Talk:Micro.blog

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contested deletion[edit]

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because micro.blog is comparably notable or more notable than several existing or defunct microblogging services such as Heello (defunct), ImaHima (stub at best, unclear if still active), or Soup.io (similarly flagged with Advert template). I'll also work on finding more citations to help substantiate notability as that's generally desirable anyway for any article. --Tantek (talk) 01:12, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please provide additional reliable sources establishing the subject's notability. Meatsgains (talk) 01:31, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Before I could do so, another editor expanded the article greatly with additional citations. In addition I noted the explicit support of major web hosting service DreamHost which IMHO establishes micro.blog's notability. Additional suggestions for improving the article are welcome! Tantek (talk) 03:41, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have tidied up this article a lot. I think it still needs some more secondary sources to confirm that it's notable [1] by encyclopedia standards. Danylstrype (talk) 15:24, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A few additional secondary sources (feel free to add with statements to article itself) - Tantek (talk) 06:09, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also note a few additional secondary sources from the larger mainstream and tech press that are speaking about micro.blog in context with fellow notable services like Mastodon, Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, and WordPress. -Snark35 (talk) 18:43, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Newport, Cal (2019-05-18). "Can "Indie" Social Media Save Us?". The New Yorker. Retrieved 2019-11-18.
  • Gooding, Sarah (2019-08-26). "Micro.blog Adds Tumblr Cross-Posting". WP Tavern. Retrieved 2019-11-18.
The page is in much better condition now than when I originally PROD'd. Meatsgains(talk) 19:43, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


References

  1. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Uncle_G/On_notability

"flatter" architecture claims[edit]

"More open" is an entirely subjective claim, and it would only be true that the "architecture of the service is topographically "flatter" than federated social networks" if micro.blog was intended to be run on end users own computers, rather than on a webserver or "cloud" platform like Dreamhost, which it clearly isn't. Any end user of fediverse apps like Mastodon or GNU Social user can run their own instance if they choose. If somebody created a new set of email protocols and claimed their architecture was "flatter" because they were intended for self-hosting, they would be similarly wrong, *unless* the protocols were for a P2P service like BitMessage where the only software involved runs on the PCs of sending and receivers users. I'm removing this sentence for now, if someone can find a secondary source that asserts it, it could be re-added mentioning that source. Danylstrype (talk) 12:21, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Remove Stub Notice[edit]

I think this article is probably no longer a stub. I just read the notes on stubs and (a) this seems plenty long enough and (b) the advice is to be bold in removing stub status. So if no one disagrees in a couple of days, I'll remove it. But very happy to be dissuaded. (I suppose asking first isn't very bold, but I've never done it before!) Njradcliffe (talk) 08:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I said I would, there having been no responses, I have removed the stub notice.
Njradcliffe (talk) 09:15, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Micro.blog&oldid=1169871658"