Talk:MySpace
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archives |
---|
[edit] Spotlight Contest
i had entered info about the very popular Spotlight Contest on myspace in the Other section, and it was deleted. I think it should not be deleted because it is very popular and even praised by tom himself. Mcoop06 12:49, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- Hello! We thank you for your suggestion! First, please sign an messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). Second, the topic you mention (a picture comment contest? I tried to read the page, but it made me dizzy) is not big enough to be verifiable in third-party sources, which is the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. -- Chris chat edits essays 11:24, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
There should be another shortcut for signing messages, its so typical american to chose the ~ because its easy to get ON THEIR KEYBAORD. In most of the rest of the world its fucking difficult to get that character because you have to press multiple keys. You should allow **** as well. IceHunter 15:51, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
im sorry bout that...im not that smart around this stuff. Id figured i would just help and grow the myspace article. if its not reliable enough i understand, i was just like WHERE DID ALL MY STUFF GO!? i was kinda mad but i Understand. thanks! Mcoop06 12:48, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Security
Hi, I was thinking of adding to the security section, about the recent JavaScript loophole that was made public that allowed users to use JavaScript code on their profiles. http://profileviewz.com/ was selling a working MySpace Tracker that allowed you to get the FriendID of the user browsing the MySpace profile with the JavaScript code on it, thus allowing you to get their username, profile name, email address (though cookie data), profile details, pictures, etc. This loophole was patched some time during the first 2 weeks of October (date unknown). Roozbenjrox 22:21, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Myspace To Disable Links?
I heard in several forums that Myspace will be implementing changes which will disable links to any of the numberous Myspace help sites out there such as http://www.premadelayouts.biz Has anyone else heard of this, is there any truth to it. It seems in my opinion that these help sites actually help Myspace by making it more fun to use so why would Myspace want to intentionally hinder these sites?
Minnseoelite 09:32, 27 October 2006 (UTC)Jason
- Um, what does this have to do with the MySpace article? —tregoweth (talk) 11:28, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
Because this relates directly to Myspace and could potentially effect all users which use such sites which is about 90% of them.
-
- Regardless, it's neither a fact nor verifiable, so it's not going in until it is. But MySpace can't "disable links" to just certain sites. Why would they? -- Chris chat edits essays 16:47, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I'm thinking this is spam. --Hypertext 07:25, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- I'm thinking you're a jackass. Well, I don't like MySpace anyway, because I feel that it promotes satanism. Well, not satanism. More just being incredibly dull. Same thing. Omegaultima 17:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
-
The only links that have been disabled are the ones added by a recent worm that led users to phishing sites. I don't think what you heard is true. --Mrrightguy10 01:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] China
I(and my compatriots) can no longer access myspace in China. I can see my homepage, but not the profiles. If a block has been put on myspace, like there had been on wikipedia, then it should be a good addition. On the other hand, it might be my school, city, or region blocking me out; so I don't know. ABart26 16:38, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- If it's documented in the press or any reliable source then it would be worth noting in the article. But without some sort of verifiable source for this, then it's like hearsay in court..inadmissable here. ju66l3r 17:18, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- Could also be the Chinese goverment, they are very strict on free speach, & all its advocates I.E. networking sites. But thats my two cents. Evicorator666 03:46, 9 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Copyright
If I was to start a band page on myspace and upload their songs surely that is a copyright violation right? 195.93.21.36 21:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
- Please leave this page for the discussion of the MySpace article on Wikipedia. This is not a chat space/forum for MySpace questions or legalities. ju66l3r 17:19, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I would have thought it is an important point for the article to make...—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.159.109.130 (talk • contribs) .
- It probably would be a copyright violation. This is probably explained in the copyright article - copyright 101 if you will. As it happens, a similar thing is mentioned in the YouTube article, but only because it has been highlighted in the mainstream media. If there is similar coverage of similar problems on MySpace then it could probably go in, but there would have to be references. It is not for this article to explain copyright law. -- zzuuzz (talk) 23:46, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
http://www.out-law.com/page-7302 - Might be a case coming up? Francium12 16:41, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
On October 30, 2006 it was announced that MySpace will use Gracenote's audio fingerprinting technology in order to prohibit users from downloading copyrighted music to the site. MySpace and Gracenote have teamed up in order to counter the copyright problems MySpace is faced with. Though MySpace claims they will eventually be selling the music of unsigned artists, the large music companies seem to be completely ignorant regarding how they should deal with the problem. Gracenote may be of help, but why is it that MySpace and the music industry havent teamed up and negotiated lucrative deals that would enable MySpace to sell signed artists' copyrighted music?
