinese counterpart, which has an estimated seven million active users and a popular base among students. http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/zhanzuo.com ????????? ````` Spencerk 07:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
but its the largest Chinese social networking website?! Spencerk ( talk) 05:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
This is a valid social networking site helping to promote discussion about climate change. I think it is valid for this list, it has its own wikipedia article and it is a valid social networking site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wakeyjamie ( talk • contribs) 14:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Why would you dispute that distributed teams of learners interacting at Wikiversity forms a social networking site? Wikiversity is a social network of teams of learners actively seeking participation. cc Unitedstatesian talk page Lazyquasar ( talk) 20:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I just reviewed the main page of the english Wikiversity [3]. I see nothing in the introductory descriptions stating "self study" or applicable to only such with the possible exception of "exploring personal goals". There is a lot about joining learning activities and learning communities. It is clearly oriented toward group activities and collaboration. The Wikiversity is not limited to wiki. Links can be provided to demonstrate this via IRC channels, mailing lists, blogs, email, etc. Indeed, most are available by design from the main page. I think the deleting editors here have allowed their understanding of how Wikipedia works to bias their evaluation of how Wikiversity functions. Again, I would like to hear what specific steps beyond verifying that learning also takes place at Wikiversity by intention and design the deleting editors have taken to verify Wikiversity does not use "social networking" as a primary means of building the learning communities it is designed to support. Lazyquasar ( talk) 04:05, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm thinking we should create a template to leave on users talk pages for those who add non-notable sites here, you know the ones we remove several dozen times a week. I'm not sure there is one, and I don't think the spam template really covers the issue here. Before I create it, has anyone seen one already in existence?-- Crossmr ( talk) 19:24, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | ← | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | → | Archive 9 |
Czj switched off autosorting, referring to an already obsolete discussion. Correct number sorting can be forced using sorting templates. The way to do this is already explained in a comment at the beginning of the table, but i'll it copy here:
Please use {{nts}} and no commas for the user counts so they don't not mess up sorting. For examle: {{nts|1234567}} Use {{ntsh}} with non-numeric user counts, for example: {{ntsh|0}}Unknown {{ntsh|1000}}Thousands
(Look into the wikicode if it's still not clear.)
It's a bit of a hack, but it's invisible to readers, and not too difficult to maintain; and I think the ability to sort by community size is important enough to do the extra work. Any objections against switching it back? -- Tgr 11:46, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
I didn't find any mention of browser compatibility issues at m:Help:Sorting, nor at Template talk:Sort. If there are, they should be reported at these places. But I don't think that was the problem; somebody just forgot to add the proper sorting template. (There was at least one missing in the last revision that had sorting.) -- Tgr 18:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
I would like to add http://www.powerfulintentions.com an online community based on the Law of Attraction and the home of the official forum for the 2006 film "The Secret" by Rhonda Byrne. The current membership count is 113,000. I am the CTO and part owner of this community. Not sure of the guidelines nor how to add our community to the list. Bob OConnor 17:55, 7 August 2007 (UTC) Rocnet
I'd like to see this same chart, sorted by usercount. The number of users isn't a bad way to judge the notability of a Social Networking Site. Mathiastck 20:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Dear Author,
I request you to visit my analysis on 100+ Social Networking Portals categoriezed in 6-7 categories. Analysis & ranking is given on the basis of popularity and traffic genereated by portals. Hope this link will be helpful to readers. Here is the link:
(removed external link)
I am now aware whom to ask to add external link so i am using this page.
Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Voyage2mail ( talk • contribs) 22:46, 11 April 2007 (UTC).
Azerbaijanian social network site, with over 1500 verified members, blogs, videos, photos. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.215.217.197 ( talk • contribs) 17:58, April 25, 2007 (UTC)
So long as it has a Wiki article, it can be added to this list.-- MonkeyTimeBoy 18:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
I was just recently introduced to a social networking site "Zorpia" -- I turned to Wikipedia to give me the skinny and it's not there -- anywhere -- positive or negative ???
What gives, shouldn't Zorpia at least be on this list??
Help me understand.
And maybe I'm answering my own question here. I just found a "complaint site" from Zorpia complaining that they're not on this list --- is it because they don't have an article elsewhere on Wikipedia -- and are they unable to keep an article up because there's nothing "new" about them? That seems a bit of a catch-22 --- I like this compiled list *because* of its breadth -- I want it to list ALL KNOWN MEMBERS OF THE SPECIES. But if it will only list those that have articles on Wikipedia elsewhere and somebody has decided that only unique businesses can have articles, then the two virtues are rather fighting against each other, aren't they?
