Talk:People of Walmart

Expanding the article
The plan for this article is to expand on the few sentences already discussed. We will add information about the background of the site, backlash it has received, and people's reactions who were affected by the site. We will also discuss the usability, its social aspects, and communication aspects. We have found many articles about people's reactions from prominent sources. This website is apart of a growing trend of websites which allow members to anonymously post about themselves or others. We will go into detail about this online community, discussing the functions and uses involved. --Laurensac (talk) 00:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Laurensac (talk) 20:09, 21 September 2011 (UTC) --Laurensac (talk) 00:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)Cmb268 (talk) 20:09, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I have chosen to follow this project. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kmacdonald4 --kmacdonald4 (talk) 12:22, 22 September 2011

Hey guys! The expansion is coming along nicely... a few comments I have are creating a section about what demographic are most frequently visiting the site? Do you have to be a member to contribute or can it be done anonymously? Also, in you founders section Im concerned about the language being too informal when you say "three guys" founded it... I guess that since the site is humorous and informal it could be appropriate but just something to think about. --kmacdonald4 (talk) 13:04, 29 September 2011

So this is definitely more than I ever expected to know about People of Walmart. One thing that I think you could have added was maybe something about site traffic. How many visitors does the site get per month? Also you mention the demographic of walmart but is there a way to know the demographic of the website visitors? kmacdonald4 (talk) 12:40, 04 October 2011

Observer --atd42 (talk) 18:00, 22 September 2011

Hey guys! I will be another observer on this article. Good luck, looking forward to see what you guys come up with! --Kprincisvalle (talk) 01:05, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

I know you guys are still working hard on your article but it's coming along nicely. As an observer, I just wanted to suggest a couple of things. Firstly, it would be really informative to readers if you included some headlines about how peopleofwalmart is used in our society today. Is it popular? Who uses it? Another great idea is to include what Walmart thinks about this website. Have their been any legal actions taken? Just some things to think about. I look forward to seeing what you guys come up with! kwolf713 (talk) 21:31, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey guys! I am going to be observing your website. I have a couple suggestions. First, I think that you should expand more on the introduction. I know it might be hard, but it will help inform the reader more about the site. Second, it might be helpful to provide some of the demographics of the people who look at the site as well as demographics of Walmart- who shops there/how many walmarts are in the U.S? I am sure that you an find this information on the Walmart Wikipedia page. It could then be helpful to include a section on your page that says " See Also" and include a link to the Walmart Wikipedia page or any or Walmart Pages. Also, in the second paragraph under Founders and Start up, the word look should be changed to looked. It looks great so far! Good Luck! DanielleSHammer (talk) 15:13, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello, the progress on the wiki is looking good. Adding the table was a great improvement, but I'm a little confused to the "Commerical? --Yes" Statement in the table. I understand that you've only just added information into the founding of the site, but I think you could have put up more information. Site features and purpose of the site could be expanded upon. I look forward to seeing the information you have on the legal issues behind the site. --Nocturnalcaffeine (talk) 16:52, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Ahh! I just typed in so many great tips and then safari crashed. Okay, so I agree with Danielle. You need to expand your introduction and provide more details in your introduction. Also, I know you talked about how the website has grown but can you provide stats like amount of website visits per day or each month. In addition, you may want to discuss Walmart a bit more and the type of customers that their stores attract. Good job so far- I know how hard it is to start your article from scratch. --atd42 (talk) 13:19, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello People of Walmart group! I was looking over your Wiki article and I have a few suggestions as to how you can improve the page. I think there just needs to be a bit more meat to this article. Try including a "history" section or a "user experience" section (to explain why a person might upload a photo or why someone would go onto PeopleofWalmart.com). Also, I think the stats suggestion above is a good one by atd42 and I support that suggestion. I think it would be a good idea to include this. Also Nocturnalcaffeine's suggestion of the site features and legal issues is a good one. Also, try to make sure to link some of your mentioned items to other Wikipedia Articles that exist so readers will have increased useability and a greater knowledge experience while reading this article. Looking forward to your changes, good luck! Kprincisvalle (talk) 00:14, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello again! I like the changes you guys made since I last "observed" your article. I feel that since a lot of your subsections only include one line, you should either condense the organization of your article or add more detail to the sections. I think adding detail would be the better strategy since the organization seems to flow more nicely at this point and I find the subsections make the page easy to navigate and easy to read. Providing more detail will give reason for these subsections to exist on your page. Kprincisvalle (talk) 05:13, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

the content you have added looks good. You could condense some of the sections to make it longer without dividing it up as much. You can get some more detailed information as well to back up claims. Overall additions you made I believe will be helpful for the future. twr28 —Preceding undated comment added 17:07, 5 October 2011 (UTC).

Our Edits
We have added in information about the founders and why they started the website. We will be adding in societal implications, backlash, Walmart's response and legal action in the near future. Our information was taken from a Time article which was written shortly after the site was started. --Laurensac (talk) 01:53, 29 September 2011 (UTC)Laurensac (talk) --Laurensac (talk) 01:53, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[User:Cmb268|Cmb268]] (talk)

More Edits
We have added some more information to the introduction to give readers a better understanding of the website and how to use it. We also added in some more information on the founders. User experience, site features and Walmart demographics were also added in to give some background info on the type of people visiting the store, thus possibly being on the website. User experience and site features describe the different settings and breakup of the website included top rated pictures, most recent, etc. There was a lack of backlash from Walmart. They do not comment on the People of Walmart site. We discuss the recently added mobile applications and social media. We have also added in some information of the reaction of a woman on the website, who's daughter found her picture and how easy it is to get rid of pictures which may offend you.

--Laurensac (talk) 03:13, 4 October 2011 (UTC)((User: Laurensac|Laurensac)) --Laurensac (talk) 03:13, 4 October 2011 (UTC)((User:Cmb268|Cmb268))

No reliable source objects to making fun of people
I would like stand up, even though alone, to object publicly to making fun of people. We're all in the same boat of life together. Publishing photos of people in order to laugh at them is unkind in the extreme. We need more understanding, acceptance, and love in this suffering world, not humor that is essentially unkind or attacking. David Spector (user/talk) 16:12, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Reference: Woman finds mom on PoW, freaks
The URL in the citation/reference link to this article now redirects to a page on NBCNews.com,. I don't know if the citation/reference should be updated; is it informative for a reader to see the URL where this article was originally found? --anon. 71.183.134.249 (talk) 11:20, 8 September 2013 (UTC)