Talk:EBay/Archive 2

message: How big was the submarine? - I wonder if the Channel Tunnel drilling machine  (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3620673.stm)(at 580 tonnes) was not the biggest? Jooler 20:34, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Largest Item

message: I had the following: "The default provider of streaming video onto eBay is Auction Video . DMRevolution  also legally provides this service. That means if one wants to film a homemade or professional commercial with a webcam or video camera, and place it on eBay, he or she must go through one of these companies."  This is all true, and not a salespitch for "a related product", but a encyclopedic reference to the actual provider of all videos for eBay.  The other external links were upsells, but this wasn't, so by no logic could have been deleted.  I think it's an important thing to know, especially as eBay continues rolling it out to the public. Anyone have any idea why this was deleted? If not I'd ask someone (myself if you're agreeable) to put it back up.  Mrcolj 16:28, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Auction Video

message: Why doesn't this article include the history of Ebay?  When was it founded?  What lead to the idea for ebay?  Who were the brains behind ebay?  What about the company that was ebay before it was ebay?  Ebay has a rich history, and it is a shame we aren't reading about it on wikipedia.
*I do wish someone would insert such a thing. I've held back because it's too hard for me to separate original research (e.g., my own memories). --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:46, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of Ebay? 

message: Shouldn't eBay start with a capital letter when it's the first word of a sentence, like every other word? If you don't agree, could you move it so its not the first word anymore, so that pedantic peopel like me are placated. 68.227.80.79 06:51, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Hello. Hope I'm doing this right. Does anyone know who the first member was on eBay? People who work for eBay don't count and it has to be after their public opening.
*I've not been able to determine for sure whether anybody knows this, but indications are that nobody has any idea. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 18:04, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  First Member? 

message: Does anyone know how/where ebay got its name?  I've read that it was Echo Bay, California, but this place doesn't seem to exist.  There is an Echo Bay, Canada in British Columbia, however.
*"Echo Bay" is correct -- it was the name of Pierre Omidyar's consulting company, for no particular reason -- he just liked the way it sounded. (eBay was originally AuctionWeb, but someone else had dibs on the name.) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 03:19, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Beginnings 

message: I think someone should rework the "fee avoidance" paragraph, since as described it can refer to the standard eBay seller practice of inflating the handling charge for relatively inexpensive items. Unless the shipping is something like an order of magnitude too high eBay does allow it and will not cancel reported auctions, so I feel that part is inaccurate as well. In the extreme cases eBay will cancel auctions.
*eBay doesn't "allow" it -- eBay simply doesn't bother enforcing it unless the offense is egregious enough to be worth the hassle. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 04:27, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversial Practices section 

message: I'm going to add info to the article.  For those that want to edit it, I'm putting info here to help people get the info.
http://pages.ebay.com/help/policies/safe-payments-policy.html
This is from an email I sent to someone personally.  I'm going to make this as objective as I can in the article, but I'm leaving it here so you can get the idea.
Ebay has violated anti trust laws, gone beyond just a venue, and done something very illegal.  They now require that you use their service paypal to pay for auctions.  Ebay listed bidpay as their alternative as a trick because ebay forced bidpay out of business.
DyslexicEditor 11:57, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: That's bad editing you did.  Not even editing!  You blindly reverted everything.  Say what's wrong specifically about each piece so it can be edited.  All I see are discussion forums are not good enough sources.  I'm going to fix this.  Please specify anything else.  DyslexicEditor 23:45, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ebay antitrust, controlling online payment options 

message: There's a big essay in EBay#Fraud that seems to have some OR in it. Certainly a lot is correct or seems common sense, but a lot is iffy. For example, Many new buyers seem to think they are buying directly from eBay--they are not -- who says they think that? How many is many? Likewise, the weaknesses in the feedback system; according to whose analysis? And the Russia example. 
Thoughts? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 05:57, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Fraud" section 

message: by stuff on ebay without bidding, or is there another website for it?
Pece Kocovski 11:42, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  can you ever just 

