Talk:Facebook/Archive 9

Archive 5

←

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

A few corrections

Under "History" in the 5th from last paragraph is speculation about the IPO. Now that the S-1 is filed this data should be deleted or updated, specifically the section regarding "Facebook has been identified as a possible candidate for an IPO by 2013.[48] The Wall Street Journal has reported that Facebook is looking to raise as much as $10 billion in its IPO and that it plans to file paperwork as early as February 3rd.[49][50][51]"

The "total active users" table in this same section should be updated to include the new 850 million user count included in the S-1 filing.

Under the "company" section, all of the ownership numbers can now be updated with correct figures from the S-1 filing.

Under "revenue" the table for "revenues" should be updated to include factual information from the S-1 filing.

The section "menlo park executive offices" should be renamed "Menlo Park Headquarters", as the new location isn't just for executives; it's the company's HQ for all employees.

The section "Functionality issues" under "Website" should be erased, as (1) G5/PPC processors are a slim minority of total Macs deployed in the world and (2) this error isn't related to Facebook, but is instead a Flash problem that Facebook isn't responsible for.

At the end of the "reception" section the wording should be corrected. "In January 2012 just before Facebook Intitial Public Offering" should be "In January 2012, just before Facebook's S-1 filing," and "All of them above totally 309 million members" should be "all of the above total 309 million users" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Huwa (talk • contribs) 02:00, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

The Number Of Active User Account

Is it possible to include the figure of active user account? As per my understanding, there are many fake users created by some Page admin. Those admin tried to increase the number of friends who "like" their page. They would create a huge number of Facebook user and like their page. Although Facebook requires a phone number for new registration, those admin would purchase pre-paid mobile phone SIM card, valued at around HKD50 or USD6.5 each, to setup new account. It is one of the reasons why there are so many users in Hong Kong. I believed that similar situation should be happened in other countries. We need to find out the actual amount of Facebook user in the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waterloowar (talk • contribs) 09:22, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

Facebook censorship

Facebook censorship is becoming more blatant. They have all but destroyed groups that took years to build by deleting all of the members. Some of their harassment and censorship is documented at http://www.facebookcensorship.com

This is neither encyclopedic, nor written in a manor that should be included. Nothing but advertising for the mentioned website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.195.14.177 (talk)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. - Happysailor ^(Talk) 22:37, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Can social media predict elections?

According to this article on page B1 of today’s usa Today, Mitt Romney is the most “liked” (1.5 million) of the GOP candiadates on Facebook. Mitt Romney has been viewed 717,226 times in the last 30 days on Wikipedia See: http://stats.grok.se/en/latest/Mitt_Romney (please check my facts for mistakes, TIA) 71.231.62.26 (talk) 18:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Accessability in Vietnam

The wiki article says that facebook is banned in Vietnam, but this is not true. My wife lives in Vietnam and I have visited this country and let me assure you it is alive and very well in Vietnam! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.5.234 (talk) 12:23, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I visited Portugal one time but I couldn't find a McDonalds there. I will update the McDonalds article shortly detailing it's ban in Portugal. Also, I have a Brazilian wife and she's never even heard of McDonalds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.42.5.13 (talk) 22:43, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

The citation in the article speaks of the possibility of a blackout in Vietnam, it does not state that one has taken place. Unless a reliable source can be found that states that FB has actually been banned in Vietnam, that should be removed from the article.--Rollins83 (talk) 13:48, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Privacy concerns?

Interesting USA Today article about how Facebook tracks people on the web whether they are logged into Facebook or not:

Can someone please find a spot to add this to the article. Thanks in advance. Ottawahitech (talk) 14:23, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

• ...and how about this:

"Employers asking job seekers for Facebook passwords"

http://bostonglobe.com/business/2012/03/20/employers-asking-job-seekers-for-facebook-passwords/QxviQzYrVRxW8UVFw1MGRI/story.html Ottawahitech (talk) 17:59, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

International headquarters

The infobox lists Facebook international HQ as Menlo Park, California, which is incorrect - the international headquarters is in Dublin, Ireland. "Facebook is reportedly looking to more than double the size of its international headquarters in Dublin, Ireland." Barry McGuiness (talk) 11:58, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

somebody changed my password

a About 1500 4/8/12 I lost facebook and cityville and then about 2200 someone requested to cityville and it was not me Ilost it all about 1500 and I want it back if I can't get it back I will find some other way to pass time — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.129.118.245 (talk) 03:57, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

This page is for discussion of the Wikipedia encyclopedia article about Facebook. For help with Facebook itself, you will need to find a help page at www.facebook.com. -- John of Reading (talk) 07:22, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Instagram is a subsidiary

I just completed a series of updates to Instagram to reflect its acquisition. Since IP editors aren't allowed to edit this article, perhaps someone could ensure that any coverage here or at List of acquisitions by Facebook reflects the fact that Facebook intents to keep Instagram independent, an unusual step for Facebook, particularly given the fact that the billion dollars they paid comes with only 13 people. Check out the refs I cited if you need to. 72.244.200.165 (talk) 21:33, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

• Someone added the line "in April 2012 Facebook bought the application Instagram for one Billion dollars." just like that. I almost thought it was vandalism until I came here, but now I'm thinking it's merely really poorly written. So, yeah, I'll try to improve it once my account is "confirmed". Barren167 (talk) 18:25, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Wrong information ref. Key people of Facebook - Chairman is not Mr Graham, but Mr. Zuckerberg

Hi. Please correct this error: Mr. Zuckerberg is the Chariman of the board for Facebook, not Mr. Graham - as the Wikipedia page indicates.

Source Material for this can be found at SEC.gov: http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1326801/000119312512034517/d287954ds1.htm

((Table of Contents > MANAGEMENT))

(OBS: A lot of people is confusing the Chairman position due to the bad-layout at Facebooks page, found at : http://newsroom.fb.com/content/default.aspx?NewsAreaId=22)

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Partin007 (talk • contribs) 12:48, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Fixed. Trivialist (talk) 13:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Facebook Board of Directors.

A new section (business) must be added, containing the following info about the company: Board Members Mark Zuckerberg, Founder, Chairman and CEO, Facebook Marc Andreessen, Co-founder and General Partner, Andreessen Horowitz Jim Breyer, Partner, Accel Partners Donald E. Graham, Chairman and CEO, The Washington Post Company Reed Hastings, Chairman and CEO, Netflix Erskine Bowles, President Emeritus, the University of North Carolina Peter Thiel, Partner, Founders Fund

This is important, given the recent IPO — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahen23 (talk • contribs) 06:54, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

How to contact the independent privacy auditor?

I would like to read more about the specific terms of the FTC privacy settlement, in particular, how can I contact the independent auditor who they have agreed to evaluate their privacy practices? 70.58.10.111 (talk) 23:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

revenue

It can no longer be stated categorically, as the lead section does, that Facebook generates its revenue from advertising. The cited source is dated 2006, and a lot has happened since then. From my quick research, it appears that FB now generates 15% of its revenues from app developers. See here. I propose that we update the lead and create a new section on this.