85.178.14.24
07:01, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Not logical enough? Just joking, but a new website that seems to be of interest. Seems to be a cross between a Who's Who and a social networking site. Registration is open, but most of the 'members' appear to be stubs that they've created for the owner to claim. I think I joined out of the blue, but most of the people I found were famous alumni in the form of unclaimed stubs. The tagging system is attribute-based, but with cumulative voting from yourself and other members. So what are the criteria for inclusion here on Wikipedia? Shanen 00:50, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
What is this "notable" standard, anyway? It really sounds a little evil, to be honest. I thought one of the virtues of Wikipedia was the nearly unlimited data-space --- notable to whom? What gives? (please direct me to the, I'm sure, quite extensive discussion of this matter elsewhere in Wikipedia-land). 85.178.14.24
I stumbled over this, not sure if the user number is notable enough. 85.3.151.176 20:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
is it possible to add the two main social business network to the list of this article?
it's called viadeo.com and 6nergies.com ... both are more than 100 000 members
Julien (no user account on wikipedia) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.162.134.247 ( talk) 22:47, 28 April 2007 (UTC).
Hi. Editors are once again inserting sortable tables without reference to consensus on the matter, gleaned by looking at this talk page. So I've added a hidden source message in the article asking them to visit the talk page to judge consensus before they make the edit. As of this timestamp, consensus is broadly against due to incorrect number sorting, e.g. 11,000 comes above 10,000,000 which is patently wrong. A true sortable numbering table would be most welcome. Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 10:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
Can someone add www.deafbuddy.com? -- 169.139.19.106 14:49, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
Wakoopa has it's own article on wiki, so I am not sure why it would be deemed "unworthy". Furthermore, it has been mentioned on several external sites that are themselves noteworthy. One such example is the article. I will be glad to point to more articles if need be but please do not remove content that is obviously relevant. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tecmobowl ( talk • contribs).
I added izimi to the list. Where did it go? 90.199.50.13 13:34, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
OK, well I think izimi should be in the list, so how do I encourage a Wikipedia contributor to create a valid and notable article on izimi, so it can then appear in the list? I know I wouldn't do it justice. 90.199.50.13 23:58, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Updated the registered user count from 31 million to 34 million. For reference, please see the about page on Bebo which was just officially edited to say 34 million.
http://bebo.com/StaticPage.jsp?StaticPageId=2517103831
Jozecuervo 21:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Why was my contribution of GoodReads deleted? 128.101.134.38 14:59, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 22:35, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
99.246.57.23
19:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)Why was FraternityLive removed from the list? It is the largest private Greek social network on the internet!
shouldn't Rooster Teeth Networks be put into this list? - 007bond aka Matthew G aka codingmasters 07:11, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I wonder why TravelersTable.com was removed. The reason stated that it included an external link but several of these do. I think that this site deserves mentioning as it is more innovative than many others. Please advise. Thanks! Gidge-it 23:16, 18 June 2007 (UTC)gidge
TravelersTable.com is a recently launched patented business/social networking tool. Users can set up in-person meetings for any purpose including business or social networking. It offers a quick and easy way to set up meetings that offer you the opportunity to do many things including network with others in your profession, meet others in your industry, get together with fellow alumni from your high school, college or graduate school, investigate a job opportunity, introduce yourself to prospective employers or employees or potential customers, organize a play date for your kids, etc. You can set up an invite through TravelersTable.com for lunch, dinner, coffee, drinks, jogging, golf, cards, a sporting event, movie, or any other activity. What would it be considered "non-notable"? Because its just getting started?
Hi. In my opinion, this should not be part of the List, as it plainly states that it is software, offered for download through, but not operated by, the website in question. I have no idea when this addition was made, but I am sure it should be removed. I would like consensus on this in case I have missed something obvious (surely we should allow MSN or Windows Messenger if we allow IMVU - they certainly boast many more users than this one?). Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 15:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Is this an appropriate category to dump the List into? It relates only to the function of the Usercount referencing column in the article, not the article itself, as far as I can see. Too indirect for my liking. Comments? Ref (chew) (do) 16:16, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Should Windows Live Spaces not be in the list? Or are they already there under some other name? 129.142.71.166 17:01, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
I think sms.ac is also a notable social network site for mobile users. Bairuz 20:08, 12 July 2007 (UTC)bairuz
I think Naymz.com should be on the list -- they are, like LinkedIn, a way to connect with other professionals. In this case it is to establish the reputability of your name by having others vouch for you. I don't know enough about the number of user accounts, etc. to post on this page. Can some one take a look at that and determine whether it should be added to the table? -- Bill.albing 19:02, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Are y'all listing non-English sites? Here's a list www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2007/06/02/list_of_nonengl.html.-- Bill.albing 19:41, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
I see someone added Ning to the list today. While I like Ning (I've even used it to create a network of my own), and definitely see its value as a Social Networking tool, it's not a SNS in itself. But before I remove it, I thought I'd ask for a little feedback on this -- as it will set a precedent of not including such SNS "enabling" or "toolbox" sites henceforth.-- MonkeyTimeBoy 15:14, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
Since GoPets is listed, why not Neopets? -- Procrastinatrix 15:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
43 Things is a site dedicated to the listing of goals and dreams; this is the content focus. The site links users by a tagging style system. The site itself is not about tagging per say. I changed the description to include the content and did not delete the system of connecting users. Other sites have content as part of their description: music, "dark" blogs, "Green living and activism." Why would 43 Things need to be reverted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.19.46.184 ( talk • contribs) 21:55, August 6, 2007
Renspace.com, a social network for renaissance festival enthusiasts is probably deserving of mention with nearly 3,000 members to date. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lakeguy929 ( talk • contribs) 19:54, August 9, 2007 (UTC)
I was reading on PCWorld and I saw Nexo At: http://www.nexo.com/. Somebody Should Add A Wikipedia Article About It.