message: Question: Should we, or should we not, include under "external links" a pointer to every single international eBay website? There are a couple dozen of them, mostly with names like www.ebay.nl, www.ebay.ph, and so on. All of them, plus all of them that eBay adds in the future, are accessible from eBay's main page; I'm not sure what a long list (a web directory, essentially) adds to the article other than making it look longer. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:06, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: quite agree, no need for such a list. --Ali@gwc.org.uk 16:20, 30 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Although if eBay.com has a specific page listing the international pages (much like Google's page listing their other languages available), it should have a link under the external links section. --Matt0401 03:36, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  A zillion links 

message: Origins and early history states the following "...Founded in San Jose, California on September 4, 1995 by Pierre Omidyar and Jeff Skoll..."  According to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission Form 10-K submitted by eBay Inc. it states "...eBay was formed as a sole proprietorship in September 1995 and operated its onine auction service under the name 'Auction Web.'  The Company was incorporated in May 1996, but had no employees other than the founder until July 1996..."  Also stated in Form 10-K "...Jeffrey S. Skoll has served as eBay's Vice President Strategic Planning and Analysis since February 1998, its President from August 1996 to February 1998 and as a director from December 1996 to March 1998."  There is no mention in Form 10-K that Jeffrey Skoll help found Ebay or had anyting to do with Ebay in 1995.
Codepro 22:52, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questioning Accuracy of Information 

message: In written English, words that are not normally capitalized are capitalized when they are at the beginning of a sentence. There is no reason why this rule should not apply to "eBay". No reputable style guide permits sentences to begin with anything other than capital letters, including our own Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Nohat 23:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Manual of Style doesn't say that trademarks should be capitalized at the beginning of sentences. In fact, you added it to the Manual of Style. Mushroom (Talk) 00:43, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Capitalization

message: I written a true problem of at 13:59, 28 February 2006 yet it gets removed because they think all the good stuff should be in it, why can't we have the problems in it as well?
A straw poll about this kind of trademark has been created. If anyone is interested, please vote. Mushroom (Talk) 07:25, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The Drawbacks of Ebay

message: I wrote this:
NPOV here:
* When ebay was using billpay as a payment service to compete with paypal, it engaged in practices such as requiring all payment banners to be extremely tiny, requiring its online stores to only use billpay, forcing buyers to go through billpay as its checkout system, and changing seller options by themselves to force sellers to accept billpay.  For the first one, ebay made no excuse; for the others it claimed were technical glitches, of which the author of the book paypal wars argued were doubtful.  Later, when ebay bought paypal, it made explicit rules such as sellers who use paypal must accept credit cards, cannot require anything like quasi-cash, cannot make buyers pay for paypal's fees.  It also made a "safe payment policy," which banned all online payment systems (online payment systems are not the same thing as merchant accounts) except its own, Paypal, and a company that only takes eChecks and only operates in Canada.  Paypal has responded in emails that even accepting such forms if the buyer offers it are against its policy.  ((for the last I can include headers of my email or upload screenshots to wikipedia as evidence--even if not evidence enough you can copy my exact question to ebay and see the same answer))
I don't know:
*It has been argued that "safe payments" is a monopolistic practice because it has the safety flaws that: (1) The buyer has no way to recoup money if the seller takes money orders and does not delivery.  (2) Paypal may not refund a seller who rips them off if the seller's paypal account is empty and they have no bank account, removed their bank account, told their bank to block direct debit, told their bank to block paypal from direct debit, or changed their bank account after verifying. (3) Paypal allows buyers to make fraudulent claims to get refunds; it rarely fights chargebacks; and it has no option for sellers not to keep shipping costs.  Example paypal buyer scams include: any time a package is not tracked if a buyer says not delivered 100% of the time they get their money back; any not as described case has no option for a seller to provide their input; buyers can ship to the wrong address on purpose or use a remailer from the buyer's zipcode to ship to their address and claim the seller refused it when it was not delivered; if a buyer returns goods damaged in shipping paypal still gives a full refund; some buyers have shipped empty boxes back for return.  ((I have a seen news sources on the last one))
For the second, a list of paypal scams is good.  For the whole thing maybe weasel words will fix it.  It was here or paypal that had whole sections changed constantly, so I don't know about adding "list of paypal scams--watch out!" as a section in paypal.  Umm I wrote this to replace what I added earlier as "Some argue that eBay has pursued antitrust activities through Billpoint and then PayPal." and then I kind of wrote a lot.  DyslexicEditor 08:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ebay payment monopoly, might need editing 

