Talk:Quidco

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is it just me, or does this quidco entry read more like an advert than a balanced article?

I have removed the deletion entry and below I will try and explain why.

• Firstly this is not self promotion, I have created and submitted content to several Reward websites articles and it has been said that I am "self promoting" all of them, yet I would have to have a stake in all these companies if this were the case and that's unlikely.

• Second quidco and rpoints are very notable, an article by Martin Lewis in The Guardian was dedicated to them but I am having problems finding the actual article and can only find references to it. I will try and use my uni newspaper subscription to find it.

• Note that Paypal is a company, is highly notable in part because it's owned by ebay. Epinions is also owned by ebay, so forfills the same criteria. I also don't see why these websites should be any more notable than the alternatives offered above that are less popular at the moment because they don't have the weight of a large corporation behind them. I believe wikipedia is used to inform people in an unbiased manner

• There is contraversy surrounding the way these businesses operate and there is little information about this on the web, certainly very little in an unbiased form.

Supposed 12:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

This page is an advert, simple as. If it wasn't blatant advertising, you would no problem with removing your external link. But I bet you dont. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Griffinsbridge (talk • contribs) .

• This is blatent SPAM...I notice on their website (Quidco.com) they have an anti-spam policy yet Quidco obviously have no morals themselves when it comes to spamming other websites like this. Wikipedia is a brilliant site and it's companies like this that ruin it for the majority. Take your SPAM elsewhere Quidco. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 210.193.16.66 (talk • contribs) .

One way to balance the article would be to include criticism from reliable sources. Does anyone know of any newspaper articles (or other reports) that have criticized them? FreplySpang 01:08, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

The poster has a point. This article is trash. I've done what I can with it, but the author is difficult. I've got a few related points started, but this article is NOT on my priority list. If someone would like to spend some time with the author, it could be much improved. I'm unlikely to. --meatclerk 08:54, 12 November 2006 (UTC)