Talk:Craigslist
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Is it craigslist or Craigslist? The article has multiple uses of each, which is correct? I'll go ahead and change everything to uppercase. If this is incorrect then please add the article to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (technical restrictions) by using the boilerplate Template:Wrongtitle. See Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Wrongtitle for more examples of articles with lowercase titles and how they are dealt with. Cacophony 22:52, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)
- After browsing the pages at craigslist.org/about/, it appears that the site is consistently called craigslist but the new non-profit is called Craigslist Foundation. I'm going to change it back to craigslist here, and add the wrongtitle template. I know that some people have a big problem with starting sentences with a lowercase letter; I think that in the case of nouns which are explicitly lowercase it is acceptable. I also think it would also be reasonable to capitalize the word at the beginning of sentences, to be syntactically correct English, but I think the word should remain lowercase at the beginning of the first sentence at the least.
- Other articles I've edited with the exact same issue include del.icio.us, qmail, and djbdns. ~leif ☺ HELO 00:10, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
The "wrong title" template should be removed. Grammatically, even something that is not normally capitalized is capitalized when it begins a sentence, paragraph or article. Thus, "craigslist" should be rendered "Craigslist" at the top of the article and whenever it begins a sentence.
- Agreed. I have capitalized instances at the beginning of sentences. It's a basic rule of written English: all sentences must begin with a capital letter. Nohat 06:09, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
-
- Per the newly-agreed guidelines at Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks), I have capitalized all instances of Craigslist. Nohat 09:56, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Status of organization running craigslist
The article is rather confusing and unclear. It talks about being incorporated and eBay buying a stake, but also discusses Craigslist Foundation as a non-profit. Does this foundation really have anything to do with craigslist, other than having some of the same people involved? Its website discusses helping "emerging nonprofit organizations" pretty generically, and doesn't indicate that the foundation actually helps fund or operate craigslist itself. However, someone could certainly walk away with that impression from this article. --Michael Snow 01:49, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)
[edit] why remove erotic services?
reverting the edit where someone removed "erotic services" on the list of ads that craigslist supplies until someone can give me a good reason not to have it. i'd say this is one of the more well known and infamous things that craigslist provides.
[edit] Craigslist has been offline all day today (Feb. 11, 2006)
Is there a reason why????
[edit] Ads beamed into space?
In July 2005, Craigslist beamed over 2 million classified ads into deep space (one light year) in the near future, Er, so were the messages beamed in July 2005 or not? Perhaps July 2005 is just when Craiglist won the rights, or announced their intentions to beam ads into space. This should be clarified, and if they didn't beam them into space until later, that date should be given.
[edit] Removal of a section
I don't believe Craigslist would want to advertise that a bunch of their userbase got pranked, and the links seem to check out. Plus, the guy said he got interviewed by the New York Times, so we'll have to see how that turns out. I don't want some lame-@## edit war to start, so I thought it'd be good to bring it up in the talk page first.--198.82.92.132 17:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
- This isn't a hoax, I know that for sure, because I know about it second-hand. There's sources out there, I think I have them somewhere. WIll be back soon. 66.231.130.102 17:59, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
- Don't you know? You're not allowed to mention Encyclopedia Dramatica on Wikipedia. It has several embarrassing pictures of Wikipedia admins <removed link to attack site> and as retribution, they won't let the article exist without meeting higher standards than John Seigenthaler's page. Even mentions of it in other pages aren't permitted, it goes against the Wikipedia hive-mind. Until this latest notable piece of internet drama turns up on the front page of the New York Times and the Washington Post (because anything on the internet is obviously "not verifiable", it has to be in a print newspaper or it's not good enough), Encyclopedia Dramatica is going to get the wilfully-ignorant "not notable" from the people who hate it. 195.173.23.111 08:22, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- Something tells me Wikipedia would relish the note, given all the negative publicity. Also, added the specific Washington statute Fortuny willingly violated. Of note: the NYT article is reportedly coming tomorrow as per waxy.org's investigation. This definitely deserves to stay in the CL section, as it is a clear compromising of an entire section of their system, with or without direct links to ED.
- Your legal interpretation is not really enough. Let any legal goings-on work their way out first. 66.231.130.102 10:34, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] dead lnks
I've removed the former links 8 & 9, to stories of the controversy with Live 8. They seem to be dead. DGG 06:35, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] List of cities section in article
Does the section List of cities serve any purpose? An up-to-date version is always available at the official web site. Besides, this seems to be contrary to WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. I propose the section be removed, and information about the first ten cities be rolled into the background and/or significant events sections. — EncMstr 02:27, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- As no one objected, I've made the section significantly more maintainable and useful. — EncMstr 10:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
