Talk:Nexopia/Archive 1

Whole article

I re-wrote the beginning part of the article and added a history section. But the whole article really should be cleaned up still. I guess that's why it's flagged.

It's impossible to find any decent information relating to the website, but I manged the find the creators posts on a forum, I used them as references, I hope thats enough.

My nexopia name is Spoolmaster, fyi TimothyRoger 15:18, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Disclaimer

This article reads like a big disclaimer. Not very informative needs to be re-written from scratch

Plus Errors

I've gone in and fixed some errors in the Plus section, which, frankly, was really badly done. The Blogs ARE NOT a Plus feature, lades and gents.

Also, several key features of Plus are totally skipped. I'll work on fixing it, and eventually turning it into a list of features. --Cuddles32 23:35, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

repeat sentence

I removed a repeat sentence in the description of nexopia Plus. It stated a few things over three times in a row. Nexopia advertising is also very minimal, and does not disrupt the site at all. Nexopia displays ONE banner at the top of the page, that is very easy to get rid of with a flash blocker. As the person responsible for Advertising on Nexopia, I have removed the following line because it is in-accurate:

ads

"A lot of the ads are for Microsoft, Smileys and free iPod scams."

I've also removed the word "large" in relation to the number of ads we show. The vast majority of pages have 1 ad, which by industry standards (and the web in general for ad-support sites) is very low.

Can you come up with a more accurate description of what you advertise then? -62.188.28.25

I also think its worth mentioning that PLUS users do not have as many ads. --ekimdrachir 16:33, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

We advertise everything from Free iPod Programs ("scams" is a bit harsh) to Cell phone companies to Films

It should be mentioned that nexopia has limited control of what ads are shown, although they are age targeted. --Mark 04:53, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

user count

Updated number of users.

Cleanup

This article needs serious clean-up. Its written poorly, uses subjective writing, and requires citation in some places. It should be organized with sections and a table of contents. Have a look at the myspace article if some direction is needed. --Crossmr 04:04, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

I cleaned it up quite a bit. There still may be some grammatical errors that I didn't notice though. King Bigos 00:16, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Just put in some headers to make sections and for organization. King Bigos 04:26, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

No mention

This article has no mention about several things that gave birth to Nexopia. It is widely contested that the whole concept was just an imitation(with a shift in demographic, from the fringe punk rock scene, to the more pop-culture oriented scene) of a popular pre-existing edmonton based site, Indecline. In fact one of the co-creators of indecline was commishioned to write some code for the first incarnation of 'enter nexus' (please note the edmonton based punk rock site 'indecline' has no affilliation with the creators of 'bum fights')

• Commissioned was spelled incorrectly.

List of social networking websites on AfD

List of social networking websites is currently an AfD candidate. You are invited to partake in this discussion. Czj 19:05, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Updated Hit Count

I updated hit count to 10 billion

Cleaned up vandalism

Some people have been putting links to their own nexopia profiles throughout the article, adding comments about 'noodz', and incorporating their own opinions of the site into the article.

• removed "USE MYSPACE" vandalism

Ugly People

"Sadly however, there is no direct way to filter the use of this website to sidestep ugly people."

something inside my head told me that didn't belong here —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.11.11.247 (talk) 07:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Why is this article still here?

The Zorpia article was deleted due WP:WEB. If that is indeed a standard, then this article also needs to be deleted for the same reason. angrykeyboarder (a/k/a:Scott) 12:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Nexopia is mentioned frequently by Canadian newspapers, and has been for years. See http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=&q=nexopia&btnG=Search+News --72.165.173.27 15:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

This article can be used to store the more controversial info about Nexopia. will try and clean it up Towel401 (talk) 22:45, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Who owns Nexopia?

This source] is a press release about a major investment investment and a new CEO. It has been cited as evidence that Nexopia has a new owner.

• An investment is not a merger or a buyout.
• A CEO is not necessarily an owner. Typically a CEO is an employee.

Please do not add material to articles without citing it to a source that verifies the material added. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 21:02, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Nexopia was sold. Everyone knows this. This is common knowledge. Bermdu Media owns nexopia, who owns bermdu media?, Borris Wertz. It was my mistake that I added Noah Kane, I was thinking of a different website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.6.149.77 (talk) 22:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

If it's common knowledge, it should be easy for you to find a link to a reliable source reporting this. If you can't find a source, your information cannot go into the article. Wikipedia policy is quite clear on this. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 00:43, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

The New Profiles, among other things.

Anyone have proper information for all the new updates going on with the site? 68.146.166.148 (talk) 00:31, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Edited Update Section

Hey I just edited the Nexopia Update section and fixed some spelling errors and added information as well as some more citations. Ogdens (talk) 23:27, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

error.