message: I knew about gouge on shipping but buyit now + shipping gouge = I didn't.  I also find ebay doesn't do anything.  I reported these auctions  and still they go.  $0.99 buyitnow + $35.00 shipping.  Maybe this link to the auctions should be a source?  Hehe, probably not.  But I think the search system could be configured to search for 99 cent auctions with high shipping like that as a proof.  DyslexicEditor 08:36, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  buyit now and gouge on shipping 

message: Link here: User:DyslexicEditor/Ebay/safepaymentpolicyemail3_20_2006 .  Please discuss.  DyslexicEditor 19:29, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screenshots of email answers from ebay on safe payment policy 

message: Could someone add a narrative to the Profit_and_transactions section about Yahoo having a head start in Japan? It's not at all clear why eBay failed in this region. --BWDuncan 23:50, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Yahoo/Japan eBay failure 

message: User:Commando303 wishes to insert this material. I've suggested he discuss it here. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 03:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: His/her most recent edit was this far more sensible addition, so kudos to him for not engaging in a mindless edit war. KarlBunker 10:51, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed change by [[User:Commando303]] 

message: Currently, eBay forbids sellers from accepting the services of independent money-wiring companies such as Western Union and MoneyGram. Cash-payments, too, are prohibited.
i'm pretty sure such payment methods are allowed its just sellers aren't allowed to require them. Plugwash 11:11, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It appears to be correct. See the reference I added to that statement in the article. KarlBunker 11:29, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

text: But there's no reason why an eBay username should reveal a person's "real" identity. Nor (afaik) is there anything preventing someone from having multiple eBay usernames. I suppose an option to "Do not show auctions in my feedback page" would be nice for some, but I can't see the lack of such a feature as being at all controversial. KarlBunker 04:12, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that it is controversial -- for better or worse, what you think and what I think is irrelevant on Wikipedia. Can you provide a reliable source that asserts that this is controversial? Besides, you have an obvious remedy: don't use eBay. Nothing's forcing you to. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 04:16, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  wrong information 

message: You know I don't see anything about parody sites!
You know we could have a parody catagory of some of the better ones. Just of the top of my head this one comes to mind. "bargainfindsonebay.com/index.html Bargain Finds One Bay" what do you think?
*I think it's not a parody site, and you're being disingenuous. I think they're using the ebay trademark to promote their own site, and you're trying to use Wikipedia to do the same thing. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 14:51, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I got to thinking about what eBay needs 

message: Sorry to say this, but this is true. EBay is run by a bunch of incompetent morons.
They do not know a single thing like to withdraw money from my account.
I have my account set up so if I pay, the money is taken dirrectly from my account.
Yet they kept sending me a message saying the account is overdue. I was responding with a message saying to withdraw the money from my bank.
However, they did not know how to do this and kept sending me the same message over and over again.
Now I found out my account has been suspended for being late with my payment.
How dumb a person has to be not to be able to withdraw the money directly from my account, considering they had done it many times before (last time at the end of April) and they had all the information needed?
As I said it before, EBay is run by a bunch of morons.
Norum 12:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  EBay is run by a bunch of incompetent morons. 

message: Does anyone know of any good eBay resource sites? I found this eBay seller's guide, but there is only a handful of articles.
Most of my Google searches just end up with people trying to sell me their auction products. I'd appreciate any links anyone can drop. 218.234.166.121 05:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Solid eBay Seller Resource Sites? 

