Talk:WAYN (website)

message: List of social networking websites is currently an AfD candidate.  You are invited to partake in this discussion. Czj 19:22, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of social networking websites on AfD 

message: This is clearly written in a promotional style, and more than once it has been edited to apparently muddy the criticisms section. Cpmartin 09:12, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias 

message: I have a suspicion that WAYN hacks or hijacks address books. I never logged onto the site or invited anyone. Yet begin to get messages , virtually all,saying I had invited them to join. They were all from my address book and most had traveled somewhere in the world in the recent past. I consider them invasive and scurilous marketers.
Removed these lines. What is this? An encyclopedia or a forum?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.225.192.130 (talk) 11:39, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Non Encyclopedic Content

message: This article reads like an adverisment from the WAYN marketing department!  The text and tone exhibits clear bias and as previously pointed out by another user, positive comments are even inserted into the "Criticism" section to mitigate effect.  The article is notable and has failed a previous AfD discussion.  However, a major rewrite is required. I am sure that these tags will be removed by someone at WAYN so will monitor the article.  Encise (talk) 23:50, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have problem with this article just simply correct it instead of marking POV... Pkuczynski (talk) 08:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

text: You do not have to an expert to reword it in a way that it does not contain advertisement. I know the website for years and all which is written here is truth. Pkuczynski (talk) 10:08, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, at least that explains why you're busy inserting weasel words ("as with other social networks" etc) in the criticism section.  Either WAYN spams on purpose, or they're using a crappy or misleading user interface during the sign-up process, also on purpose.  Other, serious, social networks don't do any of that.  End of story.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.192.31.176 (talk) 10:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Tagging article for POV and clean up

message: User:Sniles45 wrote: Many people view WAYN.COM as a dating site or service. Too many internal emails are being sent regarding individuals looking for mates. Many times if subscribers read carefully this pitfall can be avoided.
:: Can you city some sources which explains your statements above? Pkuczynski (talk) 10:25, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I can tell you that I posted a few trips up there after years of being inactive and in the past few months have had probably two dozen people, all men, most from outside the US, send me e-mails of friend requests.  Every single e-mail asks for my e-mail or IM user name.  All of them comment favorably on my appearance.  Several specifically tell me they are looking for a relationship.  Many of them have a writing style that I have encountered previously in supposedly British men who are working in Africa, people whom I suspect are actually African spammers.  One, for example, claimed to be Scottish.  His profile picture shows a man holding a model aircraft.  I asked him where in Scotland he was, as it's one of my favorite places, and what kind of plane was in the picture, as I love airplanes.  I specifically asked if it was an A-10?  He said he lived "at" Edinburgh and that it was a "practical plane."  My guess is he grabbed a photo off Flickr or something.  Granted this is all "anecdata," but I'd venture a guess if you signed up with a phony photo and declared yourself to be a single female, you'd have the same experience. TychaBrahe (talk) 19:41, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dating site 

message: Hi there, could we add in info re WAYN's spamming in a seperate section under 'criticism' eg...
The site has been criticised for sending spam emails to the contact lists of newly registered members. A number of members vented their anger through online discussion boards  http://www.antionline.com/archive/index.php/t-274101.html/. Thanks Bstarr98 (talk) 14:02, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, I don't have a problem with that - go ahead and make the change. I'm not terribly happy with any of the references, but they will have to do for now. Ideally we would want a magazine article or similar reliable source discussing the issue.  --sciencewatcher (talk) 14:09, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spamming 

message: In two places it is said that the site was founded in 2005. Yet the Hisory section has references to things that happened in 2004.
14.139.45.242 (talk) 07:31, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Errors in History 

message: It doesn't appear that this website meets notability requirements. Yes, it is currently ranked 3,191 on Alexa, but nowhere in WP:WEB is a modestly high Alexa ranking considered grounds for notability, not that I would consider 3,191 to be very high. There are many websites with higher rankings that don't have Wikipedia pages. The article fails the most fundamental Wikipedia requirement: having third-party reliable sources. Fnordware (talk) 19:55, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not Notable 

message: here is a better ref. I don't have time to update the article right now myself, but if anyone else wants to, please feel free. Hopefully the story is true and they have changed their spammy ways. The last spammy/scammy email I got from them was in 2012 (and it definitely wasn't a scammer using the WAYN network, it was WAYN itself being scammy/spammy). I don't entirely trust them myself, but we should probably give them the benefit of the doubt. --sciencewatcher (talk) 23:49, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Better ref for criticism/spam 

message: "WAYN" is notorious for hijacking email accounts and spamming.  That Wikipedia allows this scam site to promote itself in your supposed encyclopedia shows that wikipedia is not actually an informative web site but has become a corrupt promoter of malicious scam web pages.  Why would an organization allow itself to degrade to this extent?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:403:0:21F0:3992:5B4E:BF65:772C (talk) 10:54, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Please actually edit the article rather than just complaining. See my comment above. --sciencewatcher (talk) 16:53, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is wikipedia promoting a spam site? 

message: A leaf is flying 41.223.141.83 (talk) 10:26, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  I've been a ninja of newyork 

message: I don't think this website exists anymore. It is no longer indexed by google and the link provided in the article is not on normal dns servers. 2A02:168:A1C9:0:B1D4:AA2F:3389:819F (talk) 13:46, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  website does not exist anymore