Talk:Rabble.ca

Is there a reason the paragraph about the firing of Audra Williams is repeatedly deleted from the entry? It's all public record. 199.126.22.116 (talk) 04:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Deletion debate

This article survived an Articles for Deletion debate. The discussion can be found here. -Splash^talk 01:00, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"(reverted vandalism)"

rabble makes the following claim: The site receives roughly 300,000 unique visitors a month.

I wrote the following statement, which I believe to be true and worthy of a response: (I seriously question this figure.)

Spylab chose to delete it as (reverted vandalism).

I take exception to this.

You can't write stuff like "I question this fact" in a Wikipedia article. That's not the way it works. You can insert ^{[citation needed]} if you you want proof of a statement. Spylab 12:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)Spylab[reply]

Thank you for the advice.

"Unique" visitors?

Why does it say "unique" visitors? I would even question substituting that with "open-minded" or the like...neutrality ppl! -unsigned

The word "unique" is a technical term related to how Internet visitors are counted. It has nothing to do with the personalities of the people who visit the site. Spylab 15:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's also an unattainable meausurement standard as far as internet sites go.139.48.25.60 (talk) 21:58, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify - how would the site know who is a "unique" visitor? Even if the site identified 300,000 different IP hits on the site, that doesn't mean those are people visiting or making use of the content, as opposed to automated bots, or repeat visitors (say, someone visiting from work during the day, then from at home at night). There is simply no way to know what those 300,000 IP hits represent. The statistics can't be used to support a claim that 300,000 unique visitors are using the site, unless they are actually logging in by name to the site. And even then, unless they're verifying their identities by credit card/email, there is still no way of weeding out multiple personalities. The statement can't be verified, and especially not since it comes from the site's very own "about us" page. Ridiculous. Has this article passed a recommendation for deletion yet on the grounds on non-notability?139.48.25.60 (talk) 22:03, 26 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]