Talk:MacRumors

Computing Low‑importance

	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.

Apple Inc. Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Mac, iOS and related topics 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.Apple Inc.Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc.Template:WikiProject Apple Inc.Apple Inc. articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Track Record Section?[edit]

I believe that there should be a track record section to show what rumors reported by the site have turned out to be true. For example, there should be a mention about the recent mistake concerning iPod Touch cameras. This new section could be built in a timeline format. Any feedback? VisvambaNathan (talk) 11:16, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm admittedly biased, but I will say that it's very difficult to pin "right" or "wrong" labels on a number of types of rumors. Take, for example, the iPod touch camera rumor you cite. The rumor itself appears to have been completely true...Apple did design an iPod touch with camera (see the prototype that appeared on the Sirius/XM radio show blog) and planned on releasing it in early September. So early rumors of the camera-equipped iPod touch were completely correct and not a mistake. But things changed over time, and Apple apparently decided that it wasn't happy with the way the product was turning out and scrapped the plan for the time being. That said, I have no problem with a "track record" section for MacRumors and any other rumor sites as long as they properly take into account the shifting nature of Apple's whims. There is a big difference between a flat-out wrong rumor and a correct rumor that later became incorrect due to corporate decisions or other factors. WildCowboy (talk) 14:24, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Traffic ranking[edit]

This data seems to be pretty out of date, surely it should be removed? -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:33, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Updated. Airplaneman ✈ 23:48, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 19:37, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem :). Airplaneman ✈ 19:49, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mac rumours 2012-04-09.png Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Mac rumours 2012-04-09.png, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status

What should I do?

Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Mac rumours 2012-04-09.png)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:41, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]