The result was merge to Domain name speculation. Regardless of the many keep sentiments below, the sources provided to not support having "domaining" as a stand-alone article, but merely use the term is an apparent neologism to refer to domain name speculation. I am performing the redirect myself, and leave the merge up to editorial discretion. lifebaka ++ 20:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC) reply
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}} ; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}} . |
Page is a recreation of a previously deleted article. First of all, it does not meet any encyclopedic standards. Uniquely enough, they removed the only actual news piece about Domaining which clearly defines domaining as an attempt by cybersquatters to rebrand themselves. Again, redirect to cybersquatting. If you look for news about 'domaining' the only ones who actual write 'domaining is not cybersquatting' about the practice come from websites like 'Domain Name Journal' and 'The Domains', clearly biased sources (basically blogs it seems) written by people who want to legitimize the practice of cybersquatting. See also Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Domain_name_speculation. Magicalthirty ( talk) 18:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC) reply
Furthermore, there is a comment above the domaining article being a mere duplicate of some previous domaining article. That is is inappropriate, and false. I know because I spent approximately 9 hours researching and writing the article myself. Please preserve and protect the current Wikipedia page on "Domaining". Domaining is a relevant, viable topic which is of interest to many thousands of forum members and domain business representatives around the world. As stated in my original submission, there are international trade shows, industry associations, numerous online domain news sites, dozens of online domain monetization companies, and many thousands of people pursuing domaining on a daily basis. None of these activities I just listed pertain whatsoever to the crimes of cybersquatting. The dissenters here are making false claims and denigrating an entire industry. I think continuing to restate our case here and furthering our response to these false claims should not be necessary. Thank you. Kingwarren ( talk) 23:38, 6 August 2009 (UTC) — Kingwarren ( talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Wikipedia Administrators: Please confirm and finalize the Domaining page so that ongoing development and additions may occur. This particular thread has turned into the playground of a few who aim to discredit our industry like ThemFromSpace & Magicalthirty. Below are more media links addressing the growth and legitimacy of domaining.
The fifth article link below contains a quote from the Wall Street Journal that should end the baseless attacks of Magicalthirty & ThemFromSpace -> "The domain-name market also is attracting new types of investors. Once largely the province of entrepreneurs, it is now drawing venture capitalists, wealthy families and public companies." (Source: Wall Street Journal, 2005)
The Domaining page will evolve with the continued expansion & success of the domain name industry. Many components and elements can be added to the page as the industry continues maturing into new areas and attracting many thousands of enthusiasts. This is something which Wikipedia users will enjoy and find educational. The world of domaining is extremely well-developed as evidenced by the presence of very well established online companies dedicated specifically to the business of domaining. A mere redirection to domain name "speculation" is the equivalent of forwarding the broad category of "law" to a page on "divorce law". It presumes that "divorce law" somehow represents everything there is to know about all law. Speculation, by definition, is to buy and sell with the expectation of a quick or very large profit. Wikipedia include in their defintion a "low margin of safety" and "significant risk of loss of the principal investment". There is no doubt that such an approach exists, but using this narrow definition to encompass all of investing is completely inappropriate whether the object of the investment is real estate, gold, or domain names. Speculation is by nature considered a more risky proposition, and simply does not account for proven, thoroughly researched business models. Business models that are applied in real estate, domain names, stocks, and an endless variety of other investment vehicles. A recommendation to simply merge or forward to "speculation" reveals a very limited understanding of investment as an activity that occurs along a continuum ... with speculation being a proportionally small segment narrowly located only at the extreme end of that investment continuum.
Domaining must stand as an independent page due its broad, all encompassing nature.
Thank you. Kingwarren ( talk) 00:27, 8 August 2009 (UTC) reply