All profile pictures are checked by specially appointed "pic mods" before being allowed up on a user's page

this is not true, i'm pretty sure; as of the recent update, pictures automatically go onto your page they are testing out the site without pic mods. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.183.159.52 (talk) 03:58, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Pictures are now post-modded rather than pre-modded. --68.149.3.229 (talk) 16:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Publicity stunt

I hereby disclose a conflict of interest with regard to this article, and will refrain from directly editing it. I object to the following wording, "A recent youtube video posted, claiming to be "outside the nexopia.com office" in Edmonton Alberta, recorded a business man masturbating through the sunroof of his SUV. It was in fact acted as an attempt for some publicity to the website." This implies that the video was faked and was in fact a publicity stunt. It is true that the website received some amount of publicity as a result of the release of this video, it was not faked in any way. We reported the incident to the local police and turned over a copy of the unedited (and higher quality) video. I do not know if charges were ever filed, but a concerned party is more than welcome to contact the Edmonton Police to confirm. I am happy to send an email to an admin from the @nexopia.com domain to confirm this. Regardless, I would ask that the sentence be reworded. We have no reason to believe the man was a "business man", nor was the incident faked in any way. --70.74.162.157 (talk) 20:27, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

On spam

Once again, I am refraining from editing the article directly due to a conflict of interest.

Online spam has increased since the website gained popularity. "Dummy" accounts are created remotley, and send spam messages to user's, linking them to websites containing pornographic materials, or malicious information. Along with the dummy accounts, bots check users passwords with the most commonly used passwords. Once an account is cracked, it usually spams users and then deletes itself.

Apart from a number of spelling and grammar mistakes here, it is not generally the case that spam accounts delete themselves. Instead, they are deleted by Nexopia staff.

Quite often users that do not follow the rules get a simple ban from the website, or their account "frozen". This has often been done to unsuspecting users who have done nothing wrong, leading to a lot of users paid features being lost and unrecoverable. Simply, an IP address before a new account is created bypasses this ban. For this reason, majority of banned users continue to use the website without the administrators knowledge.

This paragraph has a few problems. If users do not follow the rules, they are frozen. However, I do not think it is fair to characterise users who break the rules as people "who have done nothing wrong". Similarly, Nexopia staff are well aware how IP addresses work. Similarly to Wikipedia's sockpuppetry and checkuser process, these accounts are often, though certainly not always, frozen as well. I cannot speak to the validity of the next sentence, "For this reason, [sic] majority of banned users continue to use the website without the administrators knowledge." Even if the duplicate accounts are not also shut down, I'd expect (though have no evidence to back this up) that most banned users would end up leaving Nexopia due to repeated bannings. It's certainly the case that some banned users operate without administrator knowledge. It's also definitely the case that some banned users operate with administrator knowledge. I object to the uncited characterisation that most banned users continue to use the website. --70.74.162.157 (talk) 20:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Malicious software?

Once again, I possess a conflict of interest.

The advertisements that are run on the website sometime contain malicious software, as well as ads for sexual enhancement drugs. As well, a recent set of advertisements causes Internet Explorer to freeze up completely, and using excessive system memory.

This is uncited. Norton Safe Web shows that Nexopia hosts no malicious software and judges that the site is 'safe'. The "recent set of advertisements" that the user is complaining about are not actually a flaw with the ads but rather, a flaw in older versions of the Adobe Flash plugin with Internet Explorer 8. See for example, this, though it isn't a particularly good example. Here's a google search which shows the IE8 freeze problem is widespread.

I cannot speak as to sexual enhancement drugs. Like most websites, Nexopia uses ad networks for some of our ads. It's not always easy to track down ads which violate our terms. -- 70.74.162.157 (talk) 21:00, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

COI edits

After reading WP:COI, I believe it would be appropriate for me to edit the article itself to reflect the changes I outline above, even though I have a declared conflict of interest. I plan on doing so tomorrow if and only if nobody raises any objections here, on the basis that some of the information in the article is defamatory and on the basis that I have first raised these issues on the discussion page. At the slightest objection, I will be happy to refrain from editing. If nobody raises any objections, my edits will be as I discuss above, and I will not make a habit of editing this article. --70.74.162.157 (talk) 14:14, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

I have made these changes. --70.74.162.157 (talk) 14:53, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Members

"Over 95% of its users are Canadian with over 1.4 million member accounts and over 500,000 active users and a hit count of over 33 billion. During peak hours the site sometimes reaches over 30,000 users and several thousand guests online."

I'm not sure how old these numbers are, but the current number of active users is way way lower. Couprie (talk) 17:01, 18 November 2013 (UTC)