Talk:Yuku

message: Sadly enough someone deleted the whole article the moment I was removing the [WP:N] tags. Not sure what timezone was intended (it's STILL december 7 in much of the world) so I do regard it as vandalism. But I just placed my edit anyway as new article because the discussion had ruled in favor of *not* deleting the article and there was no opposition anymore. Furoria 02:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Any idea if it's possible to find out who deleted the article? I don't understand what the point is in having discussions if people go and delete the page regardless of the outcome. Either way, thanks for reinstating the article. JamminBen 06:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the deletion was clearly vandalism. Big changes have been made before without discussion and the article than reverted. To have managed to delete the whole article complete with all talk as well is completely out of order and should be reported. As has been said here, the consensus developing was that the Yuku article should remain side by side with the ezboard one as they are two completely different products, one replacing the other. RichardHMorris 08:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

text: 01:17, 8 December 2006 The Epopt (Talk | contribs) deleted "Yuku" (no objection to proposed deletion), how do they mean no objection, they mean the tags were not removed perhaps? See also  WP:UNDEL Furoria 13:59, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yes, it does mean that.  If you object to the deletion, you should remove the tags and give reason in the edit summary.  See Wikipedia:Proposed deletion#Contesting a proposed deletion for more information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Real decimic (talk • contribs) 21:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Didn't the page say something about "please do not remove this tag", stating that a discussion should be held? We were in the midst of discussion and the whole page was deleted. Damned if we do, damned if we don't! JamminBen 23:13, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The deletion tag that say you must not remove it is the AfD tag.  --real_decimic 01:27, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New Article

message: Since the whole Talk Page has disappeared I'll repost my last comment that addresses the only argument given: the example of InvisionFree and should address any given reason to merge.
"Actually Invisionfree will remain active alongside Zetaboards without any given timeline (actually the term 'indefinately' was used) on one replacing the other, according to the owner's FAQ and posts. So I don't think Invisionfree "is doing the same", because they won't until Invisionfree will be shut down (as product) because no one will want it anymore. Then the article becomes a historical article since Invisionfree is a product name, not the name of software or legal name of the company. The same situation might arise with Yuke and ezboard. Even while it's claimed ezboard will be shut down in 2007 somewhere, it's also possible it will take years and the different systems will co-exist as separate networks - like it's now. So it seems logical to retain different articles in both cases since the article is not about a company, but about a product, an online community network with different memberships, rules and techniques" Furoria 02:05, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the merge tags disappeared when the original Yuku page was removed. They're certainly not there anymore. I agree with your comments and would not support a merge of the two articles. JamminBen 06:26, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  No, I removed the merge tags here and at ezboard, but when I was busy doing that the Yuku article was deleted by an admin because the WP:N tags were still up at December 8 GMT.... lesson learned... Furoria 14:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, until those notable mentions are listed & verified, it's still an issue... --MonkeyTimeBoy 23:14, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Did you see Furoria's comment above? But I just placed my edit anyway as new article because the discussion had ruled in favor of *not* deleting the article and there was no opposition anymore. I find it rather suspicious that the pages were deleted just as the discussion had essentially concluded. One further point: have you actually read the article since it was reinstated? Several external links have been added. It would help if you could review the article in light of the recent changes and then come back to say whether they are sufficient. If they are not, please show us where we need to provide more references using the "citation needed" tag. JamminBen 11:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Proper formatting would suggest that you give each source/citation a listing in a References or in the External Links section, but having it within the article is ok---when I posted, there were none that I saw, but simply a 'they'll be added soon' assertion.--MonkeyTimeBoy 00:12, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggested Merge