As a side note, I'm surprised that there's no mention of the anticipated IPO outside of the lead section.

I'm sorry I don't have the time to make these changes. Perhaps someone can pick this up.

--Nstrauss (talk) 20:54, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Facebook & Microsoft

Some of Facebook's services are based on MS's Bing.com search engine, like:

• Using the search box to find friends, pages or group will also bring you a search page of pages around the web, using Bing search engine
• Links to name of places (like on events or status with a statement of a place) are linking to a page about this place. The page is having a map, powered by Bing Maps (a service similar to "Google Earth").
• Facebook also collaborate with Wikipedia, and has pages about articles from Wikipedia. Facebook suggest to people to own those pages, and to add more information about it. People can like them, no matter if the page has an owner.

I guess the reason why they chose to use those services using Microsoft, and not Google, which has the same services, is their competition with Google.

Galzigler (talk) 22:29, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

What "Impact on philanthropy"?

The "Impact on philanthropy" section says nothing specific about Facebook, just other companies. None of it belongs in this article. 70.58.10.111 (talk) 23:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Please delete the "Impact on philanthropy" section unless there are sources which say something specific about Facebook as opposed to other companies. 70.58.10.111 (talk) 04:17, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 21:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

This article gets 80,000 views per day, and the request was here on the talk page for four days (at about 140 views/day) without discussion. How long does it need to go with one proponent and no objections before you would call it a consensus? 71.215.64.125 (talk) 03:08, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

You do have a point. The section is primarily about other companies, with Facebook being mentioned as an indirect comparison. If the off-topic material were stripped out, there wouldn't be much left. I've added a {{off-topic}} notice to that section, so hopefully your concern will be addressed. Regards, RJH (talk) 14:19, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Saw this one - had a read - have to agree. The section does not reference facebook, except obliquely. it does not address facbook and its Impact on philanthropy - it addresses philanthropy in the shadow of. This article "Social media's impact on charitable fundraising: Does it work?" may be a starting point for refs to correct the deficits. In fact looking widely - all sections on impact need to be addressed due to WP:WORLDVIEW - lack of. will add to me hit list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Media-hound- thethird (talk • contribs) 21:01, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

File:Facebook screenshot.JPG Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Facebook screenshot.JPG, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: Wikipedia files with no non-free use rationale as of 7 May 2012 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:Facebook screenshot.JPG) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:52, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Cleanup of this page

This page has too much content. Probably needs some clean up. There are sections on this page that 'talk' not about the wikipedia page on facebook, but about the facebook website. I understand the general wikipedia practice on talk pages is to not delete previous conversation, since it's a 'talk page'. But 'out-of-topic content', is a valid alibi to remove such discussion. Any content not referring to wikipedia page on facebook, like requests about facebook itself, facebook complaints, off-topic verbal fights/clarifications, should all be removed. Atif.hussain (talk) 08:28, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

User base

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2011/09/facebook-f8-media-features.html Change member number to 800 million according to this article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.164.60.201 (talk) 22:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Graph

The user base increase graph is difficult to follow for the small numbers in the initial periods. The graph needs to be replaced with a log scale on y-axis. Atif.hussain (talk) 08:28, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 9 May 2012

thefacebook.com now redirects to the Facebook home page, i suggest that the page be updated to reflect this.

EggManStudio (talk) 21:12, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Not done for now: It seems like a bit of trivia that doesn't really need mentioning. ~Adjwilley (talk) 02:55, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Issues

This article is listed as a Good article and with that in mind there are a few issues relating to that criteria that should be fixed up by a willing editor. Judging by the dates, many of them have been added since the last re-assessment. First there are two large clean-up tags that appear justified. The "too long" tag under "Website" and the "expand" one under "Impact on philanthropy". These fall under criteria 3 A and B respectively. The prose (criteria 1a) is also poor in many sections, especially where it consists of single sentence paragraphs starting with "In 2011 ...". AIRcorn (talk) 04:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

I have just realised that it was previously delisted, but this was reverted about a year ago with this out of process edit. Restoring the original delisting, if you want it to become a Good article it will have to through the WP:GAN process. AIRcorn (talk) 02:38, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Facebook

File:Canale facebook.png
Type of site	Social networking service
Available in	(See Facebook features#Languages)
Owner	Facebook, Inc.
URL	www.facebook.com
Commercial	Yes
Registration	Required
Users	Over 900 million
Launched	February 2004 (2004-02)

Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan married

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg (28) week in which his company was estimated at 106 billion dollars, ended up marriage. He married his longtime girlfriend Priscilla Chan (27) at a ceremony held at his home in Palo Alto, California. Wedding ring, featuring a ruby, designed by Zuckerberg himself. The couple met at Harvard, where Zuckerberg`s Facebook was founded. Later they moved to California, where today is the seat of Facebook.78.2.93.78 (talk) 10:09, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Irony is that we are more interested in his personal life than the other way around. --82.134.28.194 (talk) 11:17, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Infobox lacks number of employees

Indeed. 76.10.128.192 jjfudha33bk;nylahjifdcnyjgfhfytyrfghhgjfrjhfg(kibthkisalindigkehjdkiy) ("{tommy bobby talker }")(talk) 05:28, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Actually, the actual company's article Facebook, Inc. does have it. Please disreguard. 76.10.128.192 (talk) 07:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

face book slash

"investors dump Facebook" [1] this website entry (locked) carry inno-much about IP0. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.90.197.87 (talk) 21:25, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

early investors

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE PUT THESE DETAILS IN ( I am a new member and i cant modify page).

(in a new section on something) Early Investors:

Clarium Capital - 12.7M - 2005 Accel Partners - 12.7M - 2005 Greylock - 27.5M - 2006 Meritech - 27.5M - 2006 Microsoft - 240M - 2007 Li Ka-Shing - 60M - 2007 European Founders Fund - 15M - 2008 Digital Sky Tech - 200 - 2009 Elevation Partners - 90 - 2009 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indexlight (talk • contribs) 00:44, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Update to Infobox

Now that we're post-IPO, the infobox should be updated to show Facebook as being traded under FB on the NASDAQ 209.205.95.138 (talk) 21:22, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

That sounds like a better update for Facebook, Inc. (the company article)--this one's about the website. Khazar2 (talk) 21:30, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah yes... Disregard that request then. 209.205.95.138 (talk) 21:35, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I came her under the same misunderstanding. To make the distinction clearer, maybe this article should switch to {{Infobox website}} (see my first draft at right). 72.244.204.58 (talk) 06:53, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Unless there are any objections, I say go for it. Khazar2 (talk) 07:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Looks like there is some confusion between the two entities. This article, Facebook is the actual website. Facebook, Inc. is the company that completley owns the website. Hope this clears up some confusion. I've changed the infobox back to {{Infobox website}} in the meantime. -- Luke (Talk) 16:36, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, why are they separate articles. Most, if not all, of what's in that article could be in this one. Hot Stop 14:43, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Facebook, Inc in regards to the post IPO launching (company as a whole including any future subsidiaries), therefore, making the Facebook page related solely to the website. swinquest (talk) 15:33, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

I realize that, but I was wondering why we needed to split up the articles. Hot Stop 12:51, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 May 2012 (Important!!)

4chan is trolling people, there is a picture of a nude man several times in the article. Can someone please revert?

Webprgmr15 (talk) 10:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 May 2012

Can you please remove the inappropriate images from this article

Brendanm80 (talk) 11:00, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 May 2012

Someone take out the porno picture in the middle please.

Kaellya (talk) 11:11, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 25 May 2012

It has pornographic materials, it must be edited to clear it from the content. It must be investigated, the hacker must be found.

49.144.176.61 (talk) 11:12, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

It's fixed now, somebody put the image in a deep-down template so it was hard to find--Jac16888 ^Talk 11:14, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 16 March 2012

76.91.137.154 (talk) 09:25, 16 March 2012 (UTC

You've lodged an edit request but have not told us what you'd like changed. Please write below if you have an idea about how this article can be improved. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 10:40, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

ب — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.229.163.69 (talk) 12:32, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Namespace

Facebook (the book) -- a dictionary word -- deserves the main namespace, just like Yearbook is about the book and Yearbook.com is about the website. Similarly, Apple is about the fruit and Apple, Inc. is about the company. For this reason, I have moved Face book (the book) to Facebook and what was originally Facebook (the website) to Facebook.com. 01:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeyRR (talk • contribs) '

Reverting. First you can't do cut and paste moves as it screws with the page history and second I don't see this being an uncontroversial move so it should be discussed. You might want to see Wikipedia:Requested moves#Requesting controversial and potentially controversial moves. AIRcorn (talk) 01:57, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

This should not be a controversial move to anyone with common sense and a rational mind.

"Facebook" is a common dictionary word. Numerous schools and universities across the Western world use the term. Zuckerberg himself even said he came up with the name from Harvard's student facebook directory.

From my dictionary: Origin: facebook (n): college student directory with personal photos and basic information. (origin: 1980s.)

JoeyRR (talk) 02:01, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

To the vast majority of English speakers in the world, obviously including the hundreds of millions of Facebook users outside the USA, the first and probably only thing they think of when they encounter the word Facebook is the social networking website. Our language has evolved. HiLo48 (talk) 02:09, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Concur with HiLo48. The current article title reflects longstanding Wikipedia policy, see WP:COMMONNAME. Not sure if JoeyRR is a newbie or a troll. I just countermanded his latest edit. If he reverts again, the next available admin should temporarily ban him and consider a permanent ban if he is unable to conform his edits to the consensus of the community. --Coolcaesar (talk) 05:01, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Timeline view photo unnecessarily offensive

The timeline view example, as of May 9th 2012 at 8:37pm CST could be highly offensive to some. This is unnecessary, as the page is uncharacteristically profane and may be seen as degrading and offensive to many viewers. I have taken it upon my self to go about changing it. But wanted to state this. I will not change it immediately, but felt I would mention it. If you agree, go ahead and change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wade.bieber (talk • contribs) 01:40, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Good point. Per WP:GRATUITOUS we don't need to illustrate words like "bitches" and "niggas" (even if they are a good-natured reappropriation of these words). The point is to show the functionality of the timeline, not any particular content that appears on a single user's timeline. It would be very helpful if we could get a willing Wikipedia user to upload their own timeline, containing only images that are public domain or for which they own the copyright, and then assigning a free license to Wikipedia. This could be a little tricky, but possible, because the "friends" images and other events on the timeline would similarly need to be copyright free. Avoiding unnecessary offensiveness, self-promotion, or anything weird that would detract from the encyclopedic purpose of the timeline, would all be helpful. - Wikidemon (talk) 02:27, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Reverted back to the old Timeline screenshot until Jayabharat (talk) uploads a new one which is less offensive with no artifacts.

Robin Mathew Rajan (talk) 22:59, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

I will gladly donate such a photo, seeing as the newly uploaded timeline example still has privacy, copyright, and self-promotion issues. I can manipulate it to only show the functionality of the timeline and not content with privacy, copyright, or self-promotion concerns. Gimme a little bit of time and I will get that taken care of. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wade.bieber (talk • contribs) 03:36, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

The original poster of the profane Timeline View has posted again and the image is still profane, although cleaned up. It expresses prejudice against groups of college individuals and is self-serving in that the cover image requests people to add him on facebook. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wade.bieber (talk • contribs) 17:09, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request

Another difference is Facebook's requirement that users give their true identity, a demand that MySpace does not make.[64] Technically, this is what Facebook wants but they do not require any proof that you are using your real name. All that is needed to sign up for Facebook is a valid email address. A valid email address can be created with a fake name also. Even the email that requests you link it to a mobile phone or another email address will accept any email as verification, including another fake email address. The word, "requirement" implies security. There is no security in place regarding the use of fake names. Hunnib (talk) 00:33, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Support. "Requirement" in terms of Facebook's use of it, does imply security. Technically, because they do not require proof that you are using your real name when signing up, shows that it not a requirement. --70.120.83.126 (talk) 05:16, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 21 June 2012

I want to add a picture of mark zucckerburg introducing the timeline please grant me permission to edit this page

Malaysupriti (talk) 12:06, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 23 June 2012

I would like to request for an edit of the one of the photos. It is the example user's timeline which seems to contain inappropriate language. Wikipedia should not be used to indirectly promote the use of foul language. I request anyone to edit it. Please strive to make wikipedia a better encyclopedia. In fact, i request a facebook developer to edit the the image to put one which is more appropriate and does not violate privacy, copyright, and self-promotion.

Malaysupriti (talk) 12:06, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Not done: Please provide a link to the image. AndieM (Am I behaving?) 13:13, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Example photos

Are the example photos of the different Facebook formats from real accounts? If so, how is that at all legit? It seem like a pretty blatant privacy invasion -- even if the owners of the accounts are the ones who posted them here as there are also other people's names and comments included in the photos. 67.233.247.41 (talk) 07:12, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Privacy concerns are for those who fears the results of their actions, be it right or wrong. But it’s not for those open minded people who are willing to serve the community for good. We can’t always live in fear, isn’t?? Up to my knowledge those example photos are legit. Robin Mathew Rajan 10:55, 3 April 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robin Mathew Rajan (talk • contribs)

I would like to request for an edit of the one of the photos. It is the example user's timeline which seems to contain inappropriate language. Wikipedia should not be used to indirectly promote the use of foul language. I request anyone to edit it. Please strive to make wikipedia a better encyclopedia. --Sisyphus110 (talk) 12:45, 23 June 2012 (UTC)..

issues with logging in

i recntly moved to georgia from south carolina, and my phone began to go crazy. it wont alow me to access my text messages, (or anything else) so i can not get my confirmation code. im thinking of getting a new phone any how, but meanwhiloe, i still cannot access my facebook, google, myspace, yahoo, or any other accounts that i have seuredin this way. please help.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.94.118.202 (talk) 18:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Facebook in the social sciences

Hello Facebook communit hat I would be happy to share for the wikipedia page. I'd really appreciate someone's help with this!

