Talk:Cdigix

---

I've cleaned up a lot of the POV and advertisement cruft from this article, but I'm not convinced it should exist at all. I'm also not convinced that every school on their client list should link to this article, as the links are anything but encyclopedic. RossPatterson 00:45, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not free adspace

I absolutely agree that this article was (and maybe still is) almost beyond saving. I cleaned up as much of the corporate fanboyish material as I could, leaving only factual information (something the piece was a bit light on before). Wikipedia is not free adspace and should not tolerate corporate exploitation. I think this article should stay, though. Just cut out all the bloat in the future, or I will have to reccommmend it for locking. Plasticbadge 13:30, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

• • Update: There has been ongoing vandalism, but I have done my best so far to combat it without having to lock the article (which should be used as an absolute last resort IMHO). I suspect that the person(s) that keep trying to change the article back to the adspeak version are either connected to the company or rabid fanboys of the service - neither very savory in the context of a wiki site - but, alas, they refuse to have a civil conversation,instead resorting to defacing my userpage. Unfortunatly for them, I have no problem policing this behavior until I die or Wikipedia shuts down. I'm a young man in good health and Wikipedia gains strength every day, so I doubt either is likely to happen any time soon. Still, I'd appreciate caring and fair minded members of the wikipedia community to help out if they can. Add the article to your watch list and revert any changes that would make the page just a free promotion for the company. Wikipedia is not free adspace, and we can all do our little part in minimizing the time marketing changes mar articles - hopefully without having to lock them. Thanks all (even the vandal - keeping up with your mischief has been mildly entertaining if nothing else). - Plasticbadge 20:02, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Yes, I definitely agree that these vandals are irritating. I've been monitoring it for a while, and the daily updates from 206.253.195.211 are really bothersome- luckily, you manage to revert the changes before I have to. --Wafulz 00:19, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
      • There are advantages to being a college student tied to my computer 20 hours of the day;) Plasticbadge 01:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Infobox for the features

The way the features are set up reminds me of an infobox, so maybe we should change it to that. --Eplack 01:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

would disagree. Few if any similar media store articles have such an infobox. The information is ususllly presented as it is here. - Plasticbadge 12:48, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Ctrax Player

Recently Cdigix released a media player (albeit rather buggy) to the public to play its songs. Its very similar to iTunes and other similar players. The new homepage is almost a direct copy of the iTunes Music Store, the only difference being the color scheme.--Eplack 01:29, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Help with the infobox

{{helpme}}

Admin: Please help me with the Media player section so that the infobox for it stays within the heading. Thanks!

Doesn't need an admin, just the special markup {{-}} at the end of the section to move the next heading down below the infobox. I've made the change for you. --ais523 14:22, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Relavancy

I've noticed that the Cdigix service is no longer offered in the online music store format, or at least, it doesn't seem to be. It seems like they went the route of content hosting provider for universities, if you check out their website. I can't find anything about the music store on there. http://www.cdigix.com/cdigix/AboutCdigix/tabid/74/Default.aspx

In this case I think that all the nitpicky details could be summarized in paragraph form in a section about the "past". I'll do that now, but feel free to chime in. --Eplack (talk) 08:32, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Done, feel free to edit. I'm debating deleting the software infoxbox, though it provides some history.--Eplack (talk) 09:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure about your changes? These are some pretty significant edits based on speculation. When it was last overhauled, this article was largely based on the template of other e-music stores' articles. For this reason, I have a real problem removing entire sections like "Features" and "Criticism". This article has a long history of shady edits from Cdigix employees and one-off IPs, so please pardon me if I'm leaning to the a more conservative inclusionist position on this one. - Plasticbadge (talk) 13:45, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

"Features" and "Criticism" sections aren't necessary for all articles, particularly short ones.-Wafulz (talk) 16:30, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. I just ask you to understand the reasons for my wariness. Plasticbadge (talk) 12:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC)