Talk:Netvibes

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

"Notability" is the most ridiculous thing about Wikipedia and why it will never be taken seriously.

Make up your mind: either make an open encyclopedia, or make it restrictive based on "notability". You can't have it both ways Wikipunks! -Anonymouse —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.151.21.104 (talk) 19:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If del.icio.us could be in Wikipedia, Netvibes should be here, because is a web service too. Why not? In fact, should be an article that lists all the web-based RSS readers.

The concern is about notability. Please see the guidelines and provide references. -- Barrylb 03:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the preceding was an analogy pointing out that if del.icio.us is noteworthy, then by dint of their similarities, Netvibes should be considered noteworthy as well.
I agree with the parent post. SaulPerdomo 19:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Netvibes has actually more than 1 million users, I think is enough. I saw articles about lot of things and web that hasn't the 1% of popularity than netvibes. Sorry, but I think is ridiculous the idea of deleting this article just because you thik that has no "notability". With your criteria 90% of articles in Wikipedia should not exist. put netvibes in google and has 7.300.000 references... is enough?

Netvibes receives special mention on a number of Wikipedia pages, presumably a valid reference source. Furthermore, Netvibes is arguably the most popular of the AJAX destops (cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajax_desktops), & as such stands as an important example of a noteworthy trend in web design. As an aside, it would be better if articles were presumed noteworthy, since it's hard to know whether even the most esoteric information is not of use to a significant population of readers. After all, that's one of Wikipedia's strengths as against traditional encyclopedias--a breadth of topical & off-the-beaten-path information. Not wise to stifle that with the conception notion of 'notability' outlined in Wikipedia's guidelines (coupled with the love of certain officious types for pointless censorship).

The fact that Netvibes is mentioned in a few Wikipedia articles does not by itself make it notable. AJAX is notable, and Netvibes might be mentioned in the AJAX article, but being mentioned in an article doesn't automatically promote the subject to noteworthiness. And if you think Netvibes is noteworthy, perhaps it's best to but whatever information proves it into the article itself--rather than just on the talk page. Oh, and as far as presumed noteworthy is concerned--you never presume noteworthiness. That must always be proven because 99.999% of stuff out there is not noteworthy.--Mumia-w-18 17:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. A few article I gathered to assert notability. Make good use of it...
Netvibes is one of the 50 best websites of 2007 according to Time
...and is ranked #9 in Time's user poll
NYT: "One of the best examples of the diffusion of Internet-style business creation is Tariq Krim, chief executive of Netvibes. His Paris-based company was a pioneer in the design of a Web service that allows users to personalize their start page, shifting the control away from the traditional Internet portal companies."
CNet's Webware 2007 winner in the Browsing category, along Firefox, Yahoo!, etc.
Winner of the 2007 Web 2.0 award in the Start page category
"Netvibes has been nominated as one of the ten technology firms most likely to change the world"
Finalist in The Next WebAwards' Disruptors category
"Netvibes is one of the leaders in the space."
"Netvibes is one of the pioneers of the personalized home page" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Xibe (talk • contribs) 11:25, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up[edit]

Cleaned up the article some and added references. Since this article was created, I am satisfied regarding notability. WP:RS was lacking and I have found a number of references which I have added.

"Your opinion regarding what you can find for references should not matter. Just because you are ignorant/clueless on where this service is referenced, does not make it non-notable. When will hubris of the editors kill Wikipedia? I hope it changes..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.151.21.104 (talk) 19:30, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I feel the article can be cleaned up a little more to make it more of an encyclopedia article but it passes Wikipolocy now. --Pmedema (talk) 19:53, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Referrer spam?[edit]

I've been getting odd referrer spam from Russia linking to a Netvibes page. The referer is a page that contains no links to any of our pages, and the URL is a very odd one full of space characters. Not saying Netvibes is necessarily involved here, but it certainly seems odd, and it's not the first time people have seen this. GreenReaper (talk) 18:00, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Netvibes. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:31, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Careless editor reinsertion of tag ... that is already there[edit]

This was an unusually strange revert. There was already a tag that was identical. We don't pile on identical tags. What could the editor possibly be thinking to reinsert the tag? Please give thought when you revert good edits by other editors. Especially, when using tools. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Netvibes&diff=924985660&oldid=924981711 And please self-revert. This revert made zero sense. --2604:2000:E010:1100:C0B3:C19:F51D:2CC (talk) 03:29, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There, I fixed it. Positive contributions are welcome, but spamming articles with the same redundant and arbitrary list of competing companies is disruptive. When you force other people to clean up your messes, don't be to surprised if they don't do a stellar job. Grayfell (talk) 03:34, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Netvibes&oldid=1202745420"