Talk:Genius (company)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
WikiProject iconNew York City Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconWebsites: Computing Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Low-importance).
project-independent quality rating
in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.

Untitled

"10 days later, after removing links in violation of Google's Quality Guidelines, Rap Genius partially recovered from their penalty.[10] In fact, some opinions discussed how well the penalty process served Rap Genius' Search Engine authority, as the aftermath showed dozens of fresh incoming links from online magazines and a rise in people searching Rap Genius in Google" This last point, the rise in people searching for RapGenius despite its penalty from Google, should have a link referring to the "Streisand effect" -Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.237.28.59 (talk) 03:08, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd disagree - the Streisand Effect refers to a person (or company) trying to keep some piece of information out of public and that act of concealing resulting in increased scrutiny/exposure from the internet. What Rap Genius did was different; they were gaming Google's algorithm by inserting text/links that juked their search relevance and when Google caught on to the scheme they changed their algorithm to punish Rap Genius and discourage other sites from doing the same practice. So this is more "there's no such thing as bad publicity" than the Steisand Effect. The users who came to Rap Genius after their bad press were not trying to see irrelevant links/text, they were just going to site as a result of hearing about them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.46.159.170 (talk) 15:09, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I dunno how to source this

Their slogan was [this](http://genius.com/43948) for a while but how do i put that in the page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Isitmyself2 (talkcontribs) 02:16, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's a joke and not quite sure if it complies with

wp:significance, if you really want to cite it just add a citation with the ref tag.... Jakesyl (talk) 20:56, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply
]

Reverts

@

WP:FANCRUFT. Users were heavily listed and do not appear to be notable at all. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 01:28, 25 November 2015 (UTC)[reply
]


External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on

Genius (website). 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018.

regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check
}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:16, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Something is off here.

I can't help feeling that something is just not right about this article. I'm thinking of trying a complete rebuild from scratch over the next few days. Any thoughts on this would be welcome. bd2412 T 12:57, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]