Jump to content

Talk:Criticism of Yahoo

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


Email unsercuirity

[edit]

Should it be mentioned how all you need to access someone's yahoo email address is their Country of Origin, Date of Birth and ZIP code? That is how palin's account was accessed by 4chan the other day. 193.120.116.180 (talk) 11:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If what above is true, then it has been fixed. I know, I just tried every possible method to access it without a password or security questions.

David —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.10.49.196 (talk) 23:29, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the payment delay of Yahoo! Singapore Mobile Developers Awards Challenge

[edit]

The payment is indeed not received by the participants because I am ONE of the participants and all the winners I contacted have not recieved their payment as at November 22,2008. The official respresentive from Yahoo! is Ray Tan. Please do double check before you remove any contents and state them as poorly unsourced. Thanks. Date for the end of event is taken from this news article : http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS145133+23-Oct-2008+BW20081023 

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.13.2 (talk) 15:43, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yahoo Personals and Yahoo Jobs

[edit]

Should it also be noted the criticism of Yahoo getting rid of Personals ebing repaced by match.com and Yahoo Jobs being replaced by Monster? 03:44, 3 August 2011 (UTC) 03:44, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Yahoo Apologizes For Censoring Wall Street Protesters Email

[edit]

http://www.businessinsider.com/yahoo-censors-occupy-wall-street-2011-9 Ottawahitech (talk) 15:27, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yahoo! Groups remodel 2013 (neo)

[edit]

Please contribute to discussion about neo at Talk:Yahoo!_Groups#Yahoo.21_Groups_Neo. Thanks. XOttawahitech (talk) 15:06, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yahoo! Answers

[edit]

The new format has been widely criticized for being aesthetically unattractive and difficult to navigate, receiving a near-universal backlash from the Yahoo! Answers community.<ref>[http://suggestions.yahoo.com/detail/?prop=answers&fid=361420 "Feedback/Commments on the new Y!A format"], Yahoo! Answers. Retrieved September 4, 2013.</ref> {{RS |date=September 2013}} {{OR |date=September 2013}}

Agreed, content is unreliable - removed. --166.104.240.87 (talk) 01:32, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the content is based on unreliable sources (WP:RS, that is, the sources are not published, third-party sources). Also, the content draws its own conclusions from the sources and so it is original research (WP:OR). The content has been deleted, restored, and edited. None of the editing has solved the problems. The only real solution is to find some better third-party reliable sources and make sure that the content follows those sources. I've left the content, but added various templates to flag the problems. If the problems are not addressed, I think the entire section should be deleted. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 13:55, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
At 21:52 on 23 September 2013 User:Romulan Ale reverted my earlier edit with an edit summary of "The sources given are straight from the horse's mouth, they come directly from Yahoo!." The result was that two Reliable source, one Primary source, and one Original research templates were removed, punctuation was moved behind a ref, and the word "Comments" misspelled as "Commments". I reverted the revert. The problem here is that Yahoo! is a primary source when it comes to its own site. We could probably let that slide, but the other citations are to user comments from the "Yahoo! Answers Suggestions Board". They are not considered reliable third-party secondary sources. And the suggestions do not state the conclusions found in this section of the article. It requires original research to come to those conclusions. And even if original research was allowed (it isn't), the use of the phrase "near-universal backlash" is hard to justify based on a non-scientific sample of users in a forum that solicits suggestions and complaints. I still feel that, if the problems are not addressed, that the entire section should be deleted. I hope that this can be discussed here before yet another round of reversions occurs. Please see WP:OR, WP:RS, and WP:Primary. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 13:43, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done. I didn't delete this section, but I shortened and reworded it quite a bit:
Before: Yahoo! Answers underwent a format change on August 30, 2013.[1][non-primary source needed] The new format has been widely criticized for being aesthetically unattractive and difficult to navigate, receiving a near-universal backlash from the Yahoo! Answers community.[original research?] [2] [unreliable source?][3] [unreliable source?]
  1. ^ http://yahooanswers.tumblr.com/post/61040172053/introducing-the-new-yahoo-answers
  2. ^ "Feedback/Comments on the new Y!A format", Yahoo! Answers. Retrieved September 4, 2013.
  3. ^ http://suggestions.yahoo.com/detail/?prop=answers&fid=361419
After: Yahoo! Answers underwent a format change in early September 2013.[1] The new format has been criticized for being aesthetically unattractive and difficult to navigate.[2][3]
  1. ^ "Introducing the new Yahoo Answers!", Yahoo Answers Team, Yahoo Answers, 12 September 2013. Retrieved 29 September 2013. [better source needed]
  2. ^ "Feedback/Comments on the new Y!A format", Yahoo! Answers Suggestion Board. Retrieved 4 September 2013. [better source needed]
  3. ^ "Bugs/issues related to the new Y!A format", Yahoo! Answers Suggestion Board. Retrieved 29 September 2013. [better source needed]
--Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 04:13, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How Is This Encyclopedic...?

[edit]

Even if these criticisms are valid, how are they worthy of being included as an encyclopedia article? --Studio 126 (talk) 05:39, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Criticism of Yahoo!. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:18, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yahoo format

[edit]

I'm surprised this wasn't labeled as criticism as many are detested over the new layout by users. 70.45.248.243 (talk) 06:45, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Criticism of Yahoo!. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 13:06, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Criticism of Yahoo!. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 15:09, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Criticism of Yahoo!. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 17:04, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bad title

[edit]

The title of this is "Criticism of Yahoo!", however very little of the content is criticism. Instead it's a WP:COATRACK of various screw ups, controversies and events that resulted in bad PR. It either needs retitled or deleted as a Coatrack. ♟♙ (talk) 19:27, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Yahoo! which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:19, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Talk:Criticism_of_Yahoo&oldid=1242874449"