message: I removed the comment about Yuku being released in June 2007. See here for details:  This is a rumour that appears to be false (although theoretically possible, but that would be a coincidence). This would be a pretty big announcement and it needs a source, which I certainly haven't seen. JamminBen 08:51, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The only detail concerning release dates for Yuku were contained within the CEO Blog on ezboard and Yuku - end of 2006 - although both sources have been deleted by ezboard, Inc. RichardHMorris 08:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Dates do change with this kind of thing. I don't see much point in holding anyone to a date that has already been missed. It would help if we had a date for when Yuku entered its alpha and beta stages. Beyond that, all we can do is say that as of yet, no release date has been set (which I already included). When Yuku comes out of beta, the WP page can be updated to include the release date. JamminBen 00:00, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh absolutely! But the situation remains that Yuku was launched in September 2005 as being available back then even though it was actually at alpha stage. We know that a series of dates were given for its release - the famous "ready for prime time" posts and others - but that those timescales were missed and the blogs that detailed them either hidden or deleted. We also know that Yuku (although it wasn't given that name until after the ezboard data loss when the Yuku.com domain name was transferred to it) was in development in early 2005 as ezboard referred to it in the announcements it made at the time of the data loss. This is all part of the history of the product and should validly remain included in this article even though the source data has been removed by ezboard. RichardHMorris 16:22, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Remember that this discussion only started because someone added bogus information. The History section already mentions the September 2005 (alpha) launch and that as yet there is no release date. There is also a mention of the anticipated launch date being the end of 2006. I don't think we need to point out that this is a missed date - that would be bordering on propaganda. We're now in May 2007, so it's pretty obvious that the date was missed. And regardless of whether the sources still exist, we cannot keep a full history of everything, nor should we try to. JamminBen 14:27, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think we need to include that element where I had previously written that Yuku is out of beta. Whilst there have been no formal announcements to that effect, it clearly is out of beta - still bug fixing but that continues in all the message board systems - but note that the main section logos no longer have the beta element to them and all the main site sections do not mention it being in beta. The ezboard staff have stopped using the "it's still in beta" excuse as well. Should we use my earlier edit or would someone else prefer to suggest a better form of words? Askeladden2006? You might not claim it's biased then... RichardHMorris (talk) 23:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you seen the Exiting beta section under History? Yuku has said they will be coming out of beta but they haven't specified exactly when. Is there a lot more we can say without bordering on speculation? JamminBen (talk) 01:07, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes I have. But have you looked on the main Yuku site, i.e. not the support board? If you can tell me what the average user would think or would be able to find out about the status of the software other than it not being beta but released coding, I'd be interested. It's only when you delve deeper into the out of date help wiki that you begin to see mention of beta status, but then ezboard have traditionally been extremely lax about updating their information pages (the staff and board pages weren't updated for a long long while after departures) and as I said, the help wiki is out of date. If you look at the main Yuku site, it does not mention beta status anywhere, thus it has to be released. RichardHMorris (talk) 12:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

text: P.S.: Anyway, if yuku calls itself beta, who am I to argue? I hit the familiar "Updating Software" page a moment ago – you know, the magician on a black background – and its lower right corner says "yuku beta." Cognita (talk) 05:00, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is the Wikipedia article here. The trouble with trying to rely on Yuku for a source of definitive information is that a lot of it is contradictory or out of date. One would hope that with KickApps' management and investment, they will also invest time and effort getting the whole system up to date and clarify the status. RichardHMorris (talk) 10:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Release date 

message: Several of the links in this article are no longer valid - in particular, the links to the lobby. A new source is not available. Is it reasonable to keep the information here for historical purposes but state the original sources were removed? What is the usual WP policy here? JamminBen 02:27, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what official Wikipedia policy is, but the long road to release is relevant as part of the history of Yuku, which is after all what an encyclopedia is for. I would be in favour of retaining the information but as you suggest stating that the original sources were removed. RichardHMorris 08:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What to do with expired links? 

message: Richard, could you explain this edit please? Not sure I understand the change of owner. JamminBen 13:48, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No problem: if you follow this link (or any other whois lookup) you'll see that the registrant for the domain name yuku.com is now Expert In The House, LLC and no longer ezboard, Inc. RichardHMorris 11:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks for the link. That is really quite odd, because there is no mention of the name change anywhere else. For instance the About Yuku page still says: Yuku is a product from ezboard, Inc. I don't think we should include any speculation as to what this may be about, but perhaps it would be worth expanding on this as it is not clear why there is a discrepancy. How about something like this: ezboard, Inc. is the owner of Yuku.  However, the WHOIS record for yuku.com lists the registrant as Expert In The House, LLC. What do you think? JamminBen 13:46, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ordinarily, I'd agree but given that ezboard's corporate team page still shows Steve DeMello as VP Operations so long after he left the company (more than two years now?), it could well be that changes may have taken place that they just haven't updated their site to show? The page you quote from refers to them making boards for over five years when it's over seven years now - that page just hasn't been updated since the early alpha/beta release (others have, so it's not a site-wide decision to adopt the over five years point). Similarly, the anonymous browsing feature isn't mentioned anywhere in their Wiki either and that's been in place since mid-July. And finally, ezboard never announced the removal of their CEO Blog from ezboard or Yuku, so why would they announce this? RichardHMorris 14:29, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I indented your reply. Perhaps the best solution would be to add the WHOIS record as the source for the owner? JamminBen 23:47, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  BTW, the ezboardcorp.com domain has also the same new owner. If ezboard itself is now really owned by someone else than the Board of Directors and/or initial investors or founder (!)...I think a better reference is needed than WHOIS, although it's certainly telling. For the article though perhaps this should have confirmation from elsewhere, a bit more notable and authoritative? Is there an expert in the house? Furoria 23:53, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't see why anyone would change it if it wasn't true, but I agree that we need a better reference than the WHOIS record. If the WHOIS was changed purely for administration purposes and were to be changed back in a matter of weeks, I don't see much point mentioning it at all. However, if the WHOIS stays the same, I think we need to know what's going on before we can determine how to represent it in the article. I don't think it can be included with no explanation because it is inconsistent with the ezboard and Yuku articles, which refer to ezboard, Inc. as the owner. JamminBen 23:40, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

text:  It seems to have changed back. Now we don't even have the WHOIS as a record. I have changed the owner on the article back to ezboard, Inc. JamminBen 23:28, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expert in the house? 

