Talk:Facebook/Archive 2

message: The following text was recently added to the article:
Facebook suffers from several security loopholes. Certain profiles/photos that normally prove inaccessible may be accessed through the messages menu, by clicking on the portrait of a person who isn't a Friend. This means that if a person is harassing you, do not send an E-mail reply back to them as they can use your profile to get information on you.
I removed it for a number of reasons.  First, "several" is not one.  Secondly, this may not be a security loophole but instead an assumption by the people that run facebook that you'll allow anyone you message to see your information.  Thirdly, the use of "you" is plain bad style.
If anyone can substantiate this as a real loophole, feel free to edit this and re-insert.  As it stands, I am disinclined to do so myself. Thesquire 03:52, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm inclined to believe that reason regarding messaging myself, Thesquire. I don't think it's a security breach at all. Mike H (Talking is hot) 04:17, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia is not a soapbox, or a publisher of critical reviews or personal essays.  Thesquire, please take these "comments" off the article. -- Perfecto  14:29, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh?  I was explaining my deletion so that noone re-added it without editing it.  I fail to see how this is a "critical review or personal essay."  I do have a talk page if you want to gripe at me.  Thesquire 04:34, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

text: Sorry, my english was bad.  I meant that the paragraph "Facebook suffers...." is a critical review and personal essay of a person's experience with the site.  Please remove it because it's original research.  I apologise for the misunderstanding  -- Perfecto  04:44, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The italicized text is what I took out of the main article.  Since it's no longer part of the main article, as of 21:48, 20 November 2005 when I removed it, the problem you're complaining about was solved before you started in on me for fixing it.  Thesquire 05:05, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I second this.  The criticisms section is very, very weak. Fstutzman 21:58, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I third it.  See Talk:Facebook (website)#Source for criticisms below. I think we should move the information about people with large numbers of friends and Facebook's attempts to curb this behavior up to the section on Friends and trash the rest. - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 04:15, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think some of that section should remain in the article (not necessarily in its own section but in some form). We also might want to take into account the fact that with the recent changes allowing high school users to interact with college users (and the fact that you no longer need .edu to fully use the site), some cricisms may soon arrive. For example, this Harvard Crimson article describes a backlash at the new feature  and the creation of groups such as "Advocates for the return of Facebook to college-only exclusivity". - L1AM (talk) 09:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Revised as requested. Summary: I removed the criticisms about accessabilty between schools because they were too weak. I moved the criticisms about friends lists up to the "Friends" section and the one about fake profiles up to the "Profile" section. I restructered the privacy concerns and made it clear they had been addressed. I wrote a subsection about the new high school debate (fastest growing groups at my school it appears) and because it is somewhat controversal and weak, added a cite sources template (see the below section on this talk page). Opinions: It's only a four day old policy so hopefully people will be on the look out for evidence of this criticism. I believe the section should be kept; please continue to improve it. - L1AM (talk) 08:18, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Appropriate Criticism? 

message: The article currently states that the feature to add your current course schedule was added in September 2004.  I graduated in the spring of 2004 yet I still recall being able to post my class schedule when I was in school.  Can anyone confirm the date that this feature was added?   dsemaya 02:46, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was the one who added that when I created the whole "addition of features" section of the article, but now that I think about it, I believe I was able to list my courses earlier than that as well, which means it must have been added in April 2004.  Can anyone else confirm this?  I apologize for my error.  I have removed it from the article. NBS525 14:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Current course schedule feature 

message: Some anon. users from 204.8.190.xxx (all from Big River Telephone, Missouri, USA) keep re-adding the Southeast Missourian article. I've read the article a few times now and cannot find anything useful about it. We already have enough college newspaper articles and more should be added only if they provide something useful. Please stop with the linkspam to a non-notable article. — L1AM (talk) 04:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''Southeast Missourian'' article 

message: There are citations, references, and additional information to point to in regards to the part I added about the alcohol citations at NCSU.  I'm a n00b, and don't know if I would be putting them in the right place.
This is the first local news article that reported the event along with the segment itself:
http://www.wral.com/news/5204275/detail.html
The other news had it available online but doesn't anymore (it happened last fall).  Anyway, this is where it was:
http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/2833298p-9283981c.html
The school newspaper has also removed the original article and the followups.  You can, however, still find other articles that directly reference the event from their homepage.
http://www.technicianonline.com/
For more school reaction from the event, this is the topic that talked about it on the unofficial school message boards, also with a link to the now deleted school paper article:
http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=360995
The disucssion from thewolfweb also had a little significance in itself because it was used to make the point about how anything from the internet could be used to give you citations by university policy by a university representitive from student conduct in a meeting open to the public hosted by student government.
I haven't researched what wikipedia has about legality of use of such pictures or university policies and enforcement, but there was a news event fairly recently (I think in the last month or so) where a college student recieved was awarded a large sum (around $100,000 I think) because the university kicked him out on charges that had no proof behind them.  Anyway, that seemed another issue, but very relevant.
Any help in putting that information in the right place or adding more information would be appreciated.
Alan 00:33, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved the paragraph you added to Facebook%27s_use_in_investigations#Alcohol_policy_violations. Thanks for your contribution! — L1AM (talk) 02:28, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NCSU Event

message: Removed this from article, talk about it here:
On March 27, 2006, Facebook went off-line for an extended period of time. Several users became frustrated and updated Wikipedia. Enraged students complain on campus-wide forums across the nation, wondering when their beloved facebook will come online again. This is probably due to the new search features. Facebook servers must be unable to maintain the workload of network-wide search. This is why forums like SomethingAwful restrict this feature to users who pay for this option.
128.211.251.72 21:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed it again. Definitely not worth a mention, especially not how it was presented (see here). cBuckley (Talk • Contribs) 21:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Facebook down 3/27/2006

message: I removed some parts from the article that were untagged. Feel free to add them back after finding sources to confirm them.
#"In addition, two students from the University of Kentucky wrote another "The Facebook Song" poking fun at the "hook-up" aspect of romantic networking on Facebook." - from References in popular culture
#"Rutgers University - Camden, St. Louis University" - from Digital mourning
#"At East Lansing High School, MI, many students were threatened with disciplinary action for joining a Facebook group about how much they hate the principal." - from Other investigations
The end of the Integration of high school users section still is tagged with  regarding the comparisons to issues with MySpace. Please be on the look out for a citation for that as well. —L1AM (talk) 22:25, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The pop culture references need to be converted from external links to whatever citation format is used in this article. Pepsidrinka 03:20, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations needed 

message: I don't have time to work on this right now, but it seems to me that the article would benefit from paring down the "addition of features" section to include only the really important and verifiable features, like Groups and Photos... whatever is verifiable but minor could be moved to List of Facebook features. - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 05:18, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  I added that subsection in the first place because previously the history section was long and disorganized with some information on the history of the Facebook as an organization scattered around information on the features of the service itself.  I also wanted to add some information about how the introduction of certain features, such as Groups, actually changed the way people used the site.  However, now it seems that the section has just become a timeline where people add a new paragraph whenever the site adds a new graphic or removes an apostrophe.  NBS525 12:37, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I also agree that after the section is cleaned up, it should be moved to List of Facebook features. I suspect people like to use this article as a central repository of feature updates, but it looks like other (more appropriate) sites are picking up the slack there. MaxVeers 06:38, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition of features section 

message: Does anyone understand why exactly they eliminated the colleges listing in the profile menu? Or clubs and jobs? Is there official reasoning behind it?
:The colleges listing is back, as of today I guess.  I think the "clubs and jobs" list was removed from the profile because the new "work info" section can include much more detailed information about all the clubs and jobs you wanted to list in the old section.  They probably removed the old section because it would have become redundant once people started listing all their clubs and jobs in the new section as well.  It is still possible to list all of the information that you could list before, but you just list it in a different place and in a different format.  NBS525 13:19, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent changes