Talk:For sale by owner

message: I would like to update the NAR stats to reflect current data for 2009. I have NAR's report to source from. Is anyone apposed to this? Also, with small, regional sites listed as "The Largest" (FSBOMadison) this information appears to be wrong. I would like to do some Alexa.com research and add the correct "Largest Sites" in the US - Would anyone be apposed? Qquackk (talk) 02:30, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wikipedia is free to be updated by anyone given they properly cite sources. I would recommend that you avoid Alexa.com as a measure of "largest". The FSBO Madison context is not which web site receives the most traffic - it's a reflection of market share. Stoick (talk) 18:22, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NAR Stats 

message: I'm going to put some effort into cleaning up this entry.  Most of the statements are not sourced and it has become a magnet for organizations seeking to self-promote.  I'll be reformatting the article to ensure neutrality and that every statement is properly sourced.  Stoick (talk) 15:46, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Clean Up

message: I don't understand how this article can quote research produced by the National Association of Realtors (NAR). It is this organization's duty to protect the interest of Real Estate Agents. Can someone give me their opinion on this? - William Stynes, Sales Manager - ByTheOwner.com
::Well, they are reputable organization, the chief economist of which is often quoted nationally on real estate matters and one which has access to data on the majority of home sales across the nation, which are handled by brokers.  Clearly, they know - via the MLS systems - how many homes are sold via brokers.  They may also have access to total county-wide or state-wide transfer data, although some states do not allow public access to such data (one example where this is easy to correlate is Maryland), but maybe they have other methods or they publish their statistics based upon a sampling (as in opinion polling) where the data is readily available.
::So, do you think that an organization of this nature is LYING when they produce such numbers - simply to "protect" - in some weird way - it's membership?  Clearly, NAR is a reputable source; if a By-Owner organization can produce statistics, they can just as easily be quoted.
::Thus, the question is: do you DISPUTE these figures?  And can you provide different data from a reputable source to question that provided by NAR?  Viva-Verdi 01:35, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: NAR research quote

message: I dont know how to remove it officially, but I guess I can simply delete it?  His name is MJ wilson, and I read a blog where someone told him to put his spam on wikipedia to generate buzz about his business. 72.209.70.25 16:22, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The guy who owns the website www.ownerssellingnetwork.com has spammed this page 

message: ...but PLEASE make a comment on this TALK PAGE re: chages.
I certainly support what has been done.   Vivaverdi 03:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who wrote this?? Please use the 4 tildes to indicate who you are. Viva-Verdi 03:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Thank goodness these links have been removed.... 

message: We already have 1 editor opposed to including this anonymous account of a failed FSBO transaction.  I support User:Leuko's position that this is not appropriate and in opposition to Wiki policy.
Therefore, I am reverting and copying this to talk:Alanjacobson1's page.
Viva-Verdi 16:56, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of link to on-line account of FSBO going wrong 

message: In Canada, your typical 6% commission comes with federal GST and provincial sales tax (some provinces), slapped on top. This should be mentioned in the article Pendragon39 (talk) 18:23, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sales tax on commissions 

message: This has been removed because it ignores Wikipedia policy stated quite clearly:
 "Do not copy text from other websites without a GFDL-compatible license. It will be deleted." 
Viva-Verdi (talk) 23:41, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of section copied more or less directly from an on-line newspaper article 

message: The article is becoming a spam magnet for "industry" and sales information sourced only to an association/company's website or press release. I'm removing press release content and sources unless they supplement info sourced to reliable sources. Flowanda | Talk 00:05, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removing company information sourced only to press releases and their websites 

message: Reference 7 is a spam link and should be removed - For sale by owner Australia  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Consumer power (talk • contribs) 09:17, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spam link in the references 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on For sale by owner. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140602200239/http://seek.estate/articles/private-house-sales-sydney-quickest-country/ to http://seek.estate/articles/private-house-sales-sydney-quickest-country/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:08, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: hello 102.89.22.33 (talk) 09:49, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified