Talk:Boxbe

This article was nominated for deletion on 27 March 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Randy Stewart

I wanted to declare my conflict of interest in editing the Boxbe page. As an officer of the company, I have a clear conflict of interest. The page creator had clear bias against the company, the page didn't contain any facts about the company, and additionally, the references were poor. I felt the edit was within Wikipedia's guidelines and tried to write a neutral version of the page. Stewtopia (talk) 21:32, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Warring

This stub has been subject to edit warring for over a year. I have combined the two versions. Critics of boxbe have the perhaps difficult challenge of finding reliable sources to cite. Unfortunately, blogs are not considered encyclopedia-worthy sources. Do some research, folks, and put some solid support under your claims. Do not delete or revert either version without first discussing here and reaching consensus on a neutral point of view worthy of an encyclopedia. And please — log in when you make changes. Anonymous changes with just an IP address kinda sorta have less credibility, you know? Bn (talk) 20:02, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that the blog http://www.ventrino.com/blog/309/2009/06/boxbecom-spam-scam/ includes a response telling the blogger how to opt out, so it seems odd to cite this blog in support of the claim that they provide no such means. Bn (talk) 20:06, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is Doubtful

I can testify to having recieved e-mails as given below from one of my contacts who possibly subscribed to Boxbe:-

1. A few months ago I fwd him an e-mail and got a reply that I need to verify at Boxbe before my mail could be delivered to his inbox. I never verified, presuming that if my contact was so bothered about his privacy as to require verification through some third party - I need not bother either.

2. Recently I started getting spammed by his PC / mail ID - basicaly e-mails with cryptic subjects and hyperlinks in the content redirecting to Viagra purchases etc etc.

3. I tried to fwd the mail back to him to tell him that that his PC was infected and sending out this spam. However, my mail alerting him again went to Boxbe and not directly to his mailbox and I again got a Boxbe verification request in case I wanted my mail delivered. I once again refused to click on the link Boxbe wanted me to.

Presuming that all contacts of this person are getting similarly spammed and being asked to verify and deliver their mails via Boxbe - eventually, nobody would be bothering to reply unless they are either stupid or desperate enough to verify and risk compromising their own mail ID too. End state I think is that my friend would be sending mails and wondering why nobody is replying?

I well understand that the two events (spamming and verification ex Boxbe) can be absolutely uncorrelated and Boxbe may not be to blame at all - yet this is the round-robin end state that I have experienced and it is certainly a pitfall in the proposed business model of Boxbe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.168.40.215 (talk) 22:15, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Revenue Source/Business Model

After spending 30 minutes searching, I could not find any current information about how Boxbe generates revenue. It would be very helpful if the entry talked about the business model on which Boxbe is based. I'll continue searching but had hoped to find it here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.190.56.32 (talk) 16:26, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Irony?

The only spam which ever reaches my inbox nowadays are countless "invitations" for the Boxbe service from people whom I either do not know at all or whom I am certain do not use the service. Add to this fact a Wikipedia article which looks more like advertisement than an article, and... Scam? Possibly. It sure as heck can't be a serious business in any case considering they rely on actually spamming people with "invites". 41.210.129.57 (talk) 12:23, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nikboxbe

I am here to declare my conflict of interest. I am here as a representative of Boxbe, to help provide correct facts and references to this article, within Wikipedia's guidelines, in order to keep an as neutrally written and informative article as possible. --Nikboxbe (talk) 20:43, 13 November 2012 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikboxbe (talk • contribs) 21:02, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

At least you are honest :) I would suggest that you read through WP:COI, in particular WP:PAY, WP:SELFCITE, and WP:LUC. You also seem to be in violation of WP:SPA - you are hereby warned of this fact. For completeness you should also read through WP:NPOV and WP:NOT. WegianWarrior (talk) 21:32, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for taking the time to respond and providing guidelines. I am reviewing all the references that have been provided. In short, it's my view (with "transparency and neutrality" being key) that it may be best for the wiki article editing process to occur within the Talk page rather than on the actual wiki article itself (as it had been in the past). To that end, I will be requesting help from others with the single primary goal to continually improve, correct and publish the facts surrounding the Boxbe service intentionally with a NPOV. For all experienced editors, how does that sound as an editing procedure going forward? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nikboxbe (talk • contribs) 20:48, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Qui tacet consentit" or silence implies consent.

In an effort to publish the accurate and verifiable facts regarding the Boxbe service, let us review the Issues stated at the top of the Boxbe Wiki article (as of when this Talk forum entry was posted: 9 Issues total) and cover them individually in this Talk forum. This effort will be managed by way of a series of ongoing requests, each a separate entry, covering each Issue. The requests are for editors and writers to assist in ways which will improve the article through identifying the contributing factors that necessitated an Issue being raised on the article, followed by resolving and removing the Issues as they can be. Nikboxbe (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article may contain excessive or improper use of non-free material. (April 2012)

There does not appear to be any existing usage (excessive or improper) of non-free material. To resolve this matter and remove this Issue from the article, specific examples are required to be provided for review. If they can not be provided, this issue should be removed as promptly as possible. What are the excerpts in the article that contribute to this Issue being raised in the view of Wikipedia editors? Nikboxbe (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tag removed. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 11:55, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs additional citations for verification. (September 2010)

Unfortunately, this issue will need to remain in place for the purposes of eliciting further verifiable information from the original contributing writers, unless it is the view of Wikipedia editors to simply remove the statements as they can not be verified. Here are the three (3) existing sentences that further citation is requested currently.

1) Boxbe has been criticized as an internet fraud scheme that enables spammers to buy access to Boxbe member's in-boxes for the purpose of sending spam.[citation needed] There exists no verifiable source of fact stating this about the Boxbe service. This citation request should be left as-is in place on the basis that another contributing writer added this statement and it should be their responsibility or another who is familiar with the reference to cite the verifiable source. After time has passed, it may be discussed and determined that the statement is indeed false and can be removed, including the citation request.

2) Users have complained that it spoofs their address in email soliciting others to become members.[citation needed] There exists no verifiable source of fact stating this about the Boxbe service. This citation request should be left as-is in place on the basis that another contributing writer added this statement and it should be their responsibility or another who is familiar with the reference to cite the verifiable source. After time has passed, it may be discussed and determined that the statement is indeed false and can be removed, including the citation request.

3) This [original mail headers] causes bloating in databases as well as internet congestion.[citation needed] There exists no verifiable source of fact stating this about the Boxbe service. With regard to the actual citation request, this citation request should be left as-is in place on the basis that another contributing writer added this statement and it should be their responsibility or another who is familiar with the reference to cite the verifiable source. After time has passed, it may be discussed and determined that the statement is indeed false and can be removed, including the citation request. Nikboxbe (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article appears to be written like an advertisement. (April 2012)

This Issue should remain displayed in an effort to prompt content changes to the article and remain until, at least, these two sections of the article are changed by way of discussion and agreement in this forum with the guidance of Wikipedia editors:

1) The Service paragraph needs to be modified to remove any and all wording that may appear to be written like an advertisement. The actual specific article content changes will be discussed in other entries in this forum.

2) The Security paragraph needs to be modified to remove any and all wording that may appear to be written like an advertisement. The actual specific article content changes will be discussed in other entries in this forum. Nikboxbe (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject. (April 2012)

This issue should remain displayed in an effort to prompt more writers to contribute to the article into the future. The original underlying Issue has been resolved by declaration on the Talk:Boxbe page in an effort “to help provide correct facts and references to this article, within Wikipedia's guidelines, in order to keep an as neutrally written and informative article as possible.” This Talk forum will be where questions of improving the article content will be raised, discussed, and resolved going forward. Nikboxbe (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article's factual accuracy is disputed. (April 2012)

This issue should be left as-is in place on the basis that other contributing writers added statements which could have factual accuracy disputed. After time, it may be discussed and determined that certain statements are indeed false and can be removed. Once that is agreed upon and completed, then this Issue can be removed. Nikboxbe (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's general notability guideline. (April 2012)

This issue should remain displayed and be considered for continued discussion. Since Boxbe is a service which is available to the public for use as a utility service in conjunction with their email accounts, it could be advocated that the topic is worthy to have its own article for reference. Factual information regarding the service is verifiable. It will be a continuing effort to ensure that this Wiki article is accurate in describing the Boxbe service and any contextual information related to the Boxbe service. Modern authoritative references, such as Wikipedia, are provided to the public for inquiry for the sake of the consumer of the product as reference material. Examples of other articles with similar services to the public can be found and posted here for reference.. Nikboxbe (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. (August 2010)

This Issue should remain displayed and be considered for continued discussion. This issue is a correct statement and effort has not been put forth to link from other articles given the focus on the article’s content and factual accuracy so far. Additionally, a linking effort has been not purposely been performed on the company’s behalf to avoid any wording or reference in the text of a link which would seem to be advertising from another article (such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_list). Nikboxbe (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The neutrality of this article is disputed. (April 2012)

This Issue should remain displayed in an effort to prompt more contributing writers. The underlying issue has been resolved by declaration on the Talk:Boxbe page in an effort “to help provide correct facts and references to this article, within Wikipedia's guidelines, in order to keep an as neutrally written and informative article as possible.” This Talk forum will be where questions of improving the article content will be raised, discussed, and resolved going forward. Nikboxbe (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article contains weasel words: vague phrasing that often accompanies biased or unverifiable information. (April 2012)

This Issue should remain displayed in an effort to prompt past or future contributing writers. The underlying issue will best be resolved with citations being provided where needed for verification or simply removing the statements, with such phrasing, completely from the article. No content provided on behalf of the company’s effort to correct and publish the accurate facts of the service has used vague phrasing with biased or unverifiable information. This Talk forum will be where questions of improving the article content will be raised, discussed, and resolved going forward. After time, it may be discussed and determined that this Issue is no longer needed to be displayed and can be removed. Nikboxbe (talk) 05:43, 22 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up

I am going to try to clean up this article. The following (-Boxbe starts with knowledge of your contacts. It then builds upon it, extending priority to contacts of those you trust. Close integration within Gmail (including Google Apps), AOL, Yahoo! Mail and their affiliates lets Boxbe stay up to date so it can intelligently screen email.) reads like a advertisement. Words like, your,those you trust, are out of place in a Wikipedia article.--BeckiGreen (talk) 22:17, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Becki, that is a good change. Nikboxbe (talk) 19:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

company registration?

According to their statements, they provide anonymous bulk data to their parent company: they use you to identify and classify spam.

I've been unable to find their company registration record, or (if there is a public company) their income/tax records.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.162.148 (talk • contribs) 07:29, 2 August 2018 (UTC)