Talk:Yahoo/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Streamline History section

Hi All, Spencer from Yahoo here. I was exploring Wikipedia and reading different Yahoo articles. I discovered there is an excess of duplicate, redundant information in both of the Yahoo! and Yahoo! Inc. (1995-2017) articles. I summarized the History section and removed the redundant word-for-word content. I also removed content that focused on the company itself, since this Yahoo article is on the web portal. This is a large edit request with complete rewrite of the History section. I am sharing the section in its entirety, so editors can fully see what I am proposing. However, should editors want to consider this in smaller chunks, I am happy to post in smaller edit requests. Just let me know! What I propose is below.

Extended content

History

Main article: History of Yahoo!

See also: Timeline of Yahoo!

Jerry Yang and David Filo, the founders of Yahoo

File:Yahoo screenshot 1994.png

In 1994, Stanford University graduate students Jerry Yang and David Filo created "Jerry and David's guide to the World Wide Web", a hierarchical human edited web directory. In 1995 the website became known as the Yahoo Directory, and was registered as domain Yahoo.com January 18, 1995.

The name of the site is a backronym for "Yet Another Hierarchically Organized Oracle" or "Yet Another Hierarchical Officious Oracle". The term "hierarchical" described how the Yahoo database was arranged in layers of subcategories. The term "oracle" was intended to mean "source of truth and wisdom", and the term "officious", rather than being related to the word's normal meaning, described the many office workers who would use the Yahoo database while surfing from work. Moreso, Yang and Filo liked the definition of "yahoo": "rude, unsophisticated, uncouth."

Wordmark used from January 1, 1996, to September 4, 2013 (shown: purple variant used from 2009); red version still used by Yahoo! Japan

Yahoo was incorporated on March 2, 1995. In 1995, Yahoo introduced its search engine function, called Yahoo Search, which allowed users to search Yahoo Directory. Yahoo soon became the first popular online directory and search engine on the World Wide Web.

Map showing localized versions of Yahoo! web portals, as of 2008

File:Yahoo! (4855962154).jpg

Yahoo sign at Times Square

Yahoo grew rapidly throughout the 1990s. Yahoo became a public company via an initial public offering in April 1996 and its stock price rose 600% within two years. Yahoo was the first online directory to add news, sports and finance feeds, along with user customizations and location specific directories.

Like many search engines and web directories, Yahoo added a web portal, putting it in competition with services including Excite, Lycos, and America Online. By 1998, Yahoo was the most popular starting point for web users, and the human-edited Yahoo Directory the most popular search engine, receiving 95 million page views per day, triple that of rival Excite. It also made many high-profile acquisitions. Yahoo began offering free e-mail from October 1997 after the acquisition of RocketMail, which was then renamed to Yahoo Mail. In 1998, Yahoo replaced AltaVista as the crawler-based search engine underlying the Directory with Inktomi. Yahoo had added an online magazine and "Yahooligans" a child friendly search function. Simultaneously, Yahoo grew with added online categories of shopping, classifieds, games, chat rooms, personals, weather, maps and travel. Yahoo strategically built additional Internet features such as Yahoo Briefcase (cloud storage), Yahoo TV, Flickr, Yahoo Notebook and Yahoo Music.

Yahoo's two biggest acquisitions were made in 1999: Geocities for $3.6 billion and Broadcast.com for $5.7 billion.

In 2000 Yahoo began using Google's search function. In 2002 Yahoo acquired Inktomi for $280 million and in 2004 developed Yahoo Search Technology. In the early 2000s, Yahoo began offering joint broadband Internet service with major telecommunications providers, such as SBC Communications, Verizon Communications, and BT Group.

In response to Google's Gmail, Yahoo began to offer unlimited email storage in 2007.

Yahoo headquarters in 2001

Microsoft unsuccessfully attempted to acquire Yahoo in 2008 with a $44.8 billion unsolicited bid. Although Microsoft increased its bid to $47 billion, Yahoo insisted on another 10%+ increase to the offer and Microsoft cancelled the offer in May 2008.

Yahoo's logo from September 2013–September 2019

In July 2013 Yahoo had more web traffic than Google according to Comscore, the first time that Yahoo outperformed Google since 2011.

Katie Couric joined Yahoo in 2013 as the global anchor for Yahoo News. Couric, whose interviews generated nearly 1 billion views, left Yahoo in 2017.

On December 12, 2014, Yahoo acquired video advertising provider BrightRoll for $583 million.

On November 21, 2014, Yahoo acquired Cooliris.

By December 2015, the company's performance declined amid competition, and the company was in talks to sell its Internet business. Despite efforts to buy up talent and start-ups and increasing its mobile business, high-profile strategic moves, such as Yahoo's $1.1 billion acquisition Tumblr and Yahoo's initiatives to create original video content, along with key hires, did not generate the kinds of growth Yahoo expected. On February 2, 2016, Marissa Mayer, who was CEO at the time, announced layoffs amounting to 15% of the Yahoo! workforce.

Verizon Communications began the purchase of Yahoo's core Internet business for $4.83 billion in July 2016. On February 21, 2017, Verizon reduced its offer by $350 million as a result of the Yahoo data breaches. On June 13, 2017, Verizon completed the acquisition of Yahoo. The Yahoo assets were consolidated in a subsidiary called Oath, which was later renamed to Verizon Media.

In September 2021, investment funds managed by private equity firm Apollo Global Management acquired 90% of Verizon Media, with Verizon retaining a 10% stake. Verizon Media was renamed Yahoo Inc.

References

Please edit as you see fit. I recommend keeping the Chief executive officers subsection in History, but I did not include it here so reviewing editors could focus on the content I am seeking to update. A reminder that I have a COI, so I am posting the request to the talk page. @FormalDude: Are you interested in reviewing? Thanks for your help! Spencer at Yahoo (talk) 18:45, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Note: Closing down request as extremely stale (years old). Contents of the article have probably changed, making the request likely obsolete. Please repost the review and ping me if you are still around. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 11:13, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

Infobox and top sentence

@FormalDude: The Infobox is outdated. I also wonder if the "about" sentence at the very top of the page can be updated to include a link to Yahoo's current parent company. I broke down the requests below and put together some sourcing to support.

Yahoo

Company type	Subsidiary
Area served	Worldwide
Owners	Apollo Global Management (90%) Verizon Communications (10%)
Founders	Jerry Yang David Filo
Products	Yahoo Search Yahoo Sports Yahoo Finance Yahoo News Yahoo Mail Yahoo Edgecast Yahoo Entertainment
Revenue	$7.4 billion (2020)
Parent	Yahoo! Inc. (1995–2017) Oath (2017–2019) Verizon Media (2019–2021) Yahoo (2021–present)
Advertising	Yahoo! Ad Tech
Registration	Optional
Current status	Active

Infobox: There are a few areas in the Infobox that are in need of updates.

1. The type of site section says "web portal". Yahoo has a deep history as a search engine and web portal, but that description seems outdated as now Yahoo offers more to users. For example: Yahoo Sports, Yahoo News, Yahoo Email and so on. Please update this area to read "web portal and online services"
2. There are several Yahoo services that have their own pages. The current Infobox has a link to a list of products in the products area. Instead of having a link, could we list some of the services that have a Wikipedia page? Since the infobox offers readers a quick glance of important information, it seems that a link to another page is counterintuitive
3. The revenue section source is from 2017. Here is a link to a current source, with a reported 2020 revenue number of 7.4 billion.
4. Update the name of Yahoo! Native to its new name, Yahoo Ad Tech Source)
5. I think the parent area is confusing if the reader isn't familiar with Yahoo's history. I propose changing the parent list to include the name and year. In chronological order. Something similar to:

• Yahoo! Inc. (1995–2017)
• Oath (2017–2019)
• Verizon Media (2019–2021)
• Yahoo (2021–present)

You can see my proposed Infobox at right.

"This article is about…": Would it be possible to include Yahoo's parent company Yahoo (2017-present) in this sentence at the very top of the article? It gives further clarity for the reader. The Yahoo (2017-present) has a similar note that distinguishes the Yahoo pages, since there are multiple. Perhaps something like that?

I am proposing an edit request for review. I have a COI, so I am posting the request to the talk page. Thanks for your help! Spencer at Yahoo (talk) 17:14, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

1.  Done.
2. Deferred to another reviewer.
3.  Done.
4. Deferred to another reviewer.
5. Deferred to another reviewer. ––FormalDude talk 22:41, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

   @Spencer at Yahoo: saw your request at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies. I agree with your requested update to "Parent" (#5) so I've updated that property, though I formatted it slightly differently. Let me know if you have concerns about the way it's now presented. I've not implemented #2 or #4, however. See feedback below.

