Talk:Gadu-Gadu

message: why do you remove it? it's not commercial tool, its completly free.
: probably because people are afraid it might steal their passwords and you have nothing to prove it. 193.59.72.35 10:49, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the link, we shouldn't be linking to password decoders. Lcarsdata 19:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  free decoder added 

message: :Image:Gg7.gif 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 this Wikipedia article 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 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 04:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Gg7.gif

message: The article starts by saying that Gadu Gadu is a client and its categorization and sidebar are about client software.  However it is really about the service or protocol, which I think is what an article an unqualified title should be about.
More generally, it suffers from the common vices of articles about software in popular culture of being academically shallow. For example, as there are third party implementations of the protocol, there should be enough information in the public domain (confidentiality sense) to be able to characterise what makes the protocol unique and how it is similar to other instant message protocols.  The only possible problem is that there may not be source documents that make this analysis (although a good protocol specification document would do so), and deriving that information from the details of the specification risks being "original research".
As a service, I'm sure there must have been published analyses of the business model and whether it is successful, but I think that is limited to a categorisation as "adware".
David Woolley (talk) 10:10, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Indeed. I've removed the fan-type material which didn't have any secondary sources. As for the separation between the client and the protocol, I would argue that when both are proprietary and designed only for each other that there's no need to separate them (or indeed the company behind them) except article length, which isn't currently a problem. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:21, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confuses Service, Protocol and Client 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Gadu-Gadu. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090320043038/http://www.naspers.com:80/index.cfm?content=7109 to http://www.naspers.com/index.cfm?content=7109
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:35, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I just updated bunch of info about Gadu-Gadu to better represent its current state. Since then England.pl changed its name to Fintecom and also moved their main office to Koszalin instead of Warsaw (although they still have an office there according to their website).  Frog4D (talk) 17:03, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changing owner from England.pl to Fintecom