Talk:Meetup/Archives/2015

Untitled

Does Wikipedia bother anybody but me in how the entries on companies turn into essentially blurbs for the company, because criticism is automatically controversial and hence not "encyclopedic?" I'm a happy user of meetup who today thought he would like to find some "perspective" on the organization that comes from some source besides Meetup.com. I'm not going to find it here. I also think there is a tendency to overstate companies' place in the marketplace, because the critics of such as meetup.com are not motivated to do research and write it here. But of course the principals or employees of meetup.com are so motivated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.190.164.52 (talk) 20:20, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Requested move 2006

Meetup → Meetup.com – {The word "meetup" is NOT synonymous with meetup.com. First of all meetup.com is a profitable organization. Second, several other online services offer the same services as meetup.com. So why give meetup.com the right to the Wikipedia word "Meetup"? Instead “Meetup” should be reserved for a generic description of what meetups are. Here a link to meetup.com and other similar services could of cause be provided. Watson 13:33, 6 June 2006 (UTC)} copied from the entry on the WP:RM page

Survey

Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one-sentence explanation, then sign your opinion with ~~~~

• Support - I requested it, Watson 13:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Support. —GrantNeufeld 05:13, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Moved. —Nightstallion (?) 19:26, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

• Support - Why hasn't this been done yet? It wasn't synonymous in 2006, it's not synonymous now. Chandell (talk) 08:49, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

Explanation of recent rework

1. Contact info doesn't belong in a Wikipedia article; people can go to the Meetup.com site for this.
2. The Wikipedia:Meetup link is a proper dablink, so its being placed at the top instead of the bottom is fair.
3. The rest were standard date/year links and minor cleanup.

— Stevie is the man! ^{Talk | Contrib} 11:00, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Stevie. I don't know how I reverted your changes. I don't have any problem with your rework. I remember looking at a diff file of this article the other day, and I must have accidentally clicked on the rollback link without realizing it. Sorry about that. --Sheldon Rampton 05:01, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No problem. :) — Stevie is the man! ^{Talk | Contrib} 11:06, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Disinfopedia?

What's with the line at the bottom of the article stating that portions of the article were taken from disinfopedia? Were the portions taken from disinfopedia actually real? - James Foster 17:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Answers.com

http://www.answers.com/topic/meetup It appears to have the same text i don't know who got from who but it might be Plagiarism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.88.76.41 (talk • contribs)

Answers.com copies articles from Wikipedia (under the GFDL license, I think). They give attribution on the page. —GrantNeufeld 00:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Major edit: news release text removed

The history section was marked as "This article or section reads like a news release, or is otherwise written in an overly promotional tone". I agreed when I read it. The Domain name section was also totally irrelevant or at least didn't cover notable information. Several links were not motivated by the article text, so I removed them. Others may want to remove some of the remaining links.

Please don't undo my changes. If you feel that some of the stuff that I removed needs to be in the article, please re-add that particular text, and not all of it. --HelgeStenstrom (talk) 11:17, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

History?

The "History" section has one short sentence saying these three individuals started the thing in 2001. The rest is a paragraph on how they recently made some changes, and there were people who didn't like it. I have to say, I didn't like the change in the way Wikipedia alphabetizes things on their Category page. But I hardly think that warrants 75% of the history section in the article on Wikipedia. 71.241.227.115 (talk) 14:36, 5 September 2011 (UTC)Stephen Kosciesza

Requested move 2012

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved to Meetup (website). I haven't left a redirect so feel free to make a disamb page. --regentspark (comment) 20:01, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Meetup → Meetup.com – The word "meetup" is not synonymous with meetup.com. The article is about meetup.com, a social website. The word "meetup" has it's own meaning (a meeting, or regular meetings of people sharing common interest).Frkandris (talk) 09:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

• Support disambiguation since we have meeting, meetup.com, wikt:meetup, Wikipedia meetups -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 02:49, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
• Move to Meetup (website), with redirect at Meetup.com. This ref refers to "Meetup", and neither the website's logo nor the official "About" page include ".com", suggesting the WP:COMMONNAME is "Meetup". -- Trevj (talk) 05:58, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

  It sounds to me as if Meetup should be a disambiguation page. -- Trevj (talk) 07:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

• Move to Meetup (website), with redirect at Meetup.com. --Frkandris (talk) 17:33, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Translations

Note to self: A German version of this (de:Meetup.com) should be created. Also other language versions might be of interest, like Portugues, Polish. Cheers, Horst-schlaemma (talk) 11:47, 29 October 2015 (UTC)