Best, Robert Wilson

[email protected]

Here's a link to the article: http://pps.sagepub.com/content/7/3/203.short

Wilson, R. E., Gosling, S. D., & Graham, L. T. (2012). A review of Facebook research in the social sciences. Perspectives in Psychological Science, 7(3), 203 - 220.

Wilsonreaustin (talk) 16:01, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Above article requires $35.00 to view and is unlikely to cited as a source given the abundance of others available for this topic. ―cobaltcigs 03:44, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Boldly changing an existing redirect; request discussion

Currently, Fcbk redirects here. I only have one other use for the term, which is the ICAO code for Kindamba Airport, in the Republic of the Congo. However, since a) that use is actually more relevant to the redirect and b) this article already has a hatnote, I'm changing the redirect to point to Kindamba Airport, and adding a hatnote to that page pointing here. I'm happy to discuss, with or without a WP:BRD revert. - Jorgath (talk) ^(contribs) 15:15, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

That’s fine. Titles which differ only by letter case (and/or spacing, punctuation) should point to the same target page, barring some exceptional argument that they shouldn’t. ―cobaltcigs 15:47, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Like most followed people on facebook

There would be good a real-time Like button counter. (without refresh the page you see the changes) If somebody click on the like button that appears automatically the photo wallpaper's like counter. --Nofgt (talk) 04:34, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

possible impingement of human rights by facebook

The following is only 2 hours old and is poated on a facebook page used to disseminate information about child victims of war in syria. Some of these are being labelled unsuitable by facebook, and I would like to madd this into the political section of the article. It seems deplorable to deny these rights, considering the content available on the internet. A facebook page has to be found and they are not advertising. They are claiming legal restrictions, i imagine from the USA and that is indeed political if it infringes on users in another legal precinct.

THe link is here https://www.facebook.com/hamza.alshaheeed.

Urgent..please respond.

We received a message of warning from Face book, they consider some of the pictures we publish against their laws..

Although FB is the only window that we can deliver a small part of the Syrians daily suffering and the ongoing massacres,they are warning us from publishing pictures of martyred children, and from publishing parts of massacres, and considers it against the laws of publishing!!!

We were informed that if we continue to publish such scenes, this will subject the administrators account to deletion and to closing the page..We kindly ask your support for what we publish by ( like and sharing what we publish).

Share widely to allow this page to be the voice of Syrian children, and to be the voice of all the Syrian martyrs – In God’s willing- to reach all the world..please respond to our call. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoboturkey (talk • contribs) 12:16, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Facebook turning into a computer library program?

It seems pretty impossible to do simply things like delete albums, add photos etc. All of that seems really difficult. I don;t see why they don't just make macromedia flash buttons for albums, like why would i delete an album that i just put up? Why would i delete it from my wall for privacy maybe? bottom line is facebook is...annoying --2001:E41:31D4:8F2C:0:0:0:1 (talk) 05:14, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

You know that plumbing stick you use to unclog gutter trash from your sink except it clogs it more and you need a plumber to fix it eg get some service for...facebook is like that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:E41:31D4:8F2C:0:0:0:1 (talk) 05:18, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Site -> service

Facebook is more of a service than simply a website; the facebook.com website is (one of) the means by which people use the Facebook service. To be more accurate, I think we should replace the word "site" with "service" in this article, unless it is actually referring to the facebook.com website and not the service as a whole. Edit: I will do it. Mbza (talk) 17:13, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

I want to know how much money invested by the Indian Congress members in the Facebook IPO ?

Can anyone tell how much money invested by the congress party members in IPO of the Facebook when it was launched into the stock market ? This is very strange to see on facebook when the Indian people creating a critical environment for the Indian congress leaders and on this no ban process is being done by them. what kind of this web one side this is social and moral decline other side no action no restriction till making themselves a source of debate to earn from the invest in Facebook..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.229.134.206 (talk) 06:34, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Tumbling stock

No word of the disastrous plummet of facebook stock, immediately following the IPO? -24.130.65.122 (talk) 19:21, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Nope, no word. It's probably worth including but it's far too early to know where this is headed. - Wikidemon (talk) 01:36, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 31 August 2012

the possessive form of "it" is "its", not "it's"; this error appears twice in the last paragraph of the History section 66.203.182.104 (talk) 23:41, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Done RudolfRed (talk) 00:27, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Dislike Button Section?

Should we add a section on the 'dislike button' as it has been available to Facebook users recently?--Jacoblikesmetal (talk) 12:41, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Inflated user numbers

Please change "users" to "user accounts". The number of users is probably about a third as many. "The social network has admitted that 5% to 6% of its accounts — or somewhere around 50 million — are fake." [2] Try 50 to 60%. [3]24.62.156.219 (talk) 23:18, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Percent of women on FB

Does anyone know this please? Just a rough estimate. SmokeyTheCat 06:15, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Facebook Organizational Management

Management and Organizational History of Facebook

Origins

After June of 2004, Facebook became incorporated and changed its organizational structure to more self-managed teams since the expansion required a division of labor. What was initially a group effort was now divided into several different branches and teams—each with its own responsibilities and supervisor. Mark Zuckerberg’s coding role in Facebook was soon replaced by his management responsibilities as CEO with the assistance of Sean Parker, Facebook’s first president. In addition to this, Facebook established a board of directors that overlooked the general direction of the company.

Structure

The hierarchal structure of Facebook was much more concrete at this point. While it was clear that Zuckerberg is the decision-makers who leads the direction of the company, there re others underneath him that are in charge of specific departments of the company such as marketing, engineering, product design, advertising, business development, and more. These are further broken down as engineering alone can consist of mobile development, platform development, etc. Each department had a senior director or manager, followed by multiple tiers of assistant managers, and ended with new entry-level workers at the bottom. Even still, Facebook is often said to have a relatively “flat” hierarchy that promotes collaboration among employees since most of its employees are not only relatively new, but also young, energized, and open to new ideas no matter what the position.

Management Strategy

Management strategies differ depending on the position and level. For example, while Mike Schroepfer might be the Director of Engineering he does not actually code very much but works mostly with the other departments to gain a general sense of the direction where Facebook is headed and then with the directors of the engineering sub-divisions and set goals for them. Each sub-division (such as mobile engineering or software engineering) is charge of that specific area and works with tiers of assistant managers and workers to plan the goals established for them. Workers at an entry level not only work on given goals, but, at Facebook, they are encouraged to be innovative and develop their own work. Therefore, while management strategies do support a top-down hierarchal approach of completing tasks that are assigned, Facebook emphasizes innovation at the individual entry-level as well.

This is possible because Facebook does not utilize scientific management (a development began by Frederick Taylor) to manage its work and employees. Rather, Facebook prides itself in cultivating innovation and creativity where the natural differences in each worker are supported and nurtured. However, at the senior management level, Mark Zuckerberg is often accused of being too autocratic, which may harm the company if he does not relinquish more of the control to others.

Employee Management

While individuals could be considered more alienated from their products at this point, it is safe to assume that almost all of the employees at Facebook are Facebook users and interact with the final product on a daily basis. However, because of the scope of the company, not everyone will be familiar with every new development. For example, the user-interface team might not be aware of the new Android development application whereas the Android new might not be aware of a new feature in development. As mentioned before, task assignment still occurs in a hierarchal fashion, but what is notable about Facebook is that employees often do not have “specific” tasks and are left to be creative and discover or develop something new.

As usual, there are incentives such as compensation bonuses or promotion opportunities to motivate employees. Compensation usually comes in the form of stock options to alleviate pressure after the IPO and makes more sense for a start-up company. Mobility is also an incentive since Facebook places higher emphasis on ability rather than experience, employees can quickly establish credibility and move up the hierarchal ladder. This has allowed Facebook to manage “3,000 20-somethings in their first job out of college” to a $100 billion company.

Subsidiaries and Corporate Culture

While the subsidiaries cater to specific needs in a region, they are largely connected with one another. For example, while Facebook in Hong Kong has different user demographics, regulations, marketing approaches, or demands as Facebook in Menlo Park, if a new feature of Facebook is released it will support Facebook subsidiaries in all regions.

Because of the nature of the business, there are no real suppliers for Facebook; however, certain features that Facebook encompasses such as games or video chat might seek third-party companies such as Zynga or Skype. Thus, there does exist a vertical market and Facebook has already sought to acquire some of these “suppliers”.

Lastly, work culture at Facebook is very unique. People skateboard around the office, wear casual clothes, encourage creativity, and have fun at their work. Specifically, Mark Zuckerberg has always been criticized as being “unprofessional” since he always wore hoodies to major business presentations, against the norm of suits. However, this just shows that the corporate culture at Facebook is very young and creative, rather than strict and bureaucratic. According to their career website, Facebook emphasizes: “We don’t have rules. We have values,” citing that it focuses on impact, being bold, being open, moving fast, and building social value. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jzhang25 (talk • contribs) 19:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Name: Carolina Mesa Godoy

Facebook is a social networking website, all people have access to the site can email was created by Mark Zuckerberg, has a network of more than 50000 servers. the services offered are friends list, groups, wall pictures, etc..

Suggestion: reducing clutter through list-defined references

Regarding [4]. Per Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Avoiding_clutter: "Inline references can significantly bloat the wikitext in the edit window and can be extremely difficult and confusing. There are three methods that avoid clutter in the edit window: list-defined references, short citations or parenthetical references. (As with other citation formats, articles should not undergo large scale conversion between formats without consensus to do so.)" I'd like to introduce list-defined references to this article, to make it more friendly to edit (less code -> closer to WYSWIWYG). Per the request of editor who reverted me and WP:CITEVAR recommendation I'd like to ask editors interested in this article for input which style they prefer, and strongly suggest following the "avoid clutter" recommendation. While LDR add a little code to the total size of the article, it amounts to only 10% or so of the total article size, so load time should not be significantly affected (nobody should notice a 10% change; also, section edit load time will shorter anyway...), and editing experience should become much friendlier. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:10, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

we need proof of this "significantly bloat the wikitext in the edit window and can be extremely difficult and confusing" -- I do not see it. I note that Piotrus has spammed many articles with his notice--and before he was stopped earlier today he was using a bot of some sort to make major formatting changes to major articles On none of those articles had he been an active editor and he never saw any of the "significant bloat. The idea is a bad one because it makes it hard for the user to follow the notes. Rjensen (talk) 06:52, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Just have to say "List-defined reference" are the worst format we have here. Content editors have constantly voted to eliminate this format altogether. Best to make the article user friendly. None will follow the LDR when updating pages - thus were you find LDR style you will always see the normal format mixed in. Just look at Michael Jackson. All it does is cause work for us as seen here at Avril Lavigne someone will have to come along and fix the new refs to match the LDR format - in the case of Avril Lavigne I have seen editors revert referenced material just because it was the wrong ref format. LDR's is nothing but a problem - noting user friendly about having to edit 2 sections to add one statement. Moxy (talk) 22:23, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Facebook Illegal Censorship and Abridgment of Freedom of Speech on their Website

I have been documenting and sharing this information with as many people as possible:

Facebook is censoring protected free speech it is also raceist, pornographic, and prejudice we should shut this site down . Because we know some times it ruins marriages. It also let rumors get started . and lastly well if you try to add a friend you do know; we'll say you do not know them and block you for 30 days cause that facebook you should hate this site. =).

How can I add a section to the Wikipedia article, while still following the rules of Wikipedia, informing the Wikipedia reading public at large about what is going on at the most influential, widely used social media website???

Here is where you can find more evidence that what I say is true:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/186422711489753/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gbratboy1 (talk • contribs) 11:07, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Find some actually reliable sources (no, a Facebook group isn't a reliable source) and tone down the hyperbole (Facebook removing content may be bad, but it isn't illegal) and then maybe it can go in the article. —Tom Morris (talk) 12:53, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

Many of your reasons for shutting down Facebook, have little sway. It may ruin marriages, but so does cheating and meeting people in supermarkets. It may let rumors get started, but so does communication of any sort... If you try to add a friend you don't know... Why are you adding someone you don't know as a friend?... That doesn't make any sense. Maybe you should message them and get to know them before asking to see all their personal information. Just a suggestion. That way you wont get blocked as if you were a spammer, fisher, data miner.. Pretty much everyone knows about these "problems" and if they do not, they are not affected by them, and don't care. You should also do a little research if you intend to post anything on Wiki so that you can site your sources and prove a point concisely. Check out: Criticism of Facebook and Identifying reliable sources. You could give specific referencible or reproducible examples or published accounts that would qualify as a good source (as per the second link). TJ 108.208.85.198 (talk) 00:58, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Facebook's Domains

I don't understand why everytime I Add the list of Facebook domains it's deleted. Maybe there should be a paragraph about it, or an article, like there is for Google's domains.

Here's the list:

• facebook.com
• fb.com (shortner)
• thefacebook.com (old domain)
• fbcdn.net (images hosting)
• facebookappmail.com (SMTP server, used by applications)
• facebookmail.com (SMTP server, used for facebook notifications)
• on.fb.me (shortner for apps' pages)

Galzigler (talk) 17:41, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Got any reliable sources for that list? If it hasn't been of interest to any reliable sources, it possibly won't be that interesting or useful to include in the Wikipedia article. —Tom Morris (talk) 12:54, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

For the domains that are not being used by the API of Facebook (like fb.com and thefacebook.com) and the domains that are used by e-mail services I performed a whois check to be sure they belong to Facebook. Of course, that might not be the complete list. Galzigler (talk) 20:56, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Seems to me that this would be a good addition (sources cited). Make an edit request. TJ108.208.85.198 (talk) 01:01, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Comparison to MySpace and Customization

In the section on Comparison to MySpace, the article reads: "The media often compares Facebook to MySpace, but one significant difference between the two Web sites is the level of customization." The sentence clarifying this is a few sentences away: "MySpace allows users to decorate their profiles using HTML and Cascading Style Sheets (CSS), while Facebook allows only plain text."

