Talk:Aylo/Archives/2018

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on MindGeek. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160509080047/http://www.mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/manwin-isnt-buying-redtube-7916/ to http://www.mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/manwin-isnt-buying-redtube-7916/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:01, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Original research
Everybody should re-read WP:Original research before making any more comments on this page. Thanks. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 08:45, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Reverting edits
I reverted 3 edits by IP address editors which seemed unconstructive; 2 that involved the deletion of content mentioning the subject of pornography (the core business of the company) without any explanation other than "It is SFW.", and one edit which changed the spelling of a name to an incorrect spelling. Similar deletion of content was also reverted 22:16, 27 February 2016 by a different contributor. Please take this as an opportunity to discuss the reasoning behind any future removal of content or changing of names e.g. are there any better references that support a different spelling of "Keezer" (not Keiser)?

The spelling Matt Keezer in this Wikipedia article is referenced from New York Magazine here: http://nymag.com/news/features/70985/index1.html

It is also spelled Keezer in the book: American Girls: Social Media and the Secret Lives of Teenagers, By Nancy Jo Sales (which can be viewed on Google Books): https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=EihmCwAAQBAJ&lpg=PT44&dq=matt%20keezer%20%22pornhub%22&pg=PT44#v=onepage&q=matt%20keezer%20%22pornhub%22&f=false Nebchez35 (talk) 01:44, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Were SpankWire, ExtremeTube and KeezMovies sold or not?

 * If you read the TOS of Mindgeek owned sites like Pornhub, YouPorn or Redtube, they all say 'Websites are operated by MG Freesites Ltd, Block 1, 195-197 Old Nicosia-Limassol Road, Dali Industrial zone, Cyprus 2540.'
 * If you read the TOS of Spankwire, Extremetube and Keezmovies they all say 'Glorious Holdings Investment Ltd., a British Virgin Islands corporation, welcomes you to www.spankwire.com (the “Website”).


 * Clearly these are not owned by Mindgeek.


 * On April 8 2016 LBguilbert made an edit stating that SpankWire, ExtremeTube and KeezMovies were sold, unfortunatley there was no citation, they don't specify when in 2015 the sites were sold or who they were sold to, and the statement that they were sold appears incorrect because in addition to not being able to find any reference to their sale:


 * SpankWire, ExtremeTube and KeezMovies are still shown on MindGeek's PornMD search engine as of April 6 2016: https://web.archive.org/web/20160406095056/http://www.pornmd.com/ (position the mouse cursor over the PornMD logo in the center of the page to reveal links to those brands).


 * The Rules & Regulations for the MindGeek ad network TrafficJunky currently have sections for SpankWire, ExtremeTube and KeezMovies: http://www.trafficjunky.com/rules-and-regulations archive link https://web.archive.org/web/20160321055041/http://trafficjunky.com/rules-and-regulations 21 Mar 2016.


 * On August 29 2015 XBIZ still lists them as MindGeek sites (with no mention of them being for sale): http://www.xbiz.com/news/198440 Nebchez35 (talk) 17:11, 9 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes they were sold. They are no longer listed on the Pornhub Network at the top of each page. There was no press release done for the sale. Traffickjunky is still the adnetwork used on Spankwire, Keezmovies and Extremetube. You can see on Oct 15th, the TOS was updated on the three sites which differs greatly from the other Mindgeek tubes and has different addresses. http://www.spankwire.com/Information#terms http://www.keezmovies.com/information#terms http://www.extremetube.com/information?page=terms


 * Pornhub parent company: "This website is operated by MG Freesites Ltd, Block 1, 195-197 Old Nicosia-Limassol Road, Dali Industrial zone, Cyprus 2540."


 * Spankwire/Keezmovies/Extremetube parent company: "Glorious Holdings Investment Ltd., a British Virgin Islands corporation" Brettg2 (talk) 20:34, 9 April 2016 (UTC)


 * MindGeek is the parent company of numerous subsidiary companies, e.g. Brazzers is not operated by MG Freesites Ltd., and most of MindGeek's sites operate as independent subsidiaries.


