To view the response to a question, click the [show] link to the right of the question. To see the original version of this FAQ (January 2011), click here.
Q1: Why does this talk page have a FAQ?
A1: Some questions have been brought up repeatedly on this talk page, which has become lengthy and has an archive. This FAQ attempts to summarize previous responses to some of these questions to save people having to give the same answers over and over, and to serve as a reference point for anyone interested in improving this article.
Q2: Why does this article have so much negative material?
A2: Wikipedia's policy on neutrality states we must "fairly [represent] all significant viewpoints that have been published by reliable sources, in proportion to the prominence of each viewpoint." Although there has been positive coverage of Tagged in the technology press – and this is reflected in the article – coverage in the mainstream press, including Time,[1] The New York Times,[2] and The Washington Post,[3] has been negative in the past.
Relevant Wikipedia policy:
- Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, particularly the section on Due and undue weight
Q3: Why is this article more negative than other articles on social networking sites?
A3: In addition to the above, there are several lines of evidence that Tagged, in the past, has encountered more controversy than other social networking sites.
- Time magazine called Tagged "The world's most annoying website".[1]
- New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo referred to Tagged as "one of the worst social networking sites that we've encountered."[4]
- The Better Business Bureau reports more complaints against Tagged Inc. than the two other US social networking services of comparable size.[5]
Q4: Why are the controversies mentioned in the lead?
A4: Wikipedia's guideline on lead sections states, "The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. It should... summarize the most important points—including any prominent controversies. The emphasis given to material in the lead should roughly reflect its importance to the topic, according to reliable, published sources..." It also states, "the lead... should not "tease" the reader by hinting at—but not explaining—important facts that will appear later in the article." There is an active debate on the merits of the interpretation of the guidelines and some editors disagree with the current lead claiming it is not consistent with other social networking articles and appears to be biased by a few editors.
Relevant Wikipedia guideline:
Q5: Why is everyone around here so suspicious?
A5: In June 2009, 64.125.137.10 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) repeatedly and anonymously removed referenced negative material from this article. This IP address was subsequently found to be registered to Tagged.com. Around the same time, several IP addresses and apparent single purpose accounts edited Wikipedia solely to remove or downplay criticism of Tagged (examples: Maryloffers (talk · contribs), Maryisback (talk · contribs), Ellismrtn321 (talk · contribs), 76.204.193.121 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)). This lead to the article being semi-protected to prevent edits from unregistered contributors or new accounts. Then MarinaKSF (talk · contribs) stated she was approached by Tagged to assist them in "balancing the tone" of the article.
Be it positive or negative, Wikipedia contributors are strongly discouraged from editing when they have a conflict of interest. They are also strongly encouraged to declare any interests, both on their user pages and on the talk pages of relevant articles. All contributors are expected to remain civil toward everyone and especially to be patient and kind toward new contributors.
Relevant Wikipedia guideline:
References
- ^ a b Gregory, Sean. "Tagged: The World's Most Annoying Website." Time. Thursday June 11, 2009. Retrieved on June 11, 2009.
- ^ Alina Tugend (June 19, 2009). "Typing In an E-Mail Address, and Giving Up Your Friends' Too". The New York Times. Retrieved 2009-12-05.
{{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help) - ^ "paidContent - Social Net Tagged Getting Sued By NY AG". The Washington Post. July 9, 2009. Retrieved 2011-01-12.
{{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help) - ^ Laura Dolan (June 10, 2010). "NY attorney general warns teen social networking website". CNN. Retrieved 2010-06-14.
{{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in:|publisher=(help) - ^ "BBB Review of Tagged in San Francisco, CA". Better Business Bureau. Retrieved 2011-01-12..
{{cite web}}: Check date values in:|accessdate=(help) Scroll down and click the orange box labelled "INDUSTRY COMPARISON".