Talk:List of social networking services

This article was nominated for deletion on 2006-07-21. The result of the discussion was KEEP.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of social networking services article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

Archives

Sprotected

The article is currently semi-protected, meaning new or anonymous users cannot edit the article. Users should discuss what articles belong on the article, but as the note says on the page, only wesbites that have their own article on Wikipedia should be added to the list. Users are welcome to request unprotection. Iolakana•T 19:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

www.akaneon.com

A social networking site made of all real people. Unlimited messages, comments, adds, etc.

Started on Sep. 9, 06. Currently has over 4200 users and counting.

Completely free. Click here to visit.

Alternatively, you can Go here to go right to the signup page.

What about Squidoo

I did not see Squidoo on the list (www.squidoo.com) and was wondering if there was a reason why this site was not included? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Socialmedia (talk • contribs) .

There appears to be an article about it. I think the reason is because it was not included in the social network site category. After looking at it, I personally don't think it is a social networking site. --real _decimic 02:51, 21 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Playahead

A famous swedish social network is Playahead. I am not sure of how many memebers there is, but I know its big in Sweden. Nearly all my swedish friends have it. You should add it to your list. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.18.205.9 (talk • contribs) .

Facebook now public, needs changed.

Facebook has now gone public, and anyone can join. This should be edited on the main page. Wikihelper7 16:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thank you for the correction. Ashibaka tock 23:44, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm.. and maybe adding to the explanation: (formely colleges)) That would explain the dinamics of that network.

Experts-Exchange.com

Experts Exchange has been around for 10 years and connects IT Experts with Members to provide solutions to their problems. They have a great ranking on Alexa and have a proven audience. Mmuncy123 04:51, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But they are not an SNS. Ashibaka tock 00:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are the earliest form for social networking -- experts communicate with experts and members and they help one another out and network together -- there is a community and it is a strong community. You are allowed to interact and provide content, make suggestions and rate questions.Mmuncy123 16:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An SNS is a website like Orkut or Myspace, not a forum. Ashibaka tock 21:05, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sportsgist.com

There is a great website called sportsgist.com. It is a social networking site for athletes and fans. Roger Staubach is behind it and some of the country's best athletes and trainers are on the site. It is interesting to see what they are blogging about. http://www.sportsgist.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bdonaghy (talk • contribs) 04:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Web Biographies

http://www.WebBiographies.com is a memoir/blogging/journaling/genealogy site that was recently launched. Has a couple thousand members now, needs to be listed here. It's target demographic is older people--like a MySpace for grown-ups.

No evidence of notability. Ashibaka tock 00:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, here is a list of articles, from the likes of Business Week, the San Francisco Chronicle, The Rocky Mountain News (a branch of the Denver Post) and others who have recently run stories featuring Web Biographies as unique among Social Networks--you can list registration as "open" too:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/08/20/BUG11KJLTK1.DTL http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/tech/article/0,2777,DRMN_23910_4626191,00.html http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/sep2006/tc20060925_328758.htm Dsargent, Oct. 5

"Web Biographies is a Denver startup that lets people write their life stories and store them on the company's Web site for annual fees of $25 to $85. " That doesn't sound like a social network to me. In fact, IMHO to list such a website would be spam. If you would like another opinion please list this page on WP:3O. Ashibaka tock 19:38, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They've initiated a free account since then. Check the website (where "Free" is quite prominent), or sign up for a page, like I did, and see for yourself. See mine at: http://bio.webbiographies.com/dsargent . Dsargent Oct 8

Listed for arbitration/mediation. 19:57, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

I noticed your request on requests for third opinion, and I think the primary question here, in my eyes, is a reliable source. That is, a source, such as a technology magazine or nationwide newspaper, which discusses the website. Also, it is considered bad form to link to sites you have a personal interest in, such as being a member, where a majority of users are not. So if you can provide appropriate sources it will help your case a great deal. i kan reed 20:19, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help (though with social networks, if anyone with a "personal interest" was asked not to request a listing, MySpace and all of the other top-dogs would never be listed...since I also have pages on Gather, and others, it seemed appropriate that they ALL be listed). :-) All of my sources above are from national publications. As for Technology-specific publications--Here is one from MIT's Technology Review http://www.techreview.com/blog/posts.aspx?id=16818 You can't get more authoritative than the MIT's Tech Review... :-) Oh, and you can list it similarly to some of the other sites: "Free basic level with tiered paid levels" 21:14, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

The Tech Review citation seems good enough for us to give WebBiographies an article. With that done, I checked the actual website, and it does seem to be a real SNS with a genealogy focus-- sorry for the baseless accusation. (As you can see on this talk page, every website on the street wants to be listed in this article.) The final question is network size: it seems to have roughly 3,500 members, is this right? Ashibaka tock 00:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Yes, that sounds about right as a current number. :-) Thanks! (And I totally understand about the situation...) Cheers, Dsargent 02:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

BloopDiary.com

BloopDiary.com should be added! As should LiveJournal and DeadJournal, and OpenDiary. If not, perhaps a new list specifically for blog-type sites.

No evidence of notability. Ashibaka tock 00:28, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Livejournal and Deadjournal are already on the list. Argyriou 20:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

nairaland.com

www.nairaland.com is a community with, as at this moment,56,503 members. And it is growing by the meeting. It is owned by a Nigerian young lad,for Nigerians at home and abroad and their friends to, yes, network. It deserves to be on this list.Taiwo —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.201.159.107 (talk • contribs) 18:19, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Needs notable citation. Ashibaka tock 01:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ActorsConnect.com

We should add http://www.ActorsConnect.com to the list. It's the first social networking site dedicated to people in the entertainment industry.

