Talk:GeoCities

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] FTP section

I don't believe that the FTP section belongs in an encyclopedia article. In particular, I don't believe that the advertising for a particular ad-removal service belongs in here. I am ALL for ad-removal. Which is why to be consistent I am all for removing people's ads from Wikipedia. Jdavidb 13:49, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Abuse by spammers

I wonder if there should not be a section on the abuse of GeoCities accounts by spammers in this article. I don't know about anybody else, but my primary exposure to GeoCites now-a-days is as a host for spamvertised crap. N0YKG 15:49, 2 August 2005 (UTC)


[edit] First?

I had a website way back when it was called "GeoPages". The only freebie alternative I recall was one called "Look Up". Was this one the first? --Billpg 12:41, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Warn people?

Should we warn people that Geocities isn't a very good host and there are better ones? Should we offer advice in wikipedia?

We can't offer advice as we have to remain neutral. --Image:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 04:52, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
be bold dogma mandates offering advice as long as appropriate weasel words are used, eg some critics charge... etc
See WP:NPOV. --lE☺N2323 16:36, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warn people?

hmmm, giving advice isn't neutral. I guess we shouldn't. Zhanster 00:23, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Well, giving advice in the "you should" form is not okay, but... if any well-sourced statements regarding GeoCities' functionality or lack thereof were to convince people to use or not to use GeoCities, well that couldn't be helped. Shinobu (talk) 14:16, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AOL/Geocities hate

This had nothing to do with pre-1990s internet users, the section is heavily biased. Not to mention I'm not sure The reputation has largely faded now, as it was mostly dependent upon the opinions of older internet users, whom became more and more of a minority after the late 1990s. is accurate, if anything I've only seen Geocities mocked increasingly over the past 6 years Sherurcij (talk) (Terrorist Wikiproject) 20:45, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

  • I also disagree with the validity of the 'faded reputation' statement; it sounds like it is based upon anecdotal evidence. GeoCities was -- and still is, to the best of my knowledge, known for two things: free, limited web hosting and an overwhelming number of amateurish web pages. A mention of GeoCities to any web developer who has been around for a few years will likely trigger a conversation about horrendous web design, abuse of the <BLINK> tag and animated GIFs galore. --cdjaco 18:05, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Suburbs

Could someone please mention that the old geocities neighbourhoods were divided into suburbs, too? When the neighbourhoods became full, they started to add suburbs to the neighbourhood. EG: http://www.geocities.com/neighbourhood/1234 and then http://www.geocities.com/neighbourhood/suburb/1234

[edit] Reputation

The reputation section is all total POV and if it isn't referenced I see no reason to keep it in the article. - Mjg0503 03:18, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the section - Mjg0503 15:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] spam

since the website is free we're at the mercy of geocities and ther ads and spam mine is new and when i show it off an ad show up

p.s. should i add my site to the list


[edit] Category for Bubble Buyout Boondoggles?

Seems like Geocities 3.6 billion $ buyout by Yahoo has to rank up there as one of the biggest boondoggles of the dot com bubble. Is there some appropriate category for this? Is there any information as to how much Yahoo lost on the deal?

Another topic for the article: what is the present 2007 state of Geocities, is it widely used or hardly used?

Another topic for the article: Google appears not to index it, why is this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.202.248.81 (talk) 01:15, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Litigation section

The litigation section is unreferenced. If this were a BLP, it would be deleted. What about a corporation? Shouldn't its reputation matter?

An anon removed half the section. I put it back as a default, but I see where he might be coming from. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 18:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] History 4th paragraph

Could be clearer. Refers to initial offering price then however it was bought for some $3 billion odd. Would need to know what the price was compared to IPO or drop the however. 18:20, 6 June 2008 (UTC)