Talk:Any Question Answered

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Criticisms

It is fairly typical of wikipedia pages to have a criticism section. It seems like this page is being dominated by people who want a sanitised view of AQA. Wikipedia is meant to by NPOV and accurate, not a whitewashed, glossed over view of events or organisations.

Its worth bearing in mind the Wikipedia policy on not having a conflict of interest. Working for an organisation, and then censoring any criticism of it would be a clear conflict of interest. I hope thats clear to people. --Emily heller (talk) 15:20, 28 February 2008 (UTC) I've just had a search for "Conflict of Interest" and Wikipedia has an official policy here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#Examples Its worth reading in detail, so that people are clear what Wikipedia is about. If you are being paid by an organisation and then edit wikipedia in a way that gives a one sided favourable view, then that would be a pretty clear conflict of interest. --Emily heller (talk) 15:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

The information you added to this article I consider to be weasel words, not a neutral point of view. It is implicit that if you do not meet the standards of any organization, your services will be terminated - this does not need to be stated in the article. I find it interesting that the only edit you have made to Wikipedia is to this article. This makes me believe that you're the one with an agenda. Andrew walker (talk) 15:49, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I just want to make sure that people understand and have read the Wikipedia policy about not having a conflict of interest, and know that if they are working and receiving money from an organisation, and then present information about it in an overly positive way, censoring any criticism, then that would be against the guidelines i found above. You must declare your interest if you receive payment from an organisation.--Emily heller (talk) 16:07, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Sadly, I cannot claim to be a neutral party, as I have worked as an AQA researcher for 3 years. However, please address the issues I put to you, instead of trying to avoid them. Why do you feel this information needs to be explicitly stated in the article? Any company reserves the right to sack employees if they do not meet the required standard. Also, please outline why is this the first edit you've decided to make to Wikipedia. Andrew walker (talk) 16:22, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Factual inaccuracy

Disclaimer: I am not an independent party, as I have worked for RE5ULT as a contractor for a couple of years now. For that reason I am adding this note here, as I don't think it is appropriate that I make changes directly to the page itself. However, if no one responds after a while then I will update the page directly.

The final paragraph of this page suggests that AQA was the first to market with this idea, and that RE5ULT's 82ASK is a "similar service" "subsequently launched". That is incorrect. 82ASK was launched on 3rd August 2003, pretty much creating the market sector, approximately nine months before AQA was launched on 22nd April 2004. The best source on this is a PMN article from 30th April 2004; although it is no longer online the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine has a copy of it. --DZR 16:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

A quick comment on the above. Re5ult (and many other companies) had email / text services running before AQA, but none of them were on a premium shortcode and all required subscriptions - hence not a genuine mass-market consumer service. Re5ult subsequently launched the service 82ASK in August 2004. For sources see re5ult's own website http://www.re5ult.com/news/launch.htm; also http://www.160characters.org/news.php?action=view&nid=1456;
That comment seems like a quibble about billing methods. If the crux of the service is the "ask a question by SMS and recieve an answer", then RE5ULT came up with the idea and have been running the service available to the public since September 2003. If someone else was offering a similar service at that time I would like to know who. They were also the first company to offer such a service commercially, on a subscription model as you correctly say, since January 2004. --DZR 18:56, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unsourced statement

Unsourced statement I pulled from an html comment in the article: "Judges at the packed industry event in Old Billingsgate, London described the service as having a 'touch of genius'." ~ Booya Bazooka 00:02, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:63336.gif

Image:63336.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 06:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Graph of Questions

Sorry, but I can't see any source data used to generate the graph of questions given in the article - if no-one objects to this, I think it would be right to remove it until the source data used to generate it is provided. Kavanagh21 (talk) 23:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

The data is listed on the discussion page of the graph's image description page [1], under "Source Data". MickMacNee (talk) 23:38, 2 May 2008 (UTC)