Talk:Twitter

Twitter has been used to help with employment seeking

I heard on the Radio Four programme You and Yours today (August 30 2012) that some one who was unemployed set up a site on Twitter to help him find employment - and it worked. Does any one know anything about this? If so, it could go in the article. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 13:24, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Country-blocked content

Twitter has begun blocking some results by country, starting with a neo-Nazi group in Germany yesterday [1] and anti-Semitic postings in France today.[2] It's getting enough coverage from reliable sources that it probably belongs in the main article (surely more than, say, Rick Moody's short story of Tweets), but I'm not sure where best to fit in the current layout. Any suggestions? Khazar2 (talk) 15:03, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

The "Privacy and security" section mentions that the selective blocking feature was introduced on January 26, 2012. It has been back in the news today because of its use to block tweets in Germany and France. These are specific examples which could be added as citations.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 19:37, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Great. I'll add a bit there. Khazar2 (talk) 19:42, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Suggestion: reducing clutter through list-defined references

Regarding [3]. Per Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Avoiding_clutter: "Inline references can significantly bloat the wikitext in the edit window and can be extremely difficult and confusing. There are three methods that avoid clutter in the edit window: list-defined references, short citations or parenthetical references. (As with other citation formats, articles should not undergo large scale conversion between formats without consensus to do so.)" I'd like to introduce list-defined references to this article, to make it more friendly to edit (less code -> closer to WYSWIWYG). Per the request of editor who reverted me and WP:CITEVAR recommendation I'd like to ask editors interested in this article for input which style they prefer, and strongly suggest following the "avoid clutter" recommendation. While LDR add a little code to the total size of the article, it amounts to only 10% or so of the total article size, so load time should not be significantly affected (nobody should notice a 10% change; also, section edit load time will shorter anyway...), and editing experience should become much friendlier. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:02, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

This is largely about personal preference. I prefer inline references to LDR as they are easier to find and edit, particularly if there are many references, as in this article. Also, the LDR added 19,203 characters of code to what is already a long article. The LDR system is top heavy on resources, and can increase page loading time.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:26, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

I am not so sure if the non-LDR system makes anything easier. After all the ref name="abc"/ is common enough (I count many dozens in this article), and so already there are many sections here which do not have the full citation in them anyway; adding some more short cites and moving all full references to one place, where they are alphabetically organized, should make it more easy for editors to find the full ref. Currently they have to search for it or look for it, after LDR scheme is implemented, they can expect to find it in an alphabetical list in the bottom of the article. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 19:49, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

While I think it's impressive that you've "counted many dozens" in every article you've pasted that same exact wording on (which seems to be at least a dozen different talk pages), there is a difference between using a "ref name" and having that ref name used in an entirely different section. The existence of a ref name is not indicative of it being used in other sections of an article, and if that were the case, that would be the exception, not the rule. I don't think that because some editors might need to look outside of a section for a reference, we need to make it so that all editors have to look outside of a section for a reference. - SudoGhost 20:12, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Glad you like my counting efforts. This article has 7 or so short cites (all right, I guess I should have said about a dozen here), the discrepancy about where they are used and where the full cites begins in the lead, with the "NYT-Twitter Hacked" ref used there but fully defined only several sections below. I don't have time to waste on counting how many other instances of such a problem occur here, probably not too many in this instance, but it is a fact this article suffers from this problem. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 20:31, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

You don't want to waste time counting how many instances of something occurs, yet you'll gladly assert that you've counted dozens of them on dozens of articles. LDR is a horrible way to organize references, and you haven't really explained any good reason to format the references in this article this way. - SudoGhost 20:33, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Common Twitter Uses and Hashtags

I would like to add a section called common twitter uses under the Use and Social Impact section of this page. The following is what I would like to include.
Aside from using Twitter to communicate with friends and meet people, Twitter can be used for a great deal of other things. The scope of it's use is limited practically by your own imagination. A list of some of the most common uses of Twitter include.

• Getting advice and feedback
• Promoting a business
• Content sharing and discovery
• Entertainment
• Source of breaking news
• Deal notifications
• Taking notes
• Marketing research
• Finding help
• Finding jobs
  

I would also like to add a section called Hashtags in the Features section of the Twitter page. The Following is what I would like to include.
Hashtags are one of the most complex features on Twitter for users to understand. A hashtag is basically words or phrases with a hash symbol (#) at the start of the word to identify what it is. Hashtags help spread information throughout Twitter. They are a favorite tool amongst Twitter users. When a Twitter user adds a hashtag to their topic in a tweet, it makes it easier to find that certain topic in a search. The more people that Hashtag a particular topic the more likely that topic with appear in Twitter's Trending Topics. Making use of Hashtags on Twitter is an easy way to track breaking news and current events going on around the world.

Luke L. and Tim W. are proposing these changes for a college class project that we are required to do.
--Llepper4 (talk) 00:26, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 10 December 2012

Twitter alexa rank 9 December 2012 Shahvr (talk) 06:38, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Done, User:OKBot is supposed to update this every month but nothing has happened since August.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:01, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

• OKBot has not made any user contributions since 9 September 2012.[4] This is worth bearing in mind, as Alexa rankings will not be updated automatically.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:43, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

The Pope is now a user

Should this article not point out that on December 12 2012, the Pope had his first ever use of Twitter? ACEOREVIVED (talk) 15:58, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

This is more on topic at Pope Benedict XVI, where it has been added to the article today.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:16, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

340 million tweets per day

Where is the number coming from? It doesn't seem to have a citation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emschorsch (talk • contribs) 05:57, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Twitter said this in a blog post on 21 March 2012.[5] This was added to the article and replaced one of the dead links.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:50, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Grand Theft Auto 4

Is it worth mentioning in the article that twitter was parodied in GTA 4? There was a service called Bleeter where characters would refer to sending a 'bleet'. TheBigJagielka (talk) 01:38, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Questions About How it Functions

Hello everybody! Let this section be for questions about the function. My question is "How can we see tweets of a users sorted by date, the oldest being the first?" I tried scrolling down but I could exceed 5 days ago...any idea? I use mobile — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.91.1.234 (talk) 04:08, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

This page is for discussion of the article about Twitter, not Twitter itself - see the top of the page. Autarch (talk) 04:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

500 million Twitter users

Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Twitter will according to The Next Web 23rd February have 500 million users, and there are currently 466,290,293. Impressive figure of 300 million Twitter was reached in May last year, and tripled when Apple introduced Twitter integration into its iOS. If you're interested in how Twitter has registered account information you can check on Twopcharts.93.137.42.210 (talk) 16:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

500M vs 175M active

The current text refers to 500M active users in the info box.

According to a followup to the cited article, the actual estimated active count is only 175M (over a 3 month period).

http://techcrunch.com/2012/07/31/twitter-may-have-500m-users-but-only-170m-are-active-75-on-twitters-own-clients/

-- nyenyec ☎ 15:34, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Dalai Lama a bad example?

Under Verified accounts, the Dalai Lama is given as an example of a person who has a identity-verified Twitter account, but who does not tweet. However, that Twitter account seems to have 883 tweets, averaging at least one per week. Can we find a better example of a verified-but-not-used celebrity Twitter account? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Avapoet (talk • contribs) 09:21, 15 March 2013 (UTC)