Talk:Twitter verification

i

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 29 March 2021 and 4 June 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JenPatt87. Peer reviewers: Reham321, Alexstonehill.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:30, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Some articles that not yet cited

the following articles have not yet been cited, but may be useful to future editors looking for more information (I may come back to edit this list later, by the way, and welcome others to edit this section as well):

• https://mashable.com/article/twitter-memes-unverified-verified-hack/
• https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDEW.2019.00006 / https://doi.org/10.1145/3292522.3326026 (two different versions of the same underlying research)
• https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2018.0475
• Not a source, but Blue plaque

Article title

Thanks for creating this page, Yitzilitt! I had looked up Twitter verification before and seen that it was a missing topic, so I'm glad you're plugging that hole. Make sure you integrate it into the encyclopedia by linking to it from Twitter, etc. Also, I'm sure there are lots of interesting fun facts about it, so it'd make a good potential WP:DYK candidate (you'll need to nominate within 7 days).

Regarding the title, I think Twitter verification would be more appropriate for a few reasons. It doesn't need to be disambiguated, is more formal/professional while still being intelligible to casual readers, and allows for a slightly broader scope. Would you consider moving the page? Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 09:32, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 6 March 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 03:45, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

---

Blue check mark (Twitter) → Twitter verification – The new title wouldn't need to be disambiguated, is more formal/professional while still being intelligible to casual readers, and allows for a slightly broader scope. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 00:18, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Support, the current title is unnecessarily specific and a little bit WP:JARGONy, and it needs disambiguation, unlike the proposed article which is clear, concise, and unambiguous. —El Millo (talk) 00:41, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

• Support per nom, and per the above. BD2412 T 00:45, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose "Blue check mark" and "blue check" are well-understood as being the common name for this; a Google test brings back hits from many sources. The parenthetical (Twitter) could be cut, as Instagram uses a similar symbol that could be documented on this page as well. 162.208.168.92 (talk) 00:59, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
• Support - The article is about Twitter verification. The name is less ambiguous, clearer, and more WP:PRECISE. "Blue check mark" is often used to refer to the verified users themselves (usually in a disparaging manner, ie: "oh look, another blue check mark showing their ignorance of how much groceries cost" or "yet another case of a blue check mark publicly supporting terrorism") and not in reference to the process of user's accounts being verified. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 10:17, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
• Support per WP:NATURALDISAMBIGUATION. Rreagan007 (talk) 21:22, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
• Support, clearer, more accurate, and follows WP:NATURALDISAMBIGUATION. —Granger (talk · contribs) 07:07, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
• Support per WP:NATURALDISAMBIGUATION and WP:CONCISE. HouseBlaster^talk 14:00, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rat verified

Should we mention #RatVerified post-Musk acquisition? It was a fully story in NYT and a less significant one in TechCrunch. I think that it should be mentioned as motivated by the frustration of the check mark change, as opposed to "well this also happened" with no explanation on why it happened. Thoughts? SWinxy (talk) 21:27, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

"Blue check" and "blue tick" as epithets

The term "blue check" is colloquially used to describe a certain class, personality and political profile, although which profile that was changed after the 2022 reforms. It was mainly meant in a pejorative sense both before and after. Is this phenomenon worthy of inclusion? Robin S. Taylor (talk) 14:44, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Mandira 213.172.134.206 (talk) 17:13, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

The article name should be changed

Article name should change to X (social media) verification. Kerim Demirkaynak (talk) 18:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Commerçant et enterprise

Hm1t___01@ 102.220.199.133 (talk) 01:52, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

Commeçant 102.220.199.133 (talk) 01:53, 27 September 2024 (UTC)

جواداسلوب

151.232.99.242 (talk) 21:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)