   1.  Done by FormalDude.
   2. Declined as this would bloat the infobox with excessive detail and the list link already gives easy access to products. However, feel free to raise as a separate edit request to get input from other editors.
   3.  Done by FormalDude.
   4. Declined, need reliable third-party sources (WP:RS) for this change. The Yahoo! Native article should also be updated/renamed if its name has changed so ideally sources provided should be sufficient to justify those edits as well. Please raise as a separate edit request with sources.
   5.  Done.
   6.  Done by FormalDude (requested update to "about" hatnote).

   Feel free to ping me on a new request for #4 if you've tracked down sources. -- DatraxMada (talk) 15:57, 22 March 2022 (UTC); edited DatraxMada (talk) 16:48, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

References

@FormalDude: @DatraxMada: Thank you for the help and the explanations. I really appreciate your time and expertise. Spencer at Yahoo (talk) 19:44, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

@DatraxMada: Here are a few sources that mention Yahoo Ad Tech. Thanks for reviewing! Spencer at Yahoo (talk) 20:09, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

@Spencer at Yahoo: Thanks, the Ad Week mention is enough to show that "Yahoo! Ad Tech" is the current name of the advertising provider. Updated. DatraxMada (talk) 17:21, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

References

Remove duplicate content

Hi All, Spencer from Yahoo here. I was exploring different Yahoo articles across Wikipedia and noted excessive duplicate content from the Yahoo!_Inc._(1995–2017) company article and the Yahoo! article. The Logos and Themes section contains a great deal of word for word copy and the majority of the images throughout both articles are duplicates. Would an editor or editors consider removing the Logos and Themes section from the Yahoo! article. If editors feel the images from the section should remain, please distribute throughout the article. My goal is to streamline the article for readability.

A reminder that I have a COI, so I am posting the request to the talk page. Thank you for reading and let me know what you think. Spencer at Yahoo (talk) 16:12, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

@Spencer at Yahoo: I'm thinking it might be better to WP:MERGE, let me know what you think. ★Ama ^{TALK CONTRIBS} 01:25, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

@Amadeus1999: Thanks for the suggestion. Merging the articles might be a solid option, thanks for bringing it up. However, there are many Yahoo articles on Wikipedia, so which article specifically would you recommend for the merge with the Yahoo article? Due to Yahoo's massive history and presence as both a corporate entity and a web portal, do you think merging articles would result in "too" long or clunky material, making it difficult to navigate for readers? Since Yahoo the web portal and Yahoo the original corporate entity are both independently notable, it may make sense to keep articles about both of them, similar to how Wikipedia also has an article about the existing business entity, Yahoo Inc. That is why I proposed just a deletion of the duplicate content from this article, it seemed easier for a novice Wikipedia user (like me)! Thanks for explaining and your help, Spencer at Yahoo (talk) 14:13, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

@Spencer at Yahoo: Yeah I think you're right, merging the company and the web portal doesn't seem like a good idea. Maybe certain sections could be ported over instead so that there's no duplicates and such. Might need some general WP:CLEANUP also. ★Ama ^{TALK CONTRIBS} 15:34, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

@Amadeus1999: Thanks for the quick reply. I agree, I think that the article could use a cleanup, some updating and removal of redundant material. There is another open edit request if you are interested in reviewing found here which also addresses duplicate content. Back to the Logos and themes section, what do you think about just removing the section since the material is largely a copy from the Yahoo!_Inc._(1995–2017) article. Due to my COI I am unable to edit the article, and I will rely on your expertise. Spencer at Yahoo (talk) 15:26, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

@Spencer at Yahoo: I've changed the template signifying that you can make the suggested edit yourself. Thanks for abiding to the COI guidelines. ★Ama ^{TALK CONTRIBS} 15:44, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

@Amadeus1999: While I appreciate your permission, due to my COI and to the sensitive nature of COI edits, I would prefer a user that is not associated with Yahoo edit the article. Would you reconsider removing the duplicate content in the Logos and themes section? If you are not available, I have reopened the request. Spencer at Yahoo (talk) 20:17, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

@Spencer at Yahoo: Granting permission to the request of COI edit is effectively the same as me editing it myself, since I basically gave you the permission. So if you get permission you're free to do it without risk of violating COI policy. Having said that, sure, I can try to implement it.

Implementing changes... ★Ama ^{TALK CONTRIBS} 20:46, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

@Spencer at Yahoo:  Implemented Removed duplicate content and added anchored redirect links to the past logos with a reflink to the new logo (the Yahoo (2017-present) article)

I hope this properly addresses your wishes, although I added a bit to it with the redirect links. Just making sure people can still find the stuff they want to find! ★Ama ^{TALK CONTRIBS} 21:17, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2022

This page includes the "Yahoo!" infobox, but then also includes the "Yahoo, Inc." infobox, which itself includes the "Yahoo!" infobox, making the first inclusion redundant; I believe the first inclusion should be removed.

Also, the "Yahoo, Inc." infobox is still being referred to as the "Verizon Media" infobox in the source; I believe this should be changed. 108.24.202.139 (talk) 22:45, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

There is only one infobox in the article. Perhaps its already been fixed. Otherwise, please clarify what change you're asking for. RudolfRed (talk) 03:30, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Map Update

The map displaying which countries have localized versions of Yahoo! is from 2008 and needs to be replaced. Last month, I made a new version of the map but never got around to making an edit request until now. In the source code, the line

[[File:Yahoo Portals in the World.JPG|thumb|upright=1.35|Map showing localized versions of Yahoo! web portals, as of 2008]]

should be changed to

[[File:Countries on Yahoo.png|thumb|upright=1.35|Map showing localized versions of Yahoo! web portals, as of 2022]]

which will change the picture from the one marked "Old image (2008)" to the one marked "New image (2022)" below.

Old image (2008)

New image (2022)

ConnerMiner (talk) 03:56, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

UPDATE: Just now realized I'm able to add it myself. ConnerMiner (talk) 19:58, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

American web services

Where they based 95.44.225.27 (talk) 13:56, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Wouldn't Apollo Management group count as the parent company?

After looking at this page for a while I've noticed that Apollo holds on to 90% of Yahoo. So wouldn't it technically count as the parent company? To become a parent company, the business has to aquire at least 51% of another companies common stock. I don't know if it counts towards subsidiaries, but maybe Apollo is the parent company to Yahoo? Maybe? WiinterU (talk) 13:40, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Q

Q 5.193.132.213 (talk) 13:31, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

I always wondered what happened to Q since Star Trek: The Next Generation finished… He's posting Talk messages! – AndyFielding (talk) 13:37, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Clarifications in lede

I've suggested these clarifications (bolded) in the lede:

[Before] However, usage declined in the late 2000s as some services discontinued and it lost market share to Facebook and Google.

[After] However, its use declined in the late 2000s as some of its services were discontinued, and it lost market share to Facebook and Google.

– AndyFielding (talk) 13:44, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

"Y@h00" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Y@h00 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 11 § Y@h00 until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:17, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

"Y@h00!" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Y@h00! has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 11 § Y@h00! until a consensus is reached. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:17, 11 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 October 2023

157.50.16.153 (talk) 14:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

AGAJGP

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Actualcpscm ^{scrutinize, talk} 17:50, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 January 2024

Request change:

"Previously, the company has discontinued China Yahoo! Mail on August 20, 2013"

to:

"Previously, the company had discontinued China Yahoo! Mail on August 20, 2013"

(fix incorrect tense) 2A00:23C8:7B09:FA01:6C60:9A06:95F:9D95 (talk) 12:08, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

 Done "Previously, the company discontinued China Yahoo! Mail..." sounded even less awkward to me, so I did it that way. PianoDan (talk) 00:18, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 21 August 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. Consensus to move. While some editors objected to a subset of the moves in addition to those who objected generally, these objections were insufficiently supported, either by vote count or by weight of policy, to prevent a consensus from forming here.

Editors may attempt a bold move of articles that were not covered by this RM but do use Yahoo!; if disputed a new RM should be opened.

Note that due to the number of moves required it may take some time to implement them.(closed by non-admin page mover) BilledMammal (talk) 06:41, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

---

• Yahoo! → Yahoo
• Criticism of Yahoo! → Criticism of Yahoo
• Yahoo! data breaches → Yahoo data breaches
• History of Yahoo! → History of Yahoo
• Yahoo! litigation → Yahoo litigation
• Timeline of Yahoo! → Timeline of YahooTimeline of Yahoo
• List of corporate directors of Yahoo! → List of corporate directors of Yahoo
• List of mergers and acquisitions by Yahoo! → List of mergers and acquisitions by Yahoo
• List of Yahoo!-owned sites and services → List of Yahoo-owned sites and services
• Yahoo! Answers → Yahoo Answers
• Yahoo! Assistant → Yahoo Assistant
• Yahoo! Auctions → Yahoo Auctions
• Yahoo! Australia → Yahoo Australia
• Yahoo! Axis → Yahoo Axis
• Yahoo! Briefcase → Yahoo Briefcase
• Yahoo! Buzz → Yahoo Buzz
• Yahoo! Calendar → Yahoo Calendar
• Yahoo! Consumer group → Yahoo Consumer group
• Yahoo! Cricket → Yahoo Cricket
• Yahoo! Directory → Yahoo Directory
• Yahoo! Finance → Yahoo Finance
• Yahoo! Gallery → Yahoo Gallery
• Yahoo! Games → Yahoo Games
• Yahoo! Go → Yahoo Go
• Yahoo! Green → Yahoo Green
• Yahoo! Groups → Yahoo Groups
• Yahoo! HotJobs → Yahoo HotJobs
• Yahoo! Internet Life → Yahoo Internet Life
• Yahoo! Japan Search Awards → Yahoo Japan Search Awards
• Yahoo! Japan → Yahoo Japan
• Yahoo! Kickstart → Yahoo Kickstart
• Yahoo! Kids → Yahoo Kids
• Yahoo! Kimo → Yahoo Kimo
• Yahoo! Labs → Yahoo Labs
• Yahoo! Live → Yahoo Live
• Yahoo! Livetext → Yahoo Livetext
• Yahoo! Mail → Yahoo Mail
• Yahoo! Maktoob → Yahoo MaktoobYahoo Maktoob
• Yahoo! Maps → Yahoo Maps
• Yahoo! Mash → Yahoo Mash
• Yahoo! Meme → Yahoo Meme
• Yahoo! Messenger → Yahoo Messenger
• Yahoo! Movies → Yahoo Movies
• Yahoo! Music Jukebox → Yahoo Music Jukebox
• Yahoo! Music Radio → Yahoo Music Radio
• Yahoo! Music Unlimited → Yahoo Music UnlimitedYahoo Music Unlimited
• Yahoo! Music → Yahoo Music
• My Yahoo! → My Yahoo
• Yahoo! Native → Yahoo Native
• Yahoo! News Underground → Yahoo News Underground
• Yahoo! News → Yahoo News
• The 9 on Yahoo! → The 9 on Yahoo
• Yahoo! Personals → Yahoo PersonalsYahoo Personals
• Yahoo! Philippines → Yahoo PhilippinesYahoo Philippines
• Yahoo! Photos → Yahoo Photos
• Yahoo! Pipes → Yahoo Pipes
• Yahoo! Podcasts → Yahoo Podcasts
• Yahoo! Public License → Yahoo Public License
• Yahoo! Publisher Network → Yahoo Publisher Network
• Yahoo! Query Language → Yahoo Query Language
• Yahoo! Research Berkeley → Yahoo Research Berkeley
• Yahoo! Screen → Yahoo Screen
• List of Yahoo! Screen original programming → List of Yahoo Screen original programming
• Yahoo! Search BOSS → Yahoo Search BOSS
• Yahoo! SearchMonkey → Yahoo SearchMonkey
• Yahoo! Search → Yahoo Search
• Yahoo! Site Explorer → Yahoo Site Explorer
• Yahoo! Smart TV → Yahoo Smart TV
• Yahoo! Sports → Yahoo Sports
• Yahoo! Tech → Yahoo Tech
• Yahoo! 360° → Yahoo 360°
• Yahoo! Time Capsule → Yahoo Time Capsule
• Yahoo! Toolbar → Yahoo Toolbar
• Yahoo! Travel → Yahoo Travel
• Yahoo! Voice → Yahoo Voice
• Yahoo! Voices → Yahoo Voices
• 2012 Yahoo! Voices hack → 2012 Yahoo Voices hack
• Yahoo! Widgets → Yahoo Widgets
• Yahoo!Xtra → Yahoo XtraYahoo Xtra

– WP:COMMONNAME, MOS:TM. The ! is a stylization that, while present in Yahoo logos, is commonly dropped in independent sources. See, for example, a Google News search for intitle:yahoo -inurl:yahoo or a Google Ngrams search for Yahoo!, Yahoo. Similarly, Wikipedia prefers to drop stylizations and our title policy is not based on usage in the company's own publications (which do often drop the ! in text these days) but rather in independent sources. Nominating as a mass move because prior RMs for just the Yahoo! page have included calls for all to be considered at once for WP:CONSISTENT titling. SilverLocust 💬 17:52, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

Notifying @Rusalkii, MaryGaulke, Doomsdayer520, Zzyzx11, Iwaqarhashmi, and Crouch, Swale from discussion of Yahoo! Finance. SilverLocust 💬 17:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

• Comment Is this a situation like Google+ where internet publications called it "Google Plus" for SEO purposes? Schierbecker (talk) 18:32, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

  @Schierbecker no, this is different because the '!' is not pronounced and therefore should not be included if I understand MOS:TMRULES correctly. YorkshireExpat (talk) 20:35, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

  I'd be interested in some analysis of whether print media also calls it "Yahoo". Schierbecker (talk) 00:01, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

  @Schierbecker lots of examples here from The Guardian with no exclamation mark. YorkshireExpat (talk) 07:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

  But The Guardian has not been "print first" for a number of years I presume? Schierbecker (talk) 08:14, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

  I don't know about print first, but it certainly has a print edition with a large circulation. YorkshireExpat (talk) 08:58, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

• Support: Per my response above. YorkshireExpat (talk) 20:36, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
• Support. The exclamation mark is only a stylisation for branding purposes (logotype) and is not part of the company's name, per the company itself. — kashmīrī ^TALK 21:12, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
• Weak Support the common name in online sources does indeed appear to be "Yahoo". Schierbecker (talk) 00:00, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
• Strong oppose A clear WP:TRAINWRECK as this move appears to seek to retroactively change the names of articles where the common name was indeed "Yahoo!" because the product existed before the exclamation point was phased out in common parlance, such as Yahoo! Buzz and Yahoo!Xtra among others. The nominator needs to do a bit more research vis a vis what exactly is commonly called "Yahoo" sans the exclamation point, we shouldn't be playing time machine and rewriting history to suit our whims. I also have a hunch that the Gulliver's Travels characters could be an equivalent primary topic by longterm significance, as they have entered mainstream usage as a term. Their article appears heavily underdeveloped. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
• Leaning support as noted it seems that even primary sources sometimes don't use the exclamation mark however it is often understood as being part of the name though and even if some of the sub topics should be considered on their own merits its probably best to have a central discussion here. Crouch, Swale (talk) 14:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
• Support per nom, except for the legacy or discontinued products/services that still ought to have the exclamation point.--Ortizesp (talk) 17:43, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
• I'm also under the impression that this could turn out to be a WP:TRAINWRECK. For example, the request refers to "the company", but Yahoo! Japan has not ever been part of the company that is covered by most of the articles nominated here. It was originally run by Yahoo! Japan Corporation (missing from the list of nominated articles) and affiliated with Softbank Group), and is now run by LY Corporation (jointly run by SoftBank Group and Naver Corporation alongside the Line (software) app). Yahoo! Kids is also part of the Japan company although the article there mixes information on it and the defunct service associated with the American company. I don't know how many other articles in the proposal have similar issues, but it appears that the usage and purpose of the exclamation point may vary widely among the cases. Oppose moving articles associated with the Japanese company. Dekimasuよ! 20:17, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

  This !vote also applies to Yahoo! Auctions, which is primarily a Japanese service. Dekimasuよ! 04:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: All of the red links have been made into redirects. Yovt (talk) 17:12, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose these need to be looked at individually. Yahoo!xtra is used here for example: Traumnovelle (talk) 01:11, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

• (One further comment, though I try to avoid bludgeoning my own RMs.)

I consider it reasonable, as suggested above, to try to reach a general consensus about

1. Whether to move Yahoo!,
2. Whether to move current services (like Yahoo! Finance),
3. Whether to move defunct services (like Yahoo!Xtra),
4. Any other exceptions people think to raise here, like Yahoo! Japan (a service that is no longer owned in part by Yahoo).

If this discussion results in moving some of the articles, and people find that particular pages should have been included or not included, it would be simple enough to have a follow-up RM for more individual consideration.

(It's more helpful, in my view, to declare a Trainwreck retrospectively – when closing a discussion and explaining why you couldn't find a consensus for anything – rather than preemptively predicting no consensus. And somehow I expect that if I had opened a move request for just one of them, people may have suggested a combined discussion.) SilverLocust 💬 06:50, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

No one is asking you to nominate them one by one, just to be 100% sure which ones SHOULD be moved rather than nominate them wholesale without research. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:00, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

The problem is primarily the barrier to participation that is required by trying to sort out which category each of the many nominees falls into. Meanwhile well-meaning editors who do not recognize the concerns may support or oppose on the basis of the topline move suggestion. Dekimasuよ! 04:20, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

• Support - Most of the sources avoid using exclamation mark. Azuredivay (talk) 15:52, 24 August 2024 (UTC)

• Support i am nervous that this many moves might break something or there might be some areas of exception but overall I think that this is a good idea and obeys our policies on naming pages. Jorahm (talk) 16:44, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Web services provider"

The linked article on web services does not remotely describe what Yahoo is or ever was. Yahoo is an online news, information and advertising platform. According to its press release boilerplate: "Yahoo serves as a trusted guide for hundreds of millions of people globally, helping them achieve their goals online / Yahoo Advertising offers omnichannel solutions and powerful data" 2601:642:4600:BE10:F868:3FAB:454B:AE16 (talk) 19:33, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Shadow311 (talk) 19:39, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure how I could make it clearer. Maybe someone else could take a look. 2601:642:4600:BE10:F868:3FAB:454B:AE16 (talk) 20:54, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

What Shadow meant was that you should write (in this exact format): "Change [original text in article] to [new text] because [your reason]", and also providing reliable sources to back up your claims. I'm guessing you want a more detailed description of Yahoo in the lead section? If that's the case, please read WP:SUMMARY and MOS:LEAD. The lead section, especially the first sentence, should only briefly describe the defining characteristics of the subject. Liu1126 (talk) 22:30, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm not asking for it to be more detailed. I'm asking for it to be minimally accurate. Secondary-source answers to "what is Yahoo's business?" are hard to come by because it's such a well-established brand as to require no introduction. Meanwhile, the current incorrect description has no source either. While Yahoo may indeed provide web services that companies use to purchase ad placements, describing its business that way is like describing Walmart as a logistics firm rather than a retailer. 2601:642:4600:BE10:F868:3FAB:454B:AE16 (talk) 23:11, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

The point being made is that you are using Wikipeida's Edit Request procedure. (as necessary for an unconfirmed user and a semi-protected page) As such, your request MUST be in the form outlined above by Liu1126 - "Please change these exact words in the article to these exact other words as supported by this specific reference." If it isn't, the procedure is to not act on your request. PianoDan (talk) 23:56, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

No, I am not required to use any specific form. I am only required to communicate the change clearly. I have indicated what wording should be changed, and to what it should be changed to. The opening sentence is fundamentally inaccurate as to what business Yahoo is in, and it is unhelpful to delay the point as if this were a court of law where exact forms must be followed. Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy, etc. 2601:642:4600:BE10:4859:BD9C:88BC:D3ED (talk) 19:44, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: You are not required under threat of punitive action to follow the process as described in WP:EDITXY, but as mentioned by 2 other editors the process is then that any edit may decline your edit request - as I am doing now - as not actioned.

This is not a binding denial, in that your concern - that the linked article on web services does not remotely describe what Yahoo is or ever was - cannot be addressed . Any editor is free to address such concern. This "denial" simply means your request will be removed from the queue of requested edits. You may not add this request back into the queue unless you address concerns in the original denial or are requesting a different change. Such action may be interpreted as disruptive and may result in editors requesting administrator review.

This appears bureaucratic, and to a degree it is, but all this process does is place upon you the same burden of effort that would exist if you were able to edit the page yourself. —Sirdog (talk) 06:06, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Same edge, but different argument: "Yahoo is an American web services provider." A provider is a supplier of a service or multiple services; it is the natural or legal person who organises the delivery of these services. We are talking in this article not about the operator Yahoo! Inc. who is mentioned in the following sentence. This article is not about Yahoo the company, this article is about Yahoo the web service portal. Therefore the first sentence is more precise saying: "Yahoo is an American web services portal." Detailed information about the operating companies can be given to

• Yahoo! Inc. (1995–2017) or
• Yahoo! Inc. (2017–present).