 * You have still not given any evidence that Spankwire, Keezmovies or Extremetube were sold (as noted they are still linked from the PornMD home page), you have only given a link to their information pages, but that does not show that Glorious Holding Investment Ltd. was not always shown on their legal information / terms of use pages. There is no evidence that there was a change of company name or when it occurred. Even if you were able to show that the company name changed on the sites information pages, it could simply show a reorganization of the company structure within MindGeek and it does not mean they were sold.


 * To say that the sites were sold, it should first be indicated that they were owned by MindGeek. I will be editing the article to reflect this. I will add a tag for a citation, since whilst what you claim is possible, the truth of what you say can only be based on faith unless you can give any evidence for it. Nebchez35 (talk) 02:14, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * What other evidence is possible if the company doesn't release a press release? On those 3 websites the TOS were all updated on Oct 15th 2015 to a different parent company than any of the other sites in the Pornhub Network. On that date they also changed the Network bar to "The Spankwire Network", also hinting at a sale. Being indexed in a search engine isn't evidence that it wasn't sold. Their DMCA agent on the 3 sites is also different than Pornhub, Youporn, Tube8, Redtube. It was also changed on Oct 15th.


 * Corey D. Silverstein, Esquire 30150 Telegraph Road, Suite 444 Bingham Farms, MI 48025 Email: dmca@spankwire.com


 * Is the new DMCA agent. If it were still a part of Mindgeek, it would probably still have the same DMCA agent. Brettg2 (talk) 15:46, 10 April 2016 (UTC)


 * I have removed this claim, firstly as this possibly constitutes original research and secondly as it is an unreliable claim based on a simple T&C change. There are many reasons to believe that MindGeek still owns these sites many of which have been listed by Nebchez35 already, i.e., PornMD which only indexes MindGeek websites still lists them, TrafficJunky an ad network solely for MindGeek sites lists them as well.


 * On the technical side, they are registered by the same registrar through which all other MindGeek websites have been registered, EuroDNS S.A. (check any website via WHOIS). Hosted on the same ISP as well, Reflected Networks Inc. (check the host of any MindGeek website). Content such as JS and other elements are served by phncdn.com (PornHub CDN).


 * Note: The above details and arguments Nebchez35 should have sufficed on why that claim should be removed. Just listing the technical details to show that the website is still in all probability owned by MindGeek.


 * First of all this is original research so this cant be included in the first place on the basis of a T&C if you have a reputable source saying they were bought please include it, I can't find any news source confirming this. MindGeek has subsidiaries in British Virgin Islands, also see the SOA record for spankwire.com which mentions Mindgeek as the controller https://bgp.he.net/dns/spankwire.com. Gotitbro (talk) 06:29, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Removal of reference in infobox
you removed (twice) the reference just I re-added for the owners CEO Ferras Antoon COO David Marmorstein Tassillo you said the reference makes no mention of this, but I included a direct quote in the reference from the article in my edit, to show that the article does mention both people, which makes me think you didn't check the source before removing it. I cannot see why this was deleted or why it shouldn't be added again. Ceapad (talk) 23:10, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I added the reference back, it had been incorrectly and wrongfully removed. The exact mention was on page 2 of the article so I fixed it (Davey2010 might have been confused by that). You should read the complete source before removing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gotitbro (talk • contribs) 14:40, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Merger proposal
A discussion on the Talk Page of the Babes (website) article has reached the conclusion that the Babes (website) article and the Babes.com article should both be merged into the relevant section of this article. Hence I am proposing the merger here. - Polly Tunnel (talk) 12:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You should post the merger notice in the main body of the article as well. Gotitbro (talk) 05:08, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reminding me about that. With the unusual way that the merger proposal is developing I somehow managed to forget that step. I've posted it now. - Polly Tunnel (talk) 11:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

As there appear to be no objections I shall go ahead with the mergers. - Polly Tunnel (talk) 10:56, 28 June 2018 (UTC)