message: I noticed the expansion of the kudos element of this article and the curious omission of the "Charisma" part of it (that's even mentioned in Ben's referenced article on it here). Shouldn't this element be added for completeness? RichardHMorris 19:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Charisma is still there. Is there anything you think we need to add? JamminBen 23:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My apologies, Ben. I somehow missed the "charisma" element when comparing the changes. RichardHMorris 07:16, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries. I also noticed that it was missing when the recent changes are compared, but I saw it was still in the article, so I guess that's just where it stopped comparing. JamminBen 07:20, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have reverted Askeladdeb2006's edit about Kudos being turned off in profiles and on boards: the kudos system is not opt-in or opt-out and users cannot turn off the kudos system in their profiles. The message/thread kudos system can be hidden with CSS changes to the message boards. Certainly there is nothing in the Yuku help wiki to show how to accomplish any of this so the impression given that kudos system generally on Yuku was optional was misleading. RichardHMorris (talk) 20:34, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have again removed the misleading information about turning off the kudos system on profiles and boards. Citation will be needed to show where that feature can be turned off especially in relation to profiles.RichardHMorris (talk) 13:44, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kudos 

message: I'm starting a new discussion as the previous one had become quite long, and it wasn't about the official communities anymore.
A couple of comments I made about the Features section:
Split/merge and member management would be good to include too. IP search could be incorporated into member management.
Anything else? JamminBen (talk) 01:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Features 

message: Note that Ben and I are not the only editors of his article over time: a number of ezboard's staff have edits to their name (or IP address) as well as other contributors. RichardHMorris (talk) 23:42, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Editors

message: Good for you, that you removed the link to your blog.  Still, you now have published your bitterness and anger towards Yuku/ezboard and I don't understand how you can be objective when you work on this article.  That must be extremely difficult.-- (talk) 22:31, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No, I find it very easy to be completely objective, thank you. I have now had to remove two uncited and inaccurate statements concerning the kudos system written by you. Being able to change the font sizes in a message board system is nothing ground-breaking either: vBulletin has had this feature for years, for instance. Are you objective?RichardHMorris (talk) 14:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I have edited the kudos section to be correct rather than continually reverting it to be incorrect. Post kudos can be turned off on boards but not on profiles. By all means if you can demonstrate that users can indeed opt out of the kudos system for their profiles then go ahead. I have no problem in principle with Yuku itself (my own experience is that it has not worked correctly or actually served pages properly since our ezboard was migrated), which is why I have striven to ensure that the Yuku Wikipedia entry is correct and to remove the advertising spin and vandalism that ezboard, Inc. staff carried out here. RichardHMorris (talk) 17:49, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

text: I've edited the kudos section so that the article is now factually correct and reads better as well. It would be useful for the article if you could add a reference/citation to the FAQ giving the CSS code in case any Yuku user wants to hide their profile kudos. All user profiles still have kudos though. Whether the kudos system is absolutely ridiculous or not is subjective and the discussion as to whether it is better or worse than the voting system or indeed the "charisma" system that preceded both of them is another discussion for another place :) RichardHMorris (talk) 23:33, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

text: No, I wasn't talking about actually giving the code within the article, just the citation for how to hack the profile as the Yuku Help wiki is silent and users would need to know where to look. This does have the potential to open Pandora's Box so we should be careful not to go too far with hacks/mods for Yuku otherwise we'd have to consider doing likewise for other message board systems with hacks/mods like phpBB and vBulletin, etc. Likewise, CSS is available for any website, so obviously CSS can be modified for a revised look and feel. RichardHMorris (talk) 18:01, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Contrary to your opinions, I'm trying to be constructive. I know English isn't your native language, so you'll have to excuse the odd lapse into vernacular for code and css modifications. I was merely suggesting that a link to the relevant post would be useful as clearly your assertion concerning hiding the kudos element is important to you and might well be important to others who dislike the kudos system. And to answer your question about phpBB, I'm not sure what you mean by "there". I have indeed tried phpBB successfully and still run a phpBB board. I prefer vBulletin and own a number of licences for it, but it's good that there is no one monopoly board software provider. RichardHMorris (talk) 16:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

text: No, that article doesn't help at all and the linked profile customisation page doesn't either (and the screenshots show the voting system which isn't in place any longer either). Hacking code is the vernacular - I'm sorry you're not familiar with the term. RichardHMorris (talk) 10:36, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  How to be objective? Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines 

message: This is worded as a buy out, but it's really a merger. http://support.yuku.com/topic/6031 --24.74.36.191 (talk) 07:13, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree: it's been sold to KickApps, the old CEO, Labatt, has left and Cameron Shaw from KickApps put in charge. Also, the Yuku annoucement says "We are now part of KickApps". As always (from the time it was ezboard to being Yuku to being KickApps' "Yuku Project" and "Powered by Yuku") the Yuku web pages will be out of date and remain so. Look also at what KickApps' CEO Alex Blum is quoted as saying here: http://www.centernetworks.com/kickapps-stats-yuku-message-board Then move on to the KickApps press release here: http://www.kickapps.com/press-releases/kickapps-establishes-clear-market-leadership-among-major-media-brands.html Note that it states clearly that "Wholly owned by KickApps, Yuku.com is the first of several planned destinations...". That's an acquisition, not a merger. RichardHMorris (talk) 18:11, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

text: OK, maybe you can explain in plain English what that bit of gobbledegook actually means :) My own view having now got a gold board at Yuku is that it is far from robust. Hopefully when they finally remove the bugs, upgrade the hardware and complete the promised feature set, they can make it robust and a success for the Yuku users to benefit. Maybe with KickApps on board, they will. RichardHMorris (talk) 16:07, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Why? The part you quoted is irrelevant but you are the one who puts so much store by what you'd quoted, claiming it was "very intersting indeed". Good for you! Oh and I am rapidly coming to the conclusion with all your ad hominem attacks that your own objectivity must be questioned. You should probably step back and look at what you've written if you are going to continue to claim not to be adding bias. RichardHMorris (talk) 10:40, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

text: Wow! I suggest you take a few deep breaths and relax after that flurry of edits! I haven't brought up anything: you're the one who keeps suggesting - and then repeatedly mentioning - a "vendetta" and "personal battleground", not me. FYI Ben hasn't disappeared: I'm sure he's still keeping an eye on the technical aspects of this article as he always has. Read your comments like the ones you've added and edited here today and see where the ad hominem attacks have been made. I am far from furious: why would I be? All I see is you in a frenzy. Oh and don't flatter yourself that I'm chasing you. Clearly you already know all about me if you've decided I have a vendetta - I see you've done your own chasing already... Now calm down, take a deep breath and step back from the keyboard. Then when you have something worthwhile and unbiased to contribute, feel free to join in. Just make sure it's in accordance with the Wikipedia guidelines as well. RichardHMorris (talk) 15:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

text: È benissimo. Non si preoccupi. RichardHMorris (talk) 16:31, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

text: He he he... that was a good try!  :-) :-) -- (talk) 18:59, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  ~:0) RichardHMorris (talk) 21:53, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kickapps  

message: I'm not really pleased with it, but at least it is up-to-date 2008.  Maybe you can do it better, Morris.  Check it out, Boss!  :-) :-) -- (talk) 20:27, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what the screenshot actually achieves, frankly, but as you say, it's up to date now. RichardHMorris (talk) 16:08, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Updating image 

message: "As with ezboard, free Yuku boards are supported through advertisements. An ad-free board costs $6/month for up to 50,000 page views per month. Communities that generate more views than this limit are instead charged at a rate of $0.20 per 1,000 ad-pages served."
Actually, that's $0.20 per 1,000 ad pages not served. Boards pay to remove ads, and a community can show ads selectively to categories of viewers. How about this: "Communities that generate more than 50,000 views in a month are instead charged $0.20 per 1,000 page views for which they choose ad removal."
Cognita (talk) 03:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good point. I think that edit would be more accurate. RichardHMorris (talk) 09:52, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll install it. Cognita (talk) 23:13, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Pricing" section needs rewording 

message: Can someone please tell me what the Difference between Yuku and phpbb is. As in which is easyer to use, what is better, ect...--Lolitologist (talk) 14:21, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yuku or phpbb? 

message: There appears to be zero RS coverage of Yuku. Is there any evidence of notability in the wider world? (There isn't at all in the references currently present.) - David Gerard (talk) 19:52, 6 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reliable sources? 

message: I just went to create a new forum, only to discover that "tapatalk" has changed and altered things to a "group" format (like the old yahoo groups), where everything posted - no matter what the topic - is in line in the same thread instead of having seperate threads and topics.
97.107.39.231 (talk) 03:05, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yuku.com no longer even redirects to Tapatalk but to "everforo.com".  This article is out of date.  --Heath 216.30.158.175 (talk) 19:44, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major format change 

message: The redirect Tapatalk has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  J947 † edits 01:03, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Tapatalk]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]