Talk:Facebook

Missionality
I fail to see what this has to do with (a)Conservapedia, (b)pseudoscience, (c)crackpotism, or (d)authoritarianism. I move for deletion. -- 00:28, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
 * Go ahead and delete if everyone agrees. I created it because it was redlinked on Myspace Secret Squirrel 06:12, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
 * I think they could be relevant. There are FB groups and pages dedicated to politics and various crank ideas that this wiki refutes. These also tend to go fairly unchecked. Also, hysteria (particularly whether it's justified or completely unfounded) over internet safety and privacy is worth looking into. Armondikov 08:30, 17 March 2008 (EDT)
 * * Sigh* Alright.  I won't delete it.  And this article will sit here unchanged, with nothing of relevance added, until someone else adds  to it.  -- 13:26, 18 March 2008 (EDT)

While I understand there are FB groups, the problem remains that this article doesn't really talk about those groups. This page has remained unchanged and in the same sorry state since the 18th of March, and I am honestly considering placing it in the trashcan. If you object... rise now or forever hold your peace.
 * I object and am removing the mission tag right now. The notion that a corporation has some sort of "right" to collect information about its users from unrelated websites and broadcast it to the public is both crackpot and authoritarian.  The article stays.  &mdash; Unsigned, by: 96.239.150.94 / talk / contribs

Ah, I'd almost forgotten about this page. And good riddance, I might add. 00:01, 5 September 2008 (EDT)

Zuckerberg
We probably should have a brief MZ bio, and mention some of MZ's more egregious sayings and actions. Including associations with the rich and powerful (from the Russian government to fundraising for Chris Christie), philanthropy, VC activity, dreams of space travel. Wikipedia mentions lobbying and links to the oil industry, and a blasphemy lawsuit in Pakistan.

Not sure if the whole Social Network/creep/sex pest thing is off topic, even as a subject of media misrepresentation.

Also is it relevant to mention Facebook corporate stuff and other projects of the Facebook group, e.g. internet for the world, VR, though they're not particularly on-topic in themselves?

Anything this article is missing? Aside from half of it being 10 years old. --Annanoon (talk) 09:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Zuck probably deserves his own article. Duncan from Teflpedia (talk) 11:27, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Facebook down
Any comments on the outage (and where can the FB-ers express their outrage?)?

One point each for whichever' of 'the usual suspects' is brought into the narrative. Anna Livia (talk) 18:52, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Article is wrong about Facebook's audience
Facebook had a global audience. Older people using Facebook may be true in the USA and other Western countries, but I see lots of young people using Facebook in other countries. Fehufanga12 (talk) 07:28, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this site is "US centric" and that part is more or less a joke that is commenting on the decline of Facebook among "Generation Z" in the US. (Along with the troll farms, which is a big reason for the decline, methinks.) There's also been articles in other countries (eg the UK) showing a youth switch to other platforms. But obviously Facebook is a global platform so "your mileage may vary". BobJohnson (talk) 15:03, 30 January 2023 (UTC)