Talk:Engadget

message: Should Engadget's pro-Apple position be mentioned? The comments regularly point out how Engadget praises Apple products while bashing a virtually identical product from any other company.  --—Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.76.30.78 (talk • contribs) 
: How is that different than any other tech publication. I don't think they are Biased. They like to talk about Apple but Apple is a major gadget maker.  --8bitJake 16:03, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say they're a less biased than TWiT or Diggnation.  I don't know, it seems like, from their comments on the podcast, they have an accurate grasp of, say, the iPod market (eg. that the iPod clearly dominates, even though similar products that are somewhat more featureful and/or somewhat less expensive, don't sell nearly as well).  I think they've explicitely said part or all of that, haven't they?  --Interiot 17:20, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

text: As of 2009 and the departure of the original editorial head, it could be said that Engadget has been cultivating an anti-Apple bias. 98.232.58.2 (talk) 19:50, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  Comparing the recent reviews of iPad (by the current editorial head Joshua Topolsky) and JooJoo (co-authored by Joshua Topolsky) is enough to see the bias. In the iPad review, there's not a single mention of JooJoo or Fusion Garage; in the JooJoo review, the very first sentence after the fold implies that all good things come from Apple: "even if the iPad wasn't out there for comparisons, its minimalistic design would remind us of an aesthetically pleasing Apple product". The iPad review makes no mention of the widely reported overheating problem, but the JooJoo review say that it "gets quite warm" without actually saying whether or not this makes JooJoo lock up like it is reported to happen with iPad. The iPad says "The battery ... (non-removable of course)" as if removable battery is not a desirable option available in competing products. The JooJoo review even says that it's because of Linux that "type isn't rendered as cleanly as on a Mac or Windows machine". Even if JooJoo's really uses a lousy default font (can't really tell that from the Engadget's photos), that would certainly be no fault of Linux. For example, the Gnome default Bitstream Vera font family, when rendered by FreeType library, looks a lot cleaner than anything I ever seen on Windows or MacOS. Angdraug (talk) 20:14, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've removed the section again. It requires external (non-Engadget) citations: is Engadget's supposed bias notable enough to have been covered in some other medium? The section as currently written smells entirely of original research and uses weasel words to assert claims that are probably not as widespread nor as clear as you seem to think. Until you can find external references for this criticism (and no, your personal blog does not count), and the section can be written in an encyclopedic style, it must stay off the page. nneonneo talk 15:00, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  Here are some links: Does the Media Love Apple Too Much? ("Any time the Apple store goes down, Engadget will let you know just in case Apple finally releases its long awaited iJobs personal cancer-curing robot."); Engadget editor: Why I turned off comments ("a common insult hurled in the comments is that Engadget is being paid by Apple to write lots of positive coverage." -- this also confirms that the amount of criticism Engadget was getting over its alleged Apple bias was enough to force them to turn off comments); Techies: I am done with Engadget; Gizmodo is a bad alternative. What tech blog do you use/read? ("They report tech news, but I don't see the seriousness in it, and they are also very Apple-biased."); Engadget Pimps Apple site maintenance as an actual news story. Are any of these high-profile enough to qualify for "other medium"? Angdraug (talk) 11:40, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

text: Goine once... going twice...  everyone agrees that we now have enough sources? PizzaMan (talk) 21:44, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd say half a year is quite enough for anyone disagreeing to let us know. Added a sobre singe sentence, with four references. PizzaMan (talk) 18:07, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Apple bias

message: I have suggested that Ryan Block be merged into this article. Please discuss, but do not remove the merge tag unless the issue has been resolved. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 06:59, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge?

message: :File:Engadget-logo.svg 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 Wikipedia articles 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 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 04:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for File:Engadget-logo.svg

message: by Engadget : http://www.engadgetmobile.com/2008/04/01/painting-the-town-magenta/
--Wikibert (talk) 19:12, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Alleged Trademark infringement

message: Hey everybody, Ryan Block from Engadget here. I don't want to edit our page, but I would like people to take notice that our masthead has changed significantly, and our roster of editors as listed on Wikipedia is very out of date. Please see the latest masthead at engadget.com/about. Thanks!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryanblock (talk • contribs) 01:15, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Masthead updates

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Engadget. 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/20120511054156/http://corp.aol.com/products-services/local to http://corp.aol.com/products-services/local
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:13, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Engadget. 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/20110606091539/http://technorati.com/blogs/top100/ to http://technorati.com/blogs/top100
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) 03:41, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I am moving the following uncited and poorly-cited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:CS, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, WP:BLP, WP:NOR, et al. The material includes information that is both uncited, and which is accompanied by forty-two citations of the article subject itself, a degree of reliance on primary sources that is inappropriate. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 20:48, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncited material in need of citations