User talk:Dchump

It may be tedious to spend time to find discussions about Wajam by scouring the web, but here's a collection on the Wajam blog, although it is dated: http://blog.wajam.com/2011/08/social-layer-to-search-most-useful-service/ It wouldn't be considered notable according to Wikipedia standards, but you can probably make a search for each of the users mentioned on the page. 198.199.14.99 (talk) 19:34, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

I concede that I went overboard at first, but my recent edits are well-founded. It is impossible to paint an accurate picture of Wajam without noting that its software is very often installed without the consent or knowledge of users. This cannot reasonably be disputed; I have provided link after link, and a simple google search for wajam will turn up nothing but complaints. I have still not seen any discussion anywhere that shows a substantial number of people have affirmatively sought out Wajam and purposefully installed it on their computers. Should you have some, I would be more than happy to revise my position. I look forward to your response.Dchump (talk) 17:53, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

At this point, I still consider that your intentions are good, but I'd ask you to refrain from personal attacks and allegations (See WP:NPE). You're not being constructive when you back up your point by discrediting your sources. All I was saying is that your sources come from personal experiences (See WP:SPS). I'm sorry to hear about you bad experience with Wajam, but there has been much external press releases and reviews about it, giving it praise. Their opinion is as valid as yours. I suggest that you read more about Wikipedia policies. There are some problems related to the page, but Wajam employees have been transparent about their affiliations. I see that you are a new user to Wikipedia, and I strongly suggest you to read about theses policies in order to make your point valid and as neutral as possible. 216.252.76.97 (talk) 16:10, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

216.252.76.97 (talk), you are from Montreal and are clearly connected with the company. You are not neutral and seek only to revert this to a press release praising Wjam. My main point is this: there is no doubt that the vast majority of users do not mean to install Wajam and never sought it out. Why are the top Google results, after wajam.com and wikipedia, all pages that discuss how to remove wajam or posts by users that complain that Wajam was installed without their knowledge? Why are the majority of Google's "related searches" for Wajam things like "is wajam safe," "how to get wajam off", "wajam virus," "wajam remove," and "wajam uninstall"?? The company's listing must address this issue, which is the only reason most have heard of it.

Hi, I noticed that you did not reply to my questions on the Wajam Talk page. I've restored the removed content as you did not justify the removal of notable sources such as MIT Technology Review, Forbes and more. In those mentions, there are relevant points pertaining to the features and value of the product. As I've stated in my revisions, linking to forum posts does not constitute notable sources. I've added a new reference that demonstrates more credibility as the forum moderator appropriately brings users back on topic and clarifies the possible source of confusion. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you did not remove content without appropriately describing your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary and providing major justifications or community consensus. Thanks! 74.59.20.169 (talk) 12:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I have provided substantial justification both as part of my edits and on the talk page. My edits are sound and the only people that don't like them are from the company itself. Please go to the wajam talk page and review what people really think.Dchump (talk) 07:12, 27 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm 216.252.76.97. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Wajam without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry: I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, you can use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Hi, welcome to Wikipedia. I've realized that you have removed most of the current verified content on the Wajam page. While I understand that you are doing this in good faith, you cannot simply undo the work of others and replacing it with your own. You should not be deleting content without any major justifications or community consensus. Thank you for your understanding.