No evidence of notability. Ashibaka tock 16:03, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Imbee.com

www.imbee.com is a social networking site for children from 8-14. The site was launched in July. Here are some links to articles about the site. It currently has over 10,000 children users and 85 teacher members. CNET: http://news.com.com/Web+firm+tries+to+create+safe+haven+for+tweens/2009-1025_3-6084413.html The Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115333833014811453-search.html?KEYWORDS=imbee&COLLECTION=wsjie/6month 206.15.84.10 00:41, 11 October 2006 (UTC)Neila[reply]

Since this is a pay-only site, I think you should try creating an article at Imbee first and see whether the community considers it notable. Ashibaka tock 01:17, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. Just an update, imbee is no longer a pay-only site. Parents need to submit a credit card for verification, but there is no charge. We will work on the article page. Thanks again. 206.15.84.10 16:30, 11 October 2006 (UTC)Neila[reply]

HumSubka.com - Connecting Indians across all continents is missing

I am suprised not to see the rapidly growing Indian social networking site HumSubka.com in the list.

When I visited this website some time back, it was very well there in the list.

Now the page rank of humSubka in Google has also improved.

I hope the Wikipedia Team would consider my request and will include HumSubka.com in the Social Networking list.

It doesn't have an article. I think it's spam. Ashibaka tock 16:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting semi-protection to curb the spamfest

This article is very valuable; don't get me wrong. However, it seems particularly vulnerable to spam, and always has been. I've seen plenty of instances where various dating sites, redlinked entries, etc. have been added several times within the same day, and reverts have needed to be done across multiple entries. I've seen other instances where valid edits have been added after various spam, so the spam has to be selectively and meticulously taken out if it is in multiple areas. Not to generalize, but I have yet to see an anonymous contributor add anything legitimate to this article. My view is that anonymous editors can either sign up for an account (we'll still get some spam through the cracks, but not nearly as bad -- it'll be a managable level and the article will no longer require constant babysitting), or leave a note on the talk page if they wish something to be added. Needless to say, I feel the article should be semi-protected. I think it should be discussed first, though. How does everyone else feel on this? --Czj 09:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. There should be a case made, or at least some sort of independent approval process, for entries to this article. It's a great article--and should be able to stay that way. I've found some very interesting sites through the main list (even joined a couple). I feel bad for the folks that are stuck on spam-watch... But I also know that it's because of these vigilant folks that I can trust this list. Your work is appreciated! --MonkeyTimeBoy 19:10, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've semiprotected the page. I'm also adding this to my watchlist, so that once it's unprotected, there'll be one more person watching. This situation reminds me a lot of what's going on at Shock site, which was semiprotected for similar reasons. Mango juice^talk 05:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think semi-protection seems to work. Even back when this page was semi-protected the first time, people were registering and waiting just to add these spam links. I think we should try full-protection if all this registering-just-to-spam continues. Just to add, the edits since the protection was just vandalism or reverts. --real _decimic 19:32, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you're saying, but the protection policy is pretty restrictive in the use of protection. Full protection generally is only given if an edit war is going on. It's really not a big deal if one site gets added here a day improperly; the problem is when it happens 20 times a day, and semiprotection is the difference. Mango juice^talk 21:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

YFLY.COM

YFly is an entertainment-based social network. Their mission is to provide Gen Y with an excellent social platform and the most entertaining experience online.

YFly was conceived by entrepreneurs Drew Levin and Daniel Perkins while attending the University of Florida. Their vision to create the ultimate social network was accelerated when they met Nick Lachey through common friends and joined forces to bring YFly.com to life.

Early stage funding was provided by Tom Petters (Petters Group Worldwide) and later AJ Discala (Brax Capital Group).

As of October 18, 2006, nearly 6,000 users are on YFLY. Celebrity profiles received the "Certified Celebrity" designation.

Registration is open to the public.

Postalfalcon 18:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From what I understand, the best way to get them listed here is to provide several articles from national, or otherwise credible/scholarly publications. Paste the links here, and you'll have a good shot. :-) --MonkeyTimeBoy 03:02, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Univillage.com

Phuoq 09:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC)Univillage.com[reply]

I'd like to include univillage.com, it's a UK social networking site noteable for it's university only focus and involvement of Brent Hoberman, a UK based internet entrepreneur. It's been in the news a fair bit

This sounds like a reasonable topic, but to include it in the list, one of the requirements is that the site have its own article, and this one doesn't... but feel free to create one. Mango juice^talk 12:37, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated Numbers and missing sites

Social networks are my research area and I keep a list of them here: http://trust.mindswap.org/cgi-bin/relationshipTable.cgi

Some of the numbers here are very outdated (e.g. Bolt sites a 2001 article, but their membership is now 7,000,000 larger than listed there - a number easily obtained by searching their membership).

I would happily update these numbers but apparently I don't have access to do it.

I think there are a number of notable sites also not included. Sort my list by decreasing membership and you will see some. For example, many of the Friend Finder suite of pages are not included, though they have millions of members and free accounts.

Golbeck 17:15, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You'll need to make a supported case (with professional/credible publications) for each SNS that you'd like to have listed--much as the poster did above (see the Univillage entry). It also seems that many Friend Finder sites are largly porn channels, which to my knowledge, will never get listed here. MonkeyTimeBoy 17:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Propose to remove Janglo

Both sites listed for Janglo now redirect to a Yahoo! groups page. That doesn't seem to qualify for inclusion.

Golbeck 07:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]