Talk:Balatarin

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please discuss adding controversial content here first.

[edit] Abuse Report

I didn't quite understand the meaning of this senstence:

Sometimes users complaining Balatarin managers for administrating "Abuse Reports".

It's Baladar's job to administer abuse reports. Did you mean they sometimes don't respond to abuse reports as reporters hoped? In that case, please write it under "criticism." Dochar (talk) 16:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

diggeh.com This article is on Balatarin.com specifically. Diggeh.com is not an alternative to balatarin, and adding a one-line text about it under a new section is inappropriate.Dochar 08:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Diggeh

Virtually any wikipedia entry for any service or product has a mention of competitors or alternatives. This entry even mentions that there has been criticism of balatarin and such. It is only fitting that an alternative out there is mentioned. not advertised, simply mentioned for the sake of getting that important fact out there (that balatarin is not the only persian version of digg) and perhaps open the door to comparison

ّAs you obviously know, diggeh is not even a known website, leave alone being a "leading competitor." And it is advertising. Dochar 17:13, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I think thats a matter of personal opinion and not objective. Nor, is it a basis for its deletion even if it were true. If there is another persian version of digg, which you believe IS in fact balatarin's leading competitor, please present it 208.179.110.201 17:38, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

How can diggeh be the "leading" competitor, when it is so young? Then what about plak or others? How do you say diggeh is the "leading" competitor? Any references for that? As you might know, Wikipedia only welcomes objective views. The fact that Diggeh is yours doesn't make it "leading". Moreover, balatarin is not a mere Persian digg. The only common thing between these two is that they both gather links; how they do it is absolutely different. The concept of energy, negative votes, and hot topics are just some of the new ideas in Balatarin. Dochar 18:24, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Two things. It is A competitor, and the only one that can be found. Thus, as far as can be determined it is the leading competitor, unless there is another (at least). Secondly, the fact that it is the only competitor, even if you don't want to consider it "leading" qualifies it as an "alternative," a competitor nonetheless, and thus that information should be made apparent to those researching Balatarin, their industry, and market share. 208.179.110.201 07:07, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you even read what I write? I said what about plak, aftab, and other balatarin-likes? diggeh is not the only one, you just don't know about the other websites. And a question. Do they cite Microsoft Office's competitors on it's Wikipedia page, the way you advertised your website (devoting a whole section, with a single line, to brag about your product). The correct way is to add a link to diggeh.com's Wikipedia page in "See Also" section. Why don't you do that? Write an article on diggeh.com and your link would be absolutely welcome. Please respect Wikipedia's integrity. Dochar 07:32, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I would take your no-response as your contest to removal of the added section. Dochar 19:48, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

once again. show me a link to other sites. if you like we can add those too.208.179.109.199 16:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

[Plak http://itblog.blogfa.com/post-191.aspx], [Oyax http://www.oyax.com], and Alef, which I cannot find its link. In any case, a one-line description doesn't qualify for a whole new section. As I said, you can add it in the "See Also" part. Also, please take a look at Microsoft Office's article and see if they devote one whole section to their competitors. As you you, this distracts the reader from the main focus of the article. The article about Balatarin is to talk about Balatarin. Please do read what I said before. Dochar 17:36, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

a blog entry and a non-niche bookmarking site are not the links I asked for 208.179.109.199 01:44, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TODO

• live page
• filtering and new addresses
• newly published regulations
• updating logo and screenshots

I've updated the article to reflect the above (plus many more) Dochar 00:33, 17 June 2007 (UTC)