Talk:Yellowikis

AFD (2005-09-02)

This article survived a nomination for deletion on September 2, 2005. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yellowikis (old). Kappa 16:18, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

AFD (2005-10-07)

This article was nominated for deletion on 7 October 2005. The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

--Angr/_{tɔk tə mi} 19:48, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

AFD (2006-01-15)

This article was nominated for deletion on January 15 2006. The result of the discussion was keep. An archived record of this discussion can be found here.

Further reading

The "further reading" section contains "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material not already in the article." and also helps to establish notability. Kappa 00:37, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

• Than write some prose to support them, and any that meet the standards of Wikipedia:Reliable sources can stay. And note Wikipedia:External links clearly says, "Ideally this content should be integrated into the Wikipedia article, then the link would remain as a reference." These links have been here since early October. I'll check back in a couple of days.
  brenneman^(t)(c) 01:08, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
  • If you want to integrate them, go right ahead. They add value whether they are integrated or not. Kappa 01:46, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
  • This is not the "References" section, nor the "External links" section. It is the "Further reading" section. Uncle G 03:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Why do I feel like there is something else going on here? I'm prone to stepping on toes, but these reactions seem out to proportion?

• Re: Kappa's comment, I don't believe it's "make something conform to a guideline in a manner chosen by someone else." I'm choosing the method that I think is appropiate. If you want to integrate any that are Reliable sources^TM, I'd love that.
• Re: Uncle G's comment, if there is a page that details what can go under "Further reading", please do let me know. I'm wrong all the time, and don't mind at all being demonstrated to be so. Barring that, these are external links, and whatever we call them they should conform to the guidelines that cover external links.

brenneman^(t)(c) 06:06, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Failed experiment?

I went nosing around over there and Willy has hit them hard. EVERYTHING in the recent changes log was a page move to the "on wheels!" version (with a few moves to "...on wheels! on wheels!" or even 3x) I saw no signs of anyone trying to counteract it. Where am I going with this? It's possible this idea will fail, despite the interest it garnered in the media. If it does, the article will probably want to delve into that because this is a notable idea even if it doesn't succeed. IMHO. ++Lar: t/c 04:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Legal threat from yell.com

Interesting breaking news here: Legal threat to wiki listing site and from the yellowikis site: Yell Limited have accused Yellowikis of "Passing Off"
--George100 09:04, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Broken at the moment

www.yellowikis.org is broken at the moment. It seems to be trying to redirect to 'owikis.org.uk'. Weird. I guess this is just some kind of mistake by the webmaster. Or did yell succeed in shutting them down? -- Nojer2 14:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

If you are based in the UK you get redirected to a blank owikis.org.uk page. This is the new name for Yellowikis in the UK. The rest of the world sees Yellowikis as normal--Payo 23:22, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't this article perhaps be deleted now? Given that the web site is still not functioning, nor is owikis, it seems to suggest the site itself was always minor & crummy and hence non-notable other than the legal dispute with Yell. And such legal disputes can be very minor (large companies send out legal letters to potential trademark infringers all the time however tiny they are) - i.e. the dispute itself needn't make the site notable. Ben Finn 13:51, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Site Inactive This site is currently offline. This holding page can appear for a number of different reasons including:-

The site may still be under development, and due to appear soon.

The domain name may be in the process of transfer and awaiting DNS updates.

The site may have been taken offline due to non payment or breach of Positive Internet terms and conditions.

The site owner may need to remove or replace this standard index.html file with one of their own.

Doesn't look like a UK problem to me - the entire site is gone. Digifiend (talk) 10:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

5th Afd - kept again

See - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yellowikis (5th nomination) of 22 May 2008. No consensus to delete for the 5th time - Peripitus (Talk) 11:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)