Neopets on wikipedia

[firefox]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neopets it is quite interesting

Last edited by firefox on Thu Nov 11, 2004 5:48 am, edited 1 time in total.

[vinylraven]

"Still others believe that the users of Neopets are poorly treated and considered nothing more than mere statistics, that the site has lost its friendliness over the years, and that the level of customer service has degraded considerably. Many users voice the opinion that the Neopets staff freeze accounts too often and without good reason. Some dispute Neopets' registered users count, which has reached over 85 million, a figure Neopets often cites in promotional campaigns. A large percentage of these users are multiple secondary accounts owned by one person, frozen accounts or accounts no longer in use. Such accounts are never deleted, and even accounts that have not been accessed since the creation of the site linger. The actual number of active accounts is less than 11 million"

hmmm it seems like they've done their research

[firefox]

but hey, pinkpt is mentioned

[kiay]

Wow, this must be one of the first non-neopets sites I've seen that actually knows what they are talking about.

[Shifty]

The actual number of active accounts is less than 11 million.

How nice of them to point that out.... Its still alot of they're trying to make it look pathetic.

Where is ppt mentioned??:

[kiay]

The actual number of active accounts is less than 11 million.

How nice of them to point that out.... Its still alot of they're trying to make it look pathetic.

Where is ppt mentioned??:

At the very bottom.

Fansites
As we all know The best Neopets fan site is pinkpt.com (http://www.pinkpt.com)i. ##Note## PTTers post something about the site.

[stampsyne]

Love Wikipedia. I ahve it in a quick button. They cover way much!

[Yoshi]

Well...Wikipedia entries are all user-submitted and appear instantly, usually without reviewing by a staff member of the site. Do keep in mind that it might just be some random disgruntled (or not) person out there who wrote it, and that anyone can go in and change stuff in there. *shrug*

[Urthdigger]

Hmm, I don't use the site much at all, but it looks like they noticed how we noticed their noticing us

[plushie]

"Still others believe that the users of Neopets are poorly treated and considered nothing more than mere statistics, that the site has lost its friendliness over the years, and that the level of customer service has degraded considerably. Many users voice the opinion that the Neopets staff freeze accounts too often and without good reason. Some dispute Neopets' registered users count, which has reached over 85 million, a figure Neopets often cites in promotional campaigns. A large percentage of these users are multiple secondary accounts owned by one person, frozen accounts or accounts no longer in use. Such accounts are never deleted, and even accounts that have not been accessed since the creation of the site linger. The actual number of active accounts is less than 11 million"

hmmm it seems like they've done their research

now THATS what *I* call good research! *cough*

[Asparagus Queen]

Anyone can edit that... That's stupid. What if someome came in and messed it up? I don't think anyone who reads it should get to edit it.

I don't see ppt either... I don't see anything about fansites. Well, it was edited at midnite today (8 hours ago), I don't know how I'm not seeing about ppt... Edit - nevermind. I found it on the Discussion page.

[1lewysgal]

This IS getting interesting! I followed a link from that link and got to here:

http://www.hubbardcollege.org/mgmtsystem/use_dougdohring.html

That is the guy that runs Neopets, isn't it?

[vivian58]

Anyone can edit that... That's stupid. What if someome came in and messed it up? I don't think anyone who reads it should get to edit it.

But that's the beauty of it. Anybody can add their tidbits of knowledge and edit/create articles. And if something's grossly incorrect, somebody else will come along and make the necessary changes. You'd think this method wouldn't exactly work - and yet it does.[/quote]

[ladyredhat]

wikipedia is good for the most part *points to sig link: treecats wiki article that contains grammar errors, but is a correct summary of David Weber's fictional beings nonetheless*

I am not surprise to see an article cropping up in wikipedia, I bet somebody wrote it who saw the Neopets article that appeared on Slashdot after the Australian controversy hit the news. The first time I had seen the Dohring-Scientology rumor was from a user post on the Slashdot article itself. Apparently its not just a rumor, either.

[Asparagus Queen]

I guess it works... I mean, it's worked for this long. Odd. I guess with that many people checking in on it, it would work. The article I guess was started months ago - at least it looks like that according to the corrections page.