Its a small point, but as it reads now, this somewhat important limitation of Facebook is minimized. I'd suggest these two sentences go next to each other to emphasize the first one.

Make an edit request TJ 108.208.85.198 (talk) 01:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Terms and Conditions ( sub Ownership) Section

I propose a section on the history of ownership and/or an analyzation of FB's T&C. I was looking for information on the history of changes to the terms and conditions, especially as it applies to Ownership of information and think that that is part of a bigger study of Terms and Conditions Contracts that deserve a part in many pages, as well as a page of its own.

Tj 108.208.85.198 (talk) 18:13, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Past the billion mark

Zuckerberg said this morning on FB that they had just passed this milestone of active users. No independent confirmation as yet. SmokeyTheCat 06:16, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Recommends rectification to state 'nearly one billion' rather than 'over'. SocialBakers, as at 5 January 2013, still puts Facebook users at 980 million . The WSJ article supporting this quote states 'nearly one billion'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.175.254.207 (talk) 14:40, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Outages

There should be section detailing the many facebook outages. This is a news source for the 10 December 2012 network issue. http://techcrunch.com/2012/12/10/facebook-is-down-mobile-apps-still-working-second-big-tech-outage-of-the-day/ --117.213.195.228 (talk) 15:00, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Alexa traffic ranking.

It's now number 1: http://www.alexa.com/topsites

Somebody update this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.219.13.238 (talk) 14:46, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

It fell to the second position and the article is updated. Thanks, Zalunardo8 (talk) 16:54, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

The guys worked very hard to create this website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.145.149.149 (talk) 23:38, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 22 January 2013

Under "List of countries by number of users", the "World" row contains an arithmetic error. 1,000,000,000 ÷ 6,895,889,000 is not 37%. It is ~14.5%.

Blahpro (talk) 11:52, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Done Thank you! Vacation9 12:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Facemash or Facematch?

Mark Zuckerberg wrote Facemash, the predecessor to Facebook, on October 28, 2003

Seriosuly??? Wasn't it Facematch? Matteosistisette (talk) 18:15, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

can someone please change where it says 13 to 12 so my mum and will let me have an account on Facebook only for today please :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tulip001 (talk • contribs) 18:33, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

No — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.111.204.126 (talk) 12:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 20 March 2013

202.184.208.34 (talk) 09:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

 Not done, request was blank. --McGeddon (talk) 09:50, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Suggested:: 'Criticism Rewrite': Last sentence is grammatically wrong.

..... The number one reason for users to quit Facebook was privacy concerns (48%), being followed by a general dissatisfaction with Facebook (14%), negative aspects regarding Facebook friends (13%) and the feeling of getting addicted to Facebook (6%). Facebook quitters were found to be more concerned about privacy, more addicted to the Internet and more conscientious.[175]

If you go by the first sentence, the second sentence does not make any sense.

It should be, "Facebook quitters were found to be more concerned about privacy, more worried about Facebook addiction, and more conscientious.

Do you see the difference? 71.162.82.63 (talk) 13:05, 3 April 2013 (UTC) Marcus

Ahmed KOriem : What about update on fc and make a voice comment not just written ,,, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.43.4.100 (talk) 09:43, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Addition of Graph Search

I propose that we include the addition of Facebook Graph Search under the Website header. On January 15th, 2013, Facebook introduced Graph Search and began its rollout in March. Graph Search is a semantic search engine which allows users to connect with others with similar interests and discover new places using a user's network of friends. Jesse5 (talk) 17:24, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Are there any one that would know about the youth center on figerou ave in the south central area that helped in the 70's get ged I have lost all my contacts and my award cer the name of the school was south central con. school my number to call is 951-536-7063 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CCE3:AF20:FDAD:20B8:F659:73A2 (talk) 15:56, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Lead query

"Critics, such as Facebook Detox,[15] state that Facebook has turned into a national obsession in the United States, resulting in vast amounts of time lost and encouraging narcissism." Shouldn't we find a better entry for that? Facebook Detox is a redlink, and isn't notable, and also is clearly just an anti-Facebook site. For an article of this importance, shouldn't we find a notable, reliable source for criticism? (Also, isn't that actually a Wiki guideline?). Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 14:34, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree entirely. Removed for now; a better summary of criticisms (e.g. privacy practices) should be added to the lead section.--Eloquence* 06:36, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Roleplaying on facebook

They certainly kept quiet about deleting roleplaying accounts, I think this is something that should be mentioned because roleplaying is not illegal and what facebook is doing is not right. Apparently there's millions of RP accounts, and they are still there..--Jacoblikesmetal (talk) 13:54, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

We're not a news site, it only goes here if it's notable and covered by reputable news sources.  drewmunn  talk  14:21, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose that Facebook, Inc. be merged into this article. Giving a quick look through, the history sections of both start out nearly the same, on top of the fact that the Inc. page doesn't have too much information to begin with. I propose that the two pages be merged into the Facebook page and follow a similar structure as the Twitter article (a current GA). This way, some of the duplicate information found in both articles can be paired down to one page and would give the remaining article more of a flow. WikiRedactor (talk) 21:43, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

• Support: sounds like a good idea, there is quite a bit of overlap. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 06:02, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
• Support Pages are full of redundant info and the company lacks notability without the website. The two are for pretty much all intents and purposes indistinguishable; don't I is why a separate article was created in the first place. oknazevad (talk) 14:37, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
• Support, for reasons provided above by WikiRedactor, Grammarxxx and Oknazevad. I would also add that on the rare occasion there is content specifically related to the company (and not the web site), editors frequently and incorrectly add this information to the Facebook (webpage) article. Merging the two articles would solve this problem. Gfcvoice (talk) 14:21, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
• Dont aggree: Facebook and Facebook Inc are totally different.Facebook inc is like having many products:Facebook as a website,Facebook mobile also coming soon.--Satyamcompany (talk) 13:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
• In theory, but you and what army? I disagree with Satyamcompany above. Facebook is a one-product company even if that product comes in different flavors, platforms, etc. In that way it's more like Tabasco sauce (where we don't need a separate article for every flavor) than google (which has a search engine, a video service, ad network, some funky glasses, etc). But these are both big articles and it would be a major effort and a merger of two different sets of editors. Easy to propose but actually doing it seems like a difficult task. - Wikidemon (talk) 16:20, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 19 June 2013

37.127.46.75 (talk) 19:02, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

You didn't actually make a request above. Please change the above template to "answered=no" when you have made a request. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:06, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Odd Edit to this talk page

Assume it was just clumsiness/incompetence but looks like somebody with a 41... IP (Ghana) made a string replace edit to this talk page that messed up some stuff, including my signatures above. Just fixed my signatures, I suppose reverting the edits entirely may be appropriate. 76.180.168.166 (talk) 01:35, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

Noting this apparently addressed by another editor. 76.180.168.166 (talk) 22:31, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Registered Facebook users by age as of 2010.

