User talk:Spamoom

Hello, Spamoom. You have new messages at Talk:Online_auction#.27See_also.27_Section.
Message added Callum.moore (talk) 09:32, 21 March 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

If I have left you a message: please answer on your talk page, then place {{Talkback|your username}} on my talk.
If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page, then place {{Talkback|Spamoom}} on your talk.
Please click here to leave me a new message.

Uni Talk

Hi Sam, I'm interested in doing online auctions too, and would like to join your group. Carl Stanyard (talk) 11:52, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Carl, of course you can :) --spamoom (talk) 11:55, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Where are our other group members? Craigjp88 (talk) 09:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not attending -.- Looks like it's just me and you doing this project? :D --spamoom (talk) 09:35, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good times ! Did you get talkbacks from this or am I doing it wrong? Craigjp88 (talk) 09:36, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You only need to put a talk back if we're having the convo on your wall :) I get a notification when you edit my wall :D --spamoom (talk) 09:39, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, so we're confirmed that we're doing this ? Craigjp88 (talk) 09:42, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at User:Spamoom/POIB-Online_Auction_Discussion - Trying to list all the pages we may look at on there --spamoom (talk) 09:44, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

iPad 3/HD/New

So I heard you're not getting one? You know it's a product made by Apple, right? --Ace Jon (talk) 09:36, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is it shiny? I may get one..... --spamoom (talk) 11:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is 7 shinies --Ace Jon (talk) 11:21, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IPad#Third_generation --spamoom (talk) 11:22, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What is your topic?

Sam, I'm finding it kind of hard to write about a solid topic at the moment. I was wondering if there was a specific topic you'd made your mind up on yet cause in my sandbox I have some stuff about the different types of online auction like English, Dutch, First-price sealed-bid and Second-price sealed-bid, I think it would be good if someone could do some kind of elaboration in regards to these topics, like live examples of these auctions or something and the fundamental differences (not too much detail as pages already exist for them, or we could look at talking to other wikipedia peeps about a possible merger of articles?). If not you maybe Carl or Callum. I have placed some talkbacks on their pages for this. Let me know what you think -- Craigjp88 (talk) 09:31, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It does seem very difficult to add to it. At the moment, the article reads like a big ebay advert, we maybe need to mention other online auctions. I'd like to mention about shill bidding and maybe other unlawful actions that can take place on an online auction place. There are also a few things on the todo list that I'd like to do such as adding an image of an auction (most likely a screenshot of ebay -- oops). The article is also has very little references which isn't good! You could talk about the pros and cons of each type of auction? --spamoom (talk) 16:54, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the only concern I have with what I could be adding is how to relate it directly to online auctions as opposed to generic auction practices. There seems to be all of the information available for online auctions but it seems to be on other pages? It's going to be quite hard to get collaboration from other "Wikipedians" too due to the fact that some of the most recent talk messages on the page are some 4 years old. I think I will take your advice and go in to detail about the different types of auctions but i don't think pros and cons unless heavily verifiable due to it being opinionated and clashing with Wikipedias neutrality. The main amount of papers available with regards to online auctions seem to be relating to online fraud within the arena, that might be a good topic for someone too? --Craigjp88 (talk) 17:02, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

About neutrality, Toni mentioned on a slide that as long as pros and cons are balanced they should be happy :) The fraud thing ties in with the legallity part I was talking about - so I'll steal that :P --spamoom (talk) 17:06, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In that case I think I'm going to do a comprehensive list of the current different types of online bidding formats, with possible pros and cons if i can balance it properly. We really need to get some form of input from Carl and Callum on this --Craigjp88 (talk) 17:10, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Will post a talkback to see if we can get them to see this :D --spamoom (talk) 17:14, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just trying to read through all this stuff now T_T it is pretty hard to follow. I am still not sure what I am going to talk about at the minute I can't think of another area really that I could write any amout of worth about. Callum.moore (talk) 20:15, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I have read through and I think what we need is a list of areas that need doing, so topics can be divided up because I have no idea what needs doing, and what part I can do. Carl Stanyard (talk) 20:21, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I just found this page. Online_auction_tools there was no mention of it on your page Sam but it seems like we should probably do something with this page too. Callum.moore (talk) 20:41, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So were we still planning to try and argue with the wiki community that there is a need for an online auction page as opposed to just having it link to the business model or have we scrapped that idea? Callum.moore (talk) 20:57, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should start a talk page on for the Online Auction with the aim to create a proper unbiased page that isn't just about eBay. Carl Stanyard (talk) 21:01, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best bet this late on is to work with what we have. One good task for someone to get involved in is refining the current section by providing verifiability to it, finding references and such to back up what's been said or even better to change what's been said to something that can be verified. I think Sam's intention was to do the things regarding the legal side of things which is a pretty broad subject and has a lot of subject areas like the use of unfair means to win auctions. I'm pretty sure a whole section could be done on sniping alone, I don't think we're expected to write a monster entry, just something correct and following wiki standards :). --Craigjp88 (talk) 21:09, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok so I think I have decided I am going to cover bid sniping. There is a dedicated page for it here Auction_Sniping and also really bad reference to it here Online auction tools which I think should really be moved to the sniping page. Is everyone ok with this? Callum.moore (talk) 22:22, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This page Reverse_auction about reverse auctions wants rewriting in encyclopedic style so I might do that providing Toni allows it. Carl Stanyard (talk) 22:36, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So have you guys decided to change subject or are we still needed to collaborate? --Craigjp88 (talk) 09:51, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure yet waiting for Toni to come back so we can see if he would be OK with us changing. Callum.moore (talk) 09:54, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So tony said that there cannot be another group as there are only going to be 10 presentations. So you guys are stuck with us. Callum.moore (talk) 10:26, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright so, we need a main page to act as a central hub for all of our contributions and then we can also branch off to alter other pages. I am going to suggest that we do this by making an Online auction page as it isn't really appropriate to be talking about shill bidding and other stuff on the business model page. Callum.moore (talk) 11:28, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This sounds good, I told Darren that I'd be working on the reverse_auction page which can be linked via the online auction page. Carl Stanyard (talk) 11:31, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All right guys that sounds good to me. I've currently edited my sandbox entry to be as if we were starting a new article and I've partly written what I want to contribute to the introduction and I am working on finalising my main entry. I think it would be a good idea if later on today we can all come together with our 'finalised' versions of what we want to publish on the page and try and form a cohesive entry before we stick it all up. Then we will let the Wikipedians rip us to pieces afterwards! Sound good? --Craigjp88 (talk) 13:57, 15 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me! How did you want to merge it before we put it online? --spamoom (talk) 09:27, 20 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is no longer relevant due to us already having a page up there! :D but if people have sandbox content that isn't up there and think its relevant they should slam it in and we can review it afterwards ! :) --09:30, 20 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Craigjp88 (talk • contribs)

Disambiguation link notification for March 16

Hi. When you recently edited Online auction, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page British (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 18:34, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

An invitation to the Teahouse... Please join us!

Hello! Spamoom, you are invited to join other new editors and friendly hosts in the Teahouse. An awesome place to meet people, ask questions and learn more about Wikipedia. Please join us! Rosiestep (talk) 07:12, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Bid4Games Auction Website.jpeg

Thanks for uploading File:Bid4Games Auction Website.jpeg. I noticed the description page specifies that this media item is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media item could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media item is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the file discussion page, write the reason why this media item is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. RJaguar3 | u | t 08:55, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]