- Here's another copyright story MySpace sued by Universal Music -- zzuuzz (talk) 23:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] # of users
i had entered the amount of users currently signed up to myspace.com. someone had deleted it. i think it should stay up to show people the popularity of the website, and plus its not hurting anyone. its just more info on the popular website Mcoop06 21:54, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
- On what are you basing this count? Unless it is coming from a third-party verifiable source, then it's either original research (like "I went to Tom Anderson's profile" or "I made a new profile and looked at that number in the corner") or potentially biased (like "I got it from MySpace"). The latter is better than the former by far, but both have their potential issues and shouldn't be the basis for inclusion of this information in the article. The article already states how many accounts there were on a specific date in a news article. It also gives the rough rate at which accounts are being created. If someone wants to ballpark how many accounts there are today, they can use those two pieces of information to get an estimate. Without proper sourcing for this info, it doesn't belong in the article. ju66l3r 22:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)
I am basing this information directly from Tom's page. It is a rough estimate of the volume of the site, thats why. Mcoop06 05:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- It has previously been discussed on this talk page (maybe now in the archive) that Tom's "number of friends" is biased to only those that leave Tom as a friend, etc. It does not accurately reflect the number of users and as I mention above, a report of the account volume and growth rate is included in the article text. I'm not sure it's pertinent in the infobox (especially since there's no way to get a valid number and it's changing so frequently). ju66l3r 07:05, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Why
Why do they have pretend characters like Borat and the Chancellor Adam Sutler from V for Vendetta on Myspace? --66.218.13.66 05:09, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Please leave this page for the discussion of the MySpace article and not general questions about MySpace. Thanks. ju66l3r 07:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
- Because MySpace's primary function is as a marketing tool Bwithh 02:45, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
I think people actually just MAKE them to look cool and be famous. Like, all fake paris hiltons and stuff. Mightyxjess 06:59, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Myspace Phishing
I have recently seen on Myspace that there have been alot of profiles getting hacked because of phishing sites. Now this is nothing new but the thing that I don't care for is that I have heard that Myspace is trying to blame Myspace resource site owners for most of this. As you may know getting a profile with thousands of friends can be very valuable to a Myspace resource site owner. But that does not give justification for blamming resource site owners for the problem. Why would any site owner who's Myspace resource site depends on Myspace want to do anything to place that in a bad situation.
66.188.181.101 01:14, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Er... Your point? Do you have a source for "mySpace blaming resource sites"? Sorry, but I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to say. -- Chrissperanza! chat edits 22:03, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
These were caused by a worm that accessed people's profiles through a vulnerability in Quicktime. Myspace recently made a patch available t users that is not available through the Apple site. --Mrrightguy10 01:19, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Trivia
One extra piece of trivia for the site, which may be worthy of inclusion:
There is a UK band called The Sunset Gun (http://www.sunsetgun.co.uk), who have a song called "Sit On MySpace and Tell Me That You Love Me", which appears to be about the lonliness of MySpace's so-called "social networking". If John B's, Weird Al Yankovic's and Hollywood Undead's songs are all mentioned, I think The Sunset Gun's song would make a worthwhile addition.