message: The article currently contains this:
*Under its Verified Rights Owner (VeRO) policy, eBay permits intellectual property holders (such as software manufacturers) to directly close auctions where its products are being resold. Though the first sale doctrine permits the resale of such licenses, and a court in California where eBay is based upheld it in the case of Softman v. Adobe, as of June 2006 eBay has yet to discontinue its VeRO policy. 
First of all, the citation is six years old, which isn't too useful, especially since Softman came after it. Also, VeRO is primarily used for stopping piracy and trademark infractions, as opposed to preventing resale; the paragraph gives the idea that resale is the primary issue. I think we need a more up-to-date cite on this issue. (Thanks to Mrnaz for drawing my attention to this paragraph.) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 15:20, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: In principle VeRO is for stopping piracy, trademark and copyright violations; in practice it is used by many companies to effectively prevent resale. There are frequent posts on the eBay Discussion Boards from sellers who are selling legitmately purchased products on eBay that have had their listings shut down because the company didn't want their brand sold on eBay. Here are some examples: Vittoria North America, L.L.C.: "Unfortunately, in order to protect our Trademark, we have been forced to eliminate all Vittoria products from the eBay website." 1 Ojon Corporation: "We do not want our products being bought or auctioned on ebay. We are working in having all Ojon items being removed from ebay" 2 Fleurville Incorporated: "we do not authorize any of our wholesale accounts to sell our products on ebay." 3 Xango.net "please be informed that photographs of our XanGo(tm) Juice bottle featuring black wrapping around the top of the bottle represent a misappropriation of our trademarked bottle design." (In a notice explaining why a seller's eBay listings for legitimate product were ended.) 4 Onkyo USA Corporation "Onkyo's Authorized Dealer Agreement expressly prohibits the retailer from selling to any party for resale." (In a notice explaining why a seller's eBay listings for legitimate product were ended.) 5 I agree with the statement made about the VeRO program. Perhaps it could be edited to include more up-to-date references? MonaLS 01:17, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, I know VeRO is abused, but it's one of those things that you simply don't hear about when it's working right -- that is, the thousands of auctions closed legitimately, usually software and video piracy, for evey one that's not legit. So I think my "primarily" is still correct. Perhaps it might say something like, "eBay's VeRo program, through which copyright and trademark owners can quickly protect their rights, has been abused by some manufacturers seeking to prevent all sales whatsoever of their products on eBay." --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 06:23, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that is a good summation. MonaLS 19:25, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, not quite NPOV though; how do I know they're seeking to prevent all sales whatsoever? Hm. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 19:42, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand how it isn't NPOV. It's a statement of fact, not an opinion. Now if you had said a lot of, or most, or unscrupulous (stupid, elitist, controlling) or something that injects a flavor (for want of a better word) into that statement, I think that would make it NPOV. MonaLS 22:40, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a statement of fact that they're seeking to prevent all sales whatsoever? Then we need a reference for that, or we need to weasel it a bit: "some manufacturers seemingly seeking to prevent..." might be sufficient. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 23:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: They are seeking to prevent all sales on eBay. Other sites are rarely mentioned. If you look at the letters quoted above, some manufacturers believe, among other things, that selling on eBay cheapens their brand and damages their reputation, therefore their items may never be sold on eBay. I have seen more than one manufacturer site that states their items may never be sold on eBay, and that they will have any listings removed if they find their brand being sold on eBay. I can rustle up some of those links tomorrow if you like. MonaLS 06:17, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  VeRO 

message: Are there any (or, does anyone knows that) lawsuit prosecuting the individual sellers for their selling counterfeit brand-named shoes (e.g. PRADA, Gucci, BAPE) on the ebay? Or, the shoe companies just prosecute the ebay company as supplying a platform for people to sell fake/counterfeit PRADA, Gucci shoes through ebay?
Are there any laws set up in the USA, Uk and other European countries against the counterfeit Gucci/PRADA shoes on ebay? Or, those genuine companies are just not aware of this yet? 
But, will it be reasonable and right to ban for selling the fake shoes on Ebay, as a online e-commerce platform? Would it be practically possible to supervise the listings on ebay, and suppose one really get genuine brand-name shoes, and want to re-sell it on Ebay, what type of proves do they need to put on the listings on ebay? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Korenzhang2244 (talk • contribs) 13:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You have asked this question on Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous as well as several other pages. Please do not post questions in multiple locations without mentioning it in each location, otherwise you are just wasting other editors' time. Also questions like this should only ever be asked at the Reference Desk. Thank you. Road Wizard 21:18, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Any cases prosecuting individual sellers for selling counterfeit brand-named shoes? 

