Talk:Social bookmarking

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Internet Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to the Internet. For more information, visit the project page.
??? This article has not yet received a class rating on the class scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.

External link decrease in value? I had left a link to a guide on del.icio.us I wrote that many people found helpful. Why was it taken down?

Contents

[edit] Social Bookmarking vs Social News

I don't really think Digg/reddit/Netscape/Pligg etc are "social bookmarking" and are instead "social news". However, for a while after Digg's origin, the explanation on the right hand side of the page claimed to be social bookmarking, and so some people still refer to it in that way. To me, "bookmarks" implies that the user can save whatever they like and social news sites can punish users for sharing things they don't find appropriate, etc. This is definitely not the use I had in mind when I called added "social bookmarking" as a byline on del.icio.us (and I believe thus coining the term.) Perhaps someone could clean up the entry to reflect this? JoshuaSchachter 08:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I highly agree with JoshuaSchachter's opinion. Digg, Reddit, Mixx and Newsvine are social news services, and not social bookmarking services. If someone doesn't provide a good reason for keeping "Social News" redirecting to here, I plan to take the initiative to separate them soon. theGeoffMeister (talk) 06:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree too (of course), but see the discussion over at the other article - do we have enough real sources to back up making a distinction yet? Dreamyshade (talk) 09:24, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What should go in the list of services?

Can we get a clarification about what is and isn't appropriate in the "Some social bookmarking services" section of this article? The section had included a long and useful list of services, which was removed, then some of them were put back in. Is the right thing to create freestanding articles about each of the services, then link to those articles? Thanks. Prentiss Riddle

IMHO that tools list should be put back - this article is about the websites themselves. If there is a seemingly useful NPOV article like digg it should be linked instead, but stuff like BlinkList and Furl clutter Wikipedia much more than an external link here. (and are much more prone to POV problems). Red links are even more annoying.
However, it might be better to create a page like List of online bookmarking websites and put the links there. Categories like "General-purpose", "Academic", etc... should also help. As for link spamming - it's still happenning... Eug 23:46, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

I think a better description of what social bookmarking is, how it works, etc. is more important than a corporate history. The links to the services are fine as examples of the general concept. The corporate history could be left out, all the "external links" reduced to the aforementioned list. - Beowulf314159 17:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Some observations:

  1. I don't see where DotHat have sharing capabilities, I don't think it's social.
  2. Pligg, is and open source digg style engine, hence there are over 100 of them. So maybe instead of listing thoses that use it, like GoKoDo MyBookmarks or Tutorialisme, would it not be better to just list Pligg?
  3. For information: IndiaGram is a an enhaced Scuttle engine.
  4. About Bloglines, personaly I don't consider RSS bookmarking as social bookmarks, it's not an HTML page and the source is different. But then where to but the limite? There are videos bookmarks (but that's on an HTML page) ycc2106 21:32, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I have found an existing article List of social software which contained a section for Social bookmarking. As a list article is a more appropriate place for the list, I have moved the entire section to that article. Now this article can focus on writing about social bookmarking instead of being a spam target. --AbsolutDan (talk) 15:16, 11 June 2006 (UTC)


About Oneview and History dates:

The internet archive have been sharing links since 1996. Isn't that a form of social bookmarking? Incase I've collected all the starting dates, a programme language of many services here. --ycc2106 16:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] PopUrls.com and TheWebList.net

In the external links:


Someone User:86.56.236.146 changed this to:

  • PopUrls.com aggregates the top social bookmarking services.

Why? Having some healthy competiton and giving users some alternatives is bad?


See: What Thomas Marban (creator of Popurls) had to say about TheWebList.

GeoFan49 05:31, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


REVERTED to include both PopUrls.com and TheWebList.net in External Links

67.107.133.3 19:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)


REVERTED AGAIN to include both PopUrls.com and TheWebList.net in External Links


146.74.231.113 03:07, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Needs examples, not just comments about the idea of it

Could we maybe have a brief overview of what the main actors are on this market and what their specificities are, please? That would help, and never mind if we get a couple too many, that's better than too few. Jules.LT 16:02, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


agreed. 71.232.108.228 23:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Along with an overview of bookmarking, please tell me why it is important that I know what it is and how I can use it.

[edit] Request to add external link to 100+ Social Bookmarking Services

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 advertising 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) 22:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Redundant

The first sentence in the "introduction" section and "functional overview" section are virtually identical. Could these sections be merged? --166.70.188.26 18:45, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External Links

Can we come up with a good guideline on what belongs in the External Links section? I've removed a couple entries which I considered linkspam but don't want to keep doing this arbitrarily. --NeilN 02:07, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

I think you're doing the right thing - we don't need an external links section here, really. If there's a useful external link, we could probably integrate it as a reference, which the article needs quite a bit more of. Dreamyshade 05:14, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Hello, can I make a suggestion for a external link ? http://forum.vbulletinsetup.com/f7/over-500-social-networking-sites-can-3548.html

Thanks -Brandon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.254.195.146 (talk) 06:02, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] BBC Links here

Slightly offtopic, but a help page for the BBC News website links to this article. --h2g2bob (talk) 00:22, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Publicness and Privateness

The introduction section says

These bookmarks are usually public, but depending on the service's features, may be saved privately, shared only with specific people or groups, shared only inside certain networks, or another combination of publicness and privateness.

I know what is meant by publicness and privateness, but as to my knowledge, these are not proper –let alone correct– words. --Invenio 07:04, 16 October 2007 (UTC) tc

Heh, sounds like most dictionaries agree with you. I changed those words to "public" and "private". Better? Dreamyshade 09:58, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Most popular

I removed something about del.icio.us being the most popular. I know it's a blunt tool but Alexa doesn't seem to think so - by some margin.[1] TreveXtalk 17:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Just seen this detailed examination - "it’s probably safe to say that Digg does get equal or a bit more traffic than Del.icio.us" TreveXtalk 17:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I should have cited that assertion when I put it in there. Here's my explanation. I agree, Digg is definitely more popular than Delicious. But I differentiate between "social bookmarking" and "social news" services – I think of Delicious and Digg as different but related types of things. Most of this "social bookmarking" article describes Delicious, Magnolia, Simpy, etc.; it doesn't really describe Digg or reddit. See the top of this page (Talk:Social_bookmarking#Social Bookmarking vs Social News) for some of the discussion about separating the two types. Sounds like I need to try digging up some sources again. Dreamyshade (talk) 18:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)