The "Registered Facebook users by age as of 2010." pie chart is not a good graph to represent age diversity in statistics field. Bar chart should have been used. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kirov Airship (talk • contribs) 20:28, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Size of data

Please add, e.g. after foreword and number of users, size of data used by facebook.(e.g. it maybe useful for computer size comparing stuff, compare with other databes, or libraries, cost of operation, knowledge available to search by usa forces, because of S. reminds etc., compare with Internet archive). The source is newest viable known(feel free to update), and not so old:

"Currently Facebook(as of 2012) have about 180 petabytes of data a year and grow by over half a petabyte every 24 hour.

Done - Diff. Thank you for your addition to Wikipedia! Signalizing (talk) 23:07, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Function of facebook

What do we call function of facebook that keep old conversation?Manzzzz^(talk) 03:33, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

TAFI Nomination

I just nominated Facebook at Today's article for improvement. Please go and vote for it! Jamesmcmahon0 (talk) 22:36, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Reorganisation

The main reason for failing in the last GA review was that it was disorganised and needed copyediting. I think I can probably do copyediting in small bits without discussion (correct me if I'm wrong) but I would like to achive consensus before changing the prose layout.

I'm going to point out what I think in level 3 sections below. If there's no objections about a week after my individual posts I'll probably implement the changes. RainCity471^{useless banter}_{list of failures} 18:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

The Lead

At the moment, the lead's a bit choppy and changes a lot. Here's my breakdown of what it is at the moment (please correct me if I'm wrong):

Facebook is an online social networking service. Its name stems from the colloquial name for the book given to students at the start of the academic year by some American university administrations to help students get to know each other.^[7] [= Definition] Facebook was founded in February 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg with his college roommates [...] become registered users of the site.^[9] [= History]
Users must register before using the site, after which they may [...] such as "People From Work" or "Close Friends". [= How it works] As of September 2012, Facebook has over one billion active users,[= stats]^[10] of which 8.7% are fake.^[11] According to a May 2011 Consumer Reports survey, there are 7.5 million children under 13 with accounts and 5 million under 10, violating the site's terms of service.[= stats fake stuff]^[12] Facebook (as of 2012) has about 180 petabytes of data a year and grows by over half a petabyte every 24 hours.^[13][= factual info]
In May 2005, Accel partners invested $12.7 million in Facebook [...] list published in May 2013.^[18] [= all history]

My first basic idea was to have all the non-history stuff in paragraph one (somehow put together nicely) and then the history in the other ones, however I don't know how this would go with the article. Any ideas? RainCity471^{useless banter}_{list of failures} 18:36, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

Staffing Details

Infobox shows 5K current employees but would be nice to know the historical growth, how many are in the set of those who built it (as opposed to mgt, mrkting, etc.) and so forth. 76.180.168.166 (talk) 15:53, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

If a reliable source can be found for this, we'll look into adding it. I'm sure it'd be very interesting, but I can't find the information myself (I haven't looked thoroughly).  drewmunn  talk  15:56, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Even though they weren't publicly traded until 2011, they're still a regular US/CA business, so the number of employees should be in the public record for the relevant years. Who is the "we" you refer to? Lycurgus (talk) 19:07, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

"We" are the editing community as a whole. If something is put up that's unsourced, someone will no doubt remove it, and sources are scrutinized for notability. Forgive me if this is wrong (I'm not in the US), but I don't think that companies have to provide a departmental breakdown of their staffing.  drewmunn  talk  19:10, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

No I think that's true from a legal standpoint. It's just false as regards the larger set of media. For example Ken Auletta did a book level reportage on google, Googled: The End of the World as we know it. There's prolly one or more such for FB, and the info is likely in the current sources. It's presumptuous to speak for a community in the first person, at least in a case like this. Maybe for a head of state, person writing something on that community and referencing their inclusion, etc. There's a such thing as "the editorial we" but this is distinct from the usage in question. 76.180.168.166 (talk) 20:52, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Not really, as I was noting guidelines that all editors should observe a collective is fine. If it were a matter of personal opinion, then it wouldn't be appropriate, but it's not. Anyway, you're more than welcome to look through the sources for the information, although it's unlikely to be in any and still up to date enough for it to be of any use. Facebook is a very rapidly growing company with resources shifted around to meet demand in growing sectors, so the more recent, the better; it wasn't that long ago that it was just one guy and a computer.  drewmunn  talk  21:28, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

It was almost 10 years ago, which seems a long time to me, and I'm old, time speeds up as you get older. Almost from the beginning, as is well known, he used labor other than his own until he graduated into the Gates, Ellison, Perot, the Google Jews, et al class. First part of your response with "collective" is incoherent don't know what you mean and you still seem to be posing as Wikipedia personified, granting people permission to do stuff. 76.180.168.166 (talk) 17:33, 20 June 2013 (UTC)

Ten years is not as much as you'd think in the world of technology companies; a massive portion of the enterprise world is still using an OS released 12 years ago. The point is, the company is still rapidly growing and changing, so you'd need new information. The point of my using the word "we" is that Wikipedia has guidelines. As editors, we stick by the guidelines. If you put an unsourced claim into the text, someone, maybe not me, will remove it. This is the "we". Whether it is a bot, an administrator, or a passing contributor, we are a collective taskforce. I am not saying "I don't like unsourced info", I'm saying "Wikipedia doesn't allow unsourced info and one of the editing team, whether that is myself or another contributor, will remove or otherwise deal with it." This isn't a controversial guideline, essay, or suggestion; unsourced information is not allowed to stand in an article.  drewmunn  talk  22:07, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Very well, it wasn't my intent to troll or be trolled on the sourcing bogey. Also, it is perfectly legitimate to use the 1st person plural when one is a designated spokesperson. Today FB is the canonical case of a biz started by an individual and the situation between Zuckerberg, the Winkelvii, and the additional labor that actually realized what did in fact succeed as FB as we know it today is what I opened this thread for, the numbers vs. time on that. As I say this is certainly sourceable, though perhaps not with ease, and I'll come back to it later, time permitting. Lycurgus (talk) 00:12, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Facebook use associates to negative emotions