message: I want to learn how to start making websites like eBay (from scratch), and I was wondering what programming languages/tools I would need to do so.  I know some programming in C and C++, and a little html.
Could you list what language/tools would be good, and why/what they would do.  Also, if you could list any excellent books or websites to learn from for each respective programming language and tool, that'd be really helpful.  Thanks for your help!-TAz69x 02:14, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This page is for discussing the eBay article on Wikipedia, not for providing how-to instructions. Perhaps your question is best asked at an eBay discussion forum. Good luck. --MichaelZimmer (talk) 20:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Most auction sites are powered by the typical web back-ends... Perl and PHP. You'd likely do better downloading one of the bajillions already coded rather than writing one from scratch. But yes, it can be done entirely in Java. Or C. Or Python. Or whatever.  Ronabop 02:25, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: lol, wow, I didn't even know it was possible to make a webpage with C or C++!  That's crazy, and I've known some C and C++ for 3 years now, even though I suck at them!  I haven't even learnt how to build a real windows application yet, just dos ones.  Is it faster in its new C++ form?-TAz69x 16:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, it's hardly new -- the C++ version rolled out in early 1998 or maybe late 1997. And yes, it was way way faster. Thousands of times faster. And sure, you can make a web page with any language -- all a web page is is a stream of text in a particular format. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 18:41, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Learn how to make eBay 

message: I've bought several items from eBay that have taken over two months to arrive. But I still almost always leave positive feedback because I don't want to bother risking getting into feedback disputes. The only time I've left neutral feedback was when I found out that the item had only been sent over a month after I had paid for it. JIP | Talk 17:22, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutral/negative feedback 

message: I know someone once sold nothing on eBay for about 11$, but sadly, I either can't find the link, or eBay has taken it down. It had quite a funny description. But with no source, it would be useless adding :( 207.179.172.220 12:11, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unusual sale items 

message: Its funny how various websites critical of ebay are quickly erase.
http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff40519.htm
http://www.ebayexodus.com/
:See WP:EL; Wikipedia is not a collection of external links. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 19:33, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supressing Ebay Critics 

message: I'm inclined to remove entirely the "Some expensive items" and "Large items" section from the article, as they have almost no sources whatsoever, and the lack of sources encourages people to add more unsourced stuff. Thoughts? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 14:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good idea :) Mushroom (Talk) 14:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Big and expensive 

message: I propose that any item listed under "Unusual items" must have a citation from a reliable source documenting its notability. A link to the listing itself at Ebay is not sufficient, as individual editors cannot be the judge of unusualness per WP:NOR. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 21:56, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe in, follow, and enforce (in the course of editing) WP:NOR and other WP policies. However, to characterize a statement that something is "unusual," where most anyone would agree and where no special expertise is required to make that judgment, is carrying the concept of original research an unreasonable extreme. Finell (Talk) 23:45, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources for unusual items 

message: Why is it that Wiktionary allows lowercases titles and Wikipedia still doesn't. Is there a reason that Wikipedia is technologically farther behind than Wiktionary despite the fact that Wikipedia is actually older? Voortle 01:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Link on WP for script: Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Edit Top 70.111.218.254 13:32, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wiktionary allows lowercase titles and Wikipedia doesn't 

message: I just did a lot of copyedit on the changes by Jimgrupe (new user).  A lot of non-NPOV was chopped out, added a few cite tags, and copyedited the few items that fit the page.  This page is going everywhere, especially the Controversy section with slams on selllers, slams on buyers, and slams on eBay itself.  It's getting hard to find the facts.  I'm going to go back and tag it for clean-up. --- Jagged 02:45, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, and I wonder if maybe the Controversy section should be split into a new article, given its length. I also would consider splitting the "unusual" list too, since its not essential to what EBay is, which is the purpose of an encyclopedia article. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 10:41, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How about, perhaps, a split between eBay-the-company and eBay-the-website? Sure, there's some overlap, but things like history of the site and its most important features doesn't need to be in the corporate article. That's where the lists can go. (I just noticed there's almost nothing in the article about the often-utterly-nasty but often-utterly-wonderful discussion boards.) --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 00:56, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with splitting into separate articles for the company and the Web site. There is too little material that would be germane to one and not the other, so there would be substantial repetition if each proposed article is to adequately cover its subject. I don't think that these are two are meaningful divisible subjects from an encyclopedic viewpoint. Also, it would inconvenience the avarage reader to have to look at 2 articles when the reader seeks information about "eBay." Finell (Talk) 23:56, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Look at how Google treats it. That's what I have in mind; not much of an inconvenience to click a link on the top of the page to dispatch to the other one. I'm not sure there would need to be any repetition at all, other than the summary paragraph. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 03:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Getting out of control