Talk:Giganews

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force.

"(cur) (prev) 20:22, 23 August 2006 Junon (talk | contribs) (Initial entry)"

"(cur) (prev) 19:05, 15 September 2008 Junon (talk | contribs) (2,775 bytes) (... David Vogelpohl is a Giganews employee and my direct supervisor ...)"

http://civis.arstechnica.com/users/23015 - - Member profile - Junon - Occupation: Copywriter @ Giganews

Apart from Giganews there are many other usenet providers, e.g. usenetserver, easynews, ngroups, astraweb, newshosting, powerusenet, thundernews, news-service, newsfeeds, usenetbyorder and tons of others. All those are not represented in Wikipedia.

The trend is basically similar, they provide exactly the same service, access exactly the same data with similarly growing retention.

What should be done maybe - creating "Usenet Provider list" entry and then adding entries for individual Usenet Providers with the link back to the whole list. But even in such a case, a marketing division employee shouldn't be the one who is maintaining the Wikipedia entry, a marketing department apparent venue of activity is to recruit users from other providers through advertising, which is in apparent conflict of interests with the Wikipedia guidelines.

I think it is fine if the marketing people maintain the page as long as it is relatively unbiased(seems good so far) and they disclose the fact. If this gains popularity then I say we convert it over. - 24.218.111.158 (talk) 23:43, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"There are a number of other usenet providers with access to the same content and similarly increasing retention."

pretty sure the only difference between astraweb and giganews is that astraweb offers fewer groups than giganews. it is well known that most of the subscribers utilize these paid services for access to binary groups. Astraweb and giganews BOTH offer, essentially, identical access to all binary groups (eg groups that have binary content in the majority of the articles). Astraweb saves server space and bandwidth by only offering the binary groups and a (relatively) limited number of non-binary groups. giganews offers, essentially, 100% of all groups currently in existence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.6.52.200 (talk) 23:40, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Scam

Giganews is a scam. It has very poor support. If you try to talk to them, nobody will answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.129.208.16 (talk) 15:17, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]