This is a new myspace.com like website which is very similar to it, but its just for wrestling fans. Do you think this should be added? Don.-.J 18:14, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm shocked that Youtube and del.icio.us aren't on this list. Is there a good reason why they're not? IMO, these sites (along with Flickr, which does appear on this list) defined social networking as we know it. Thoughts? — Joey Day ( talk· edits) 19:55, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Dear Author, would you please Babulous.com. Babulous.com is a new music social networking, it is based on new york and the goal is to connect fans and musicians. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alixixi ( talk • contribs) 22:09, August 25, 2007 (UTC)
I wonder why matador Travel is not on the list, i added it twice and the next time i check it it's not on the list anymore. In fact, Matador Travel already has an article on wikipedia. Can anyone tell me why? Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThinkTwist ( talk • contribs) 06:21, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Someone please user sorting screwed up by Wirefree. Doesnt work correctly anymore when trying to sort most populace site down. Here is where it worked and then where he messed it up:
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.203.64.23 ( talk • contribs) 17:06, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
A completely useless page. It is incomplete and contains more unknown and websites that are not worth to be mentioned, solely because they have had the time to write an article about themselves. There are not always internal pages yet on Wikipedia for other websites that would be worth to be mentioned - and some of those website do have some sort of Wikipedia article but are clearly not worth to be mentioned or listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toby78 ( talk • contribs) 22:29, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I would like to see that all the articles this page links to have a website infobox. I would also like to see that under type, they all say social network service, because social network has a dablink at the top:
You list did not have Helloworld! I've been using this site for sometime and I find it most enjoyable! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.234.185.87 ( talk) 15:54, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
According to the article on the German wikipedia, it had a recorded 1,390,000 members on Sept. 2007. This is quite an increase from last year. 420,000 members (IVW December 2006) (IVW: Informationsgemeinschaft zur Feststellung der Verbreitung von Werbeträgern)
I added Lokalisten to the list of sites only to have my change rolled back. Is this because I didn't have an English article to link to? Thanks. Please don't delete me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.61.24.8 ( talk) 21:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
Isn't one of the main purposes for this page the user count column? The foundations for every claim that site has users were wiped a few days ago. 66.93.192.222 13:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
The "Registered Users" tab sorts the list alphabetically, not numerically. Please correct this. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.102.254.33 ( talk) 04:45, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Facebook is reported to have offered $85 million (£41 million) to buy Zhanzuo.com, its largest Chinese counterpart, which has an estimated seven million active users and a popular base among students. http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details/zhanzuo.com ????????? ````` Spencerk 07:55, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
but its the largest Chinese social networking website?! Spencerk ( talk) 05:05, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
This is a valid social networking site helping to promote discussion about climate change. I think it is valid for this list, it has its own wikipedia article and it is a valid social networking site. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wakeyjamie ( talk • contribs) 14:05, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Why would you dispute that distributed teams of learners interacting at Wikiversity forms a social networking site? Wikiversity is a social network of teams of learners actively seeking participation. cc Unitedstatesian talk page Lazyquasar ( talk) 20:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I just reviewed the main page of the english Wikiversity [3]. I see nothing in the introductory descriptions stating "self study" or applicable to only such with the possible exception of "exploring personal goals". There is a lot about joining learning activities and learning communities. It is clearly oriented toward group activities and collaboration. The Wikiversity is not limited to wiki. Links can be provided to demonstrate this via IRC channels, mailing lists, blogs, email, etc. Indeed, most are available by design from the main page. I think the deleting editors here have allowed their understanding of how Wikipedia works to bias their evaluation of how Wikiversity functions. Again, I would like to hear what specific steps beyond verifying that learning also takes place at Wikiversity by intention and design the deleting editors have taken to verify Wikiversity does not use "social networking" as a primary means of building the learning communities it is designed to support. Lazyquasar ( talk) 04:05, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm thinking we should create a template to leave on users talk pages for those who add non-notable sites here, you know the ones we remove several dozen times a week. I'm not sure there is one, and I don't think the spam template really covers the issue here. Before I create it, has anyone seen one already in existence?-- Crossmr ( talk) 19:24, 22 December 2007 (UTC)