This here is about the main product of both companies. --Gunnar (talk) 17:33, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

On chapter Yahoo#History: As there is already an article about Yahoo!, the company, and a specialized history article on the company this paragraph should not repeat the content in a redundant way but should focus on the history of the web portal Yahoo! When did which services appear, how was the user statistics, when were certain services discontinued, which was the most popular one and did this change? How many computer centers have been needed to operate the web services, how did the international expansion grow with the international language versions, etc.

Deep details about the business character of the company should be merged into Yahoo! Inc. (2017–present)#History or the more extensive History of Yahoo. Gunnar (talk) 16:32, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

proprietary web portal

@Twillisjr: What exactly is a "proprietary web portal"? Do not all operators of web portals own the content which they offer? Most of the are paid by attention of users, so the are delivering ads as side transmission to the payload. Maybe wikipedia and similar projects are excluded. --Gunnar (talk) 13:14, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

The differences between licenses is explained here: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

Free / Open Source / Proprietary

The free definition contains (2) of the (4) freedoms which involve the source being available. If the source isn’t available, it is neither free nor open source and is proprietary. Twillisjr (talk) 14:43, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

But a web portal isn't a piece of software. Of course, it's powered by software, and most of that software is proprietary, but that's not the same thing. I saw that you also added "proprietary" in Google Search, Amazon (company) and Reddit (I guess there are more). But that term doesn't make much sense for websites like Google and Yahoo. Most major websites run on software that's (at least partly) proprietary, yet we don't call YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Outlook.com and many, many others "proprietary", because these aren't pieces of software that one can download and install somewhere. They are services. The software that runs nytimes.com is not the same thing as the website that's available at nytimes.com. The same is true for yahoo.com, google.com, amazon.com, reddit.com, etc. — Chrisahn (talk) 15:55, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Regarding Google and Amazon, review https://www.defectivebydesign.org/ which is a development by https://www.fsf.org/ Twillisjr (talk) 16:01, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Seems irrelevant for this discussion. Please explain. — Chrisahn (talk) 16:10, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Use a search engine with the keywords “DRM” and “Proprietary” to learn how they go hand in hand. One search engine says, “ Digital Rights Management (DRM) refers to technologies and strategies used to control access to and use of digital content, including proprietary software and copyrighted works, to prevent unauthorized copying, distribution, or modification.” Twillisjr (talk) 16:58, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

I still don't see how that is relevant for the current discussion. The current discussion concerns the question what a "proprietary web portal" is supposed to be, and whether it even makes sense to apply the word "proprietary" to web portals and other websites. — Chrisahn (talk) 17:03, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

I’m comfortable removing the word proprietary from the header, but not removing the word and link in the infobox. Twillisjr (talk) 17:09, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Why? — Chrisahn (talk) 17:12, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Point me to the source code (all of it unlike twitter) and we can change it to its respective license. Is it GPL? Twillisjr (talk) 17:21, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Are you talking about the content available at yahoo.com or the software that runs yahoo.com? — Chrisahn (talk) 17:45, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

It’s all proprietary. Prove it’s GPL. Twillisjr (talk) 18:09, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

You didn't answer my question, and I don't have to prove anything. See WP:BURDEN. — Chrisahn (talk) 18:15, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

I provided 3 links with evidence that the license is proprietary (though I didn’t have to) so the burden to prove it is GPL rests on someone who wants to change it, not myself. Twillisjr (talk) 18:20, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Today Yahoo is more about tabloids and gossip on its website. With some services thrown in.

Its hardly about Yahoo Search anymore and now seems to aire lots of gossip, fake news, and trashy tabloids aired to stir up scandals. It seems like the lead section is far removed from what the portal has become. CaribDigita (talk) 01:20, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

Partical Research

Article about volcanic eruption and also use the approches of Literature the traditional review of Literature the conceptual review and we need tha citation the in text citation APA in paragraph ~2026-10194-71 (talk) 05:46, 15 February 2026 (UTC)

@ ~2026-16152-08 (talk) 23:44, 13 March 2026 (UTC)