Recent study shows increasing Facebook use associates to increasing negative emotions, such as jealousy, social tension, isolation and depression. source: Facebook is bad for you. Get a life! http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21583593-using-social-network-seems-make-people-more-miserable-get-life This finding is important and sensible. Can someone add it to the controversy section?124.149.113.191 (talk) 22:36, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Firstly, I'd really not class it as controversy. Secondly, and I know this isn't really the place of any one Wikipedia editor, but the study on which the report is based is seriously flawed: the sample size and length of study is tiny (less than 100 people sampled for 14 days), and focusses on a specific age group without sufficiently removing or facilitating for uncontrolled variables; the tested age group are likely to be among the unhappiest people anyway. A study by the Office for National Statistics here in the UK shows that 16-24 year olds feel among the least worthwhile, and are neither the most satisfied nor the happiest members of the population.[5] Similarly, one would expect to see a 'peak time' in Facebook usage, as you do with internet usage on the whole, suggesting that the negative emotions demonstrated in the study could be related to the cycle of a person's day, rather than their usage of a single website. Getting back onto the solid evidence that this isn't worth noting, however, and we look at the actual study itself. The closing comment states that "the current findings demonstrate that interacting with Facebook may predict the opposite result for young adults" (emphasis mine). The study itself notes that it's only possible, and not actually definite. Similarly, in the supporting text for the study (text S1): "We do not imply that no longitudinal research on Facebook has been performed. Rather, no published work that we are aware of has examined how Facebook influences subjective well-being over time (i.e., how people feel and their life satisfaction)."[6] What has occurred is, in fact, a report has been written, and an inaccurate view of it has been presented in a news outlet. The report suggests that there may be a link to unhappiness in young adults and Facebook, not that "the more someone uses Facebook, the less satisfied he is with life."  drewmunn  talk  08:16, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Edit request on 26 September 2013

85.24.144.234 (talk) 16:02, 26 September 2013 (UTC) It is you who change my password ... It's just me using my Facebook account. How to make notifications Facebook Help Center How to make notifications Do not have a Facebook account? Learn more about how you can report any abuse on Facebook. The best way to notify Conten ... site: sv.wikipedia.org

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. Dana boomer (talk) 16:17, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Hoaxes

Facebook, like other popular sites, is a perennial target of hoaxes. Even I, already vaguely aware of this, wasted an hour on this one. Seems to me the topic ought to be mentioned, though the details properly belong in specialized debunker sites. Jim.henderson (talk) 15:07, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

This is something that any even moderately popular site or organisation will attract, and it's not really that notable. For a topic to be included, it should meet our guidelines, in that it's received wide coverage in reliable media outlets. If an individual hoax does appear in a selection of such sources, then it may be includable, but otherwise it's not really for Wikipedia. As you rightly said, sites like Snopes that specialise in this are where most of these things should remain.  drewmunn  talk  16:23, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Facebook video downloading concept

Should we add facebook video download informationto this page. Many people aren't aware of facebook video laws and download information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.52.252.244 (talk) 16:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

188.174.75.29 (talk) 11:03, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Not done:: no actual request made here. NiciVampireHeart 19:16, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

i want facebook.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.25.29.165 (talk) 02:37, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Adding prism info ?

please insert:

For all non-US persons outside the US the intelligence agency National Security Agency (NSA) can monitor Facebook user behavoir (email, chat, uploads, downloads) through their surveilance program PRISM which requires FISA court autorisation.

Perhaps we can add this somewhere in the privacy section but it must be noted that Facebook has denied any connection to program. YuMaNuMa ^Contrib 15:17, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Maybe also adding something like: "The company, however, denied any involvement with the program or having granted easier access to private information about its users.". Mark Zuckerberg issued an statement himself denying it all, maybe that could be mentioned as well. Here is the link https://www.facebook.com/zuck/posts/10100828955847631

Cheers, Zalunardo8 (talk) 16:22, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

It's not really about Facebook though, and links to the program are tenuous at best.  drewmunn  talk  17:14, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Totally not true. Despite Facebook statements on ground of the same law, PRISM data have the same(law) access in the USA like M$ etc. Being part of program or not is just a "good politics move for the govt. from company". Law in the USA(and Facebook have servers on the USA ground) require to give access without informing, despite it may be not fully constitutional. As in the Washington D.C. case, breaking constitution until ruled out by highest Court occur in the USA, for example basing on 2nd amendment, that everybody known law to posses a gun in D.C.(lawmakers place) was only restored by highest Court after decades of forbidding new registers for USA citizens.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2337863/PRISM-Google-Facebook-DID-allow-NSA-access-data-talks-set-spying-rooms-despite-denials-Zuckerberg-Page-controversial-project.html Sources for informations that Facebook allow access for PRISM.

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. -- TOW  talk  19:02, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

• I am not sure what this article should say but I added something in it about the National Security Agency. Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

hi vt im nt can you please give me the website for health — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.195.112.221 (talk) 00:19, 11 December 2013 (UTC) hi nt i am vt how are you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.228.194.218 (talk) 22:27, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 December 2013

Jancy k.s (talk) 19:51, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Note: No request was made. --ElHef (Meep?) 21:40, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Videos?

Does Facebook host video files? -71.174.188.43 (talk) 22:45, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2014

41.235.106.92 (talk) 19:11, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Not done:: no actual request made here. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:16, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 January 2014

101.2.182.6 (talk) 11:21, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Not done: no request made.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to any article. - Arjayay (talk) 19:32, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

New 'Trending' feature

If you do a search in our Article on [trending] you will find one sentence with a reference to an article dated January 12, 2014. This will be larger than one sentence, since it represents a redesign and redirection.

• Headline: Why Facebook wants to be more like Twitter Hint: Twitter spreads news a lot faster By Chris Gayomali | January 16, 2014
• http://theweek.com/article/index/255237/why-facebook-wants-to-be-more-like-twitter

"The big news in the tech world today is that Facebook is rolling out a newly redesigned "Trending" feature. Pretty soon, users will see a ticker on the right side of their News Feed that will spotlight what chatty Facebookers are yapping about." — FYI, Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 21:55, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Reader engagement

There should be a subsection on reader engagement, the measurement of reader activity as taken separately from the number of likes. Reader engagement is plotted by Facebook and reported to site owners. Elise Andrew told Mclean's magazine[7] that her page "I Fucking Love Science" is often at the top of Facebook in terms of reader engagement, as reported to her by Facebook. Binksternet (talk) 20:22, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Capitalization of "facebook"

Is facebook not in lower case? It is in the logo.--78.156.109.166 (talk) 20:18, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia capitalizes trademarks, regardless. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:36, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks.--78.156.109.166 (talk) 20:01, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Link to Facebook Inc.

Why is there no wikilink to Facebook Inc.? 78.35.203.149 (talk) 21:16, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 February 2014

add Carter Simon Jr to the founder list CarterJij (talk) 08:11, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. --   Edderso     talk    contribs  17:06, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Stat in top right box is referenced to 1st quarter results

The stat in the top right box on the page quotes the third quarter results (http://investor.fb.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=802760)as saying 1.2 billion active users in September 2013 but is referenced to reference 6 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook#cite_note-fb2013q1-6) which is the FB first quarter results (http://investor.fb.com/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=761090). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flxjx (talk • contribs) 17:26, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 February 2014

112.198.82.101 (talk) 07:39, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

No request shown. JoeSperrazza (talk) 12:21, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

500

The first bullet point in the Criticisms and controversies section talks about a "500 fee". Is some kind of currency? — Kpalion^(talk) 22:47, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Edit request

"9% are fake" should read "approximately 9% are fake"

 Done--Rollins83 (talk) 18:19, 6 February 2014 (UTC)