--Samwaltonyeah 13:16, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Not really. Weird Al and co. are notable, and their work widely known. Who are this band? Never heard of them. And no, that's not because I'm stuck in Varietyland. I'm in the UK myself. If the song ever reaches prominence, then it would be worth mentioning. Cain Mosni 22:09, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Current event
This article has a {{currentevent}} tag at the top [1]. Am I right in thinking there is no reason for it? -- zzuuzz (talk) 23:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Granted - as one editor put it when removing the template - MySpace is not an event, current or otherwise. However, as the subject of the article it is very much subject to change. It both influences, and is influenced by current events. It may not fit the bill in terms of actual newsworthy events, but in social historic terms, which take a very much longer view, and which form the majority of the substance of the article it is both current and an event in history. In all those respects (and as the template admonishes) the content of the article is very fluid and as changeable as if it were a current event in news terms. Cain Mosni 22:16, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Myspace Profile Advertising
For the past couple of months, I've noticed an increasing number of profiles ment for "advertising" such as Borat, Final Fantasy XII, and Wal-Mart. That's my guess of how the "Featured Profile" area on the homeplace got used. Perhaps we should put in a section on the article stating that many companies are starting to "advertise" their buisness or products by making special profiles? It could say that it's an attempt for the them advertise to a large online community (Myspace). mortified_penguin contact 04:39, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Good idea, find a news article or two (I'm busy). -- Chrissperanza! chat edits 05:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- Bad idea unless you can find a reputable published source that you can cite to qualify a) the observation (relatively easy), and b) how many is many (much more difficult). You can probably find mentions of specific products, services or releases that have been promoted through MySpace, but an unbiased assessment of the volume in general is going to be very hard to come by, I imagine. Cain Mosni 22:06, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Danger Section Should Be Added
There should be a section about how dangerous Myspace is in the article.Mr.Rachel 20:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- Calling it "dangerous" would be POV. There is some coverage in the article of criticisms and controversies in the area of security and child safety. *Dan T.* 20:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
- What makes MySpace any more "dangerous" than allowing children unfettered access to the 'net in the first place? WP:NOT a life manual... Cain Mosni 22:03, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
the Myspace has had a lot of negative remarks about how unsafe it is for children well the parents should block the site from their children if they are so worried about it. And futhermore parents need to not blame myspace for what their children they should blame themselves if they have a problem because they are the ones that are supposed to be supervising their children not the website! Brandy70.159.60.226 18:32, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] How much is MySpace founder Chris DeWolfe worth?
I'm trying to figure out how much MySpace founder Chris DeWolfe is worth. I found these SEC documents:
http://www.secinfo.com/dSEyn.zFa.htm?Find=dewolfe#16thPage
The above SEC filing states that Chris DeWolfe owns 114,825 of InterMix, which is less than 1% of the company. InterMix was bought for $580M in cash (or the equivalent of $12 per share of InterMix shares) by News Corp as specified in this document:
http://www.secinfo.com/d141Nx.z17Xe.d.htm?Find=dewolfe&Line=79#Line79
So is it accurate to assume Chris DeWolfe made $1.3M from the MySpace deal?
Also see discussion here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science#Finance_.2F_SEC_question:_How_much_is_MySpace_founder_Chris_DeWolfe_worth.3F
[edit] Moving Page
Anyone mind if I move to myspace, as you can see from the site (and the image in the article) it's 'myspace' not 'MySpace'. — Deon555talkdesk 04:52, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Yes. The lowercase is used only in the logo. In all other references, MySpace is camelCase. -- Chris is me 17:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Biased section title
"MySpace and professionalism" should read "MySpace and employment" —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.19.173.43 (talk • contribs) 22:46, 3 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] Ref Fix
The section "Brad Greenspan / The Free My Space Report" needs a major ref fix. All the refs are external links, so can someone please fix them? (I'm too lazy) Thanxs. =D Jumping cheese Cont@ct 10:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Message Removed
Trolling. Message added here [2], removed here [3] — Deon555talkdesk 22:45, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
myspaces is a joke they have very proagative photos and dumb-butts on ther
myspace is a place where you can set you account to private and alow only the people you aprove to be your friends so ha butthead
- Mmm... trolling. Yes, setting your profile to private will make it secure, and no one in the world will be able to see it but your friends. Remember, MySpace is the most secure site in the whole world.-- Chris is me 15:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] I'm writing a research report...
My thesis statement: Putting an age requirement on MySpace will have no effect. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.20.64.77 (talk) 13:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC).
- Well, good luck. Basically, you'd need to find evidence that people have tried and failed to do so with other networks. I'd start with orkut. Regardless, Wikipedians aren't going to help you much, and you probably can't publish your paper here, since the conclusion you derive will be partially original research. -- Chris is me 15:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] There's a groups section on the MySpace article.
Should I be allowed to post a despcription of the largest group on myspace with a link to that group? This is a popular group. I thought I posted something like this before in the groups section of the myspace article on wikipedia, but...it seems to have been deleted. It must be a misunderstanding. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Baltimoretom (talk • contribs) 15:26, 15 December 2006 (UTC).
- I don't personally think it's too imprtant or relevant, nor is there a way of verifying that in a third party source. -- Chris is me 16:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't personally think you're too important. You should be deleted too. ;-)