Jump to content

Talk:Online wallet

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

Electronic wallet redirects here and under Banksys the Proton card is described as an [ [Electronic wallet] ] (so linked); I am not convinced they are exactly the same thing. More work needed, please. Iph (talk) 18:32, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

[edit]

I believe that we need to figure out sources for this ASAP. We need to come up with a solid "thesis" and support it with facts. Dylan Silverstein (talk)

Brain Storming, Sources & Ideas

[edit]

So here is basically what they have so far:

  • One sentence describing what online wallet is about
  • The first payment (setup)
  • Any subsequent payments
  • Examples a see also

Below are some ideas we have about brainstorming and moving forward:
Note: After you write a claim, attach your source so that we can footnote it when we use it.

Begin Joshua Brilliant (josheric)

  • We can have a section about bitcoin and we would attach a reference to the bitcoin page
  • We should change the sectioning to Payment Process, Security, Any other ideas......
  • Security is a huge area that should be addressed due to the fact that all of your information is online.
    • Indent
  • Bitcoin???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josheric (talk • contribs) 03:29, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Josheric (talk) 16:59, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/magazine-archive/2011/september/money/new-ways-to-pay/overview/index.htm Josheric (talk) 18:40, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another site I found for security is :http://www.fdic.gov/bank/individual/online/safe.html
I want to discuss how online wallets can be convenient as well as dangerous at the same time. Josheric (talk) 00:56, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

End Joshua Brilliant (josheric)


Begin Dylan Silverstein ( )

  • Ladies/Fellas I also did some research and read some read articles online for the history of the online wallet. If you have any problems with it or find additional information feel free to add on. I think the History page should be the very first one. Any other ideas feel free to comment below, just don't forget to sign off. Dylan Silverstein (talk) 15:29, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

End Dylan Silverstein ( )

Begin Sammy Pantowich ( )

End Sammy Pantowich ( )

Begin Michelle Hartog ( )

    • This can be added to Dylan's Bitcoin section. Many stories about Bitcoins in the news today.
  • On Monday, February 24, 2014, the most prominent Bitcoin exchange appeared to be on the verge of collapse. The night of Febraury 24, 2014, numerous leading Bitcoin companies cooperatively announced that Mt. Gox, the largest exchange for most of Bitcoins survival, was planning to file for bankruptcy due to months of technological problems, and what had appeared to be major theft. Mt. Gox had lost 744,000 Bitcoins, which had gone unnoticed for many years. The amount of Bitcoins that were lost amounts to approximately 6 percent of the 12.4 million Bitcoins in circulation. After this scandal, the price of a single Bitcoin dropped below $500 for the first time since November 2013, when the Bitcoin rose to over $1200.
    • I like this story but we just need to find out how this is relevant to the idea of an Online Wallet. Otherwise this is just something that should be found in the BitCoin wiki page. Josheric (talk) 19:55, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/25/business/apparent-theft-at-mt-gox-shakes-bitcoin-world.html hpw&rref=technology&action=click&module=Search&region=searchResults%230&version=&url=http%3A%2F%2Fquery.nytimes.com%2Fsearch%2Fsitesearch%2F%23%2Fbitcoin%2F24hours%2Fallresults%2F1%2Fallauthors%2Fnewest%2F

    • I want to do a section about PayPal. It is a fast way to pay and get paid online. Paypal allows people to send money without sharing financial information. People also have the flexibility to pay using their account balances, bank accounts, and credit cards. As of 2014, there are over 143 million active Paypal accounts, in 193 markets, and 26 currencies worldwide. Paypal allows for global commerce, through which it processes over 9 million payments each day. PayPal, which was bought by eBay for $1.3 billion in late 2002, had contributed to 41 percent of eBay's revenues in 2013. It is nationally headquartered in San Jose, California, and internationally headquartered in Singapore.

https://www.paypal-media.com/about

Mdhartog14 (talk) 03:47, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Mdhartog14 (talk) 03:46, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

End Michelle Hartog ( )

Begin Jamil ( )

    • I think if we were to talk about the Online Wallet that it would be cool that we talk about the return policies as far as refunds and the time it usually takes to get the funds readjusted in the account of your online wallet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhague94 (talk • contribs) 17:20, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also I think that it would be cool if we were to state what to look for when searching for a secure website to access especially when making transactions.
    • I'll attempt to express the refund aspect of the Online Wallet.
    • I also found a great reference that breaks down the Google Wallet significantly (Terms of Service). It is basically the directions and policies that comes along with the Wallet https://wallet.google.com/termsOfService?type=Buyer&gl=US — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jhague94 (talk • contribs) 01:37, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

End Jamil ( )

Begin Henry ( )

End Henry ( )
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Josheric (talk • contribs) 17:22, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Bitcoin

Peer Review

[edit]

As many of the commenters below me, I also agree that you have significantly expanded the article from what it was before. One problem I noticed was that your "History" section stops in 1995. I believe that you should briefly mention PayPal, Bitcoin, and GoogleWallet (since you discuss them later anyway) with their dates and then link it to those sections of your article. Another suggestion would be to include Venmo as they have become very large recently. Besides that, I learned a lot about online wallet, including the seven steps, and how requesting a PIN lowers the success rate for payments, which is very interesting. However, as your group noted, it is for security purposes. I think your article is virtually complete, as it is understandable, has clear structure, balances topics, is neutral, and references to reliable sources, just as wikipedia asks its authors to do. I enjoyed reading it "as-is" and hope you will consider some of my suggestions and the suggestions of the commenters below to make it even better. Aschure8 (talk) 15:55, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article was vastly expanded from what it was. I like the variety of information provided, and the article thoroughly hits on three main elements of the online wallet; history, technique, and examples. Many times people forget to add links in the text to other wiki articles, or even add too many. I like the way you added links and how often as they help provide readers an opportunity to learn about related terms (like online shopping) they may want to explore without cluttering the actual article itself. The article is virtually complete, but may be a bit too long in my opinion. I'm not sure if the refund section is necessary; it is still a part of online wallets, but I'm not sure if it can be considered an important aspect of them. Overall though, the article is very detailed and covers the important features of the online wallet. Kimpaul17 (talk) 18:56, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think you did a good job overall with this article. It is an interesting topic and I think you did a good job covering most of the relevant information to the topic. I think adding the history element was a good choice because it frames the idea of an online wallet into a fuller picture. One of the only things I thought wasn't necessary was the step-by-step walkthrough of how to use the wallet. It seems very generic, which isn't very helpful. And I understand that you can't be extremely specific because each online checkout online is different--that's the same reason why I think the walkthrough doesn't really help a ton, though. Overall, it looks like you put effort into the project and I think you did a good job covering the idea of the online wallet. TheU1991! (talk) 15:11, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Following the guidelines of what makes a good wikipedia article, I have judged this article on 5 elements. #1 Lead section's understandability: I would say this section is excellent, it is thorough yet easy to comprehend. The basic meaning is portrayed well in the introduction. #2: Clearness of Structure: There are multiple headings and subheadings which helps it to look organized, it is chronological, and footnotes and such are grammatically correct. The only suggestion I would make is to add an image, having so much text without any images makes the page bland and overwhelming. #3: Good balancing of topics: None of the topics are dwelled upon in an extreme manner in comparison to others. Each topic is thoroughly discussed, but not over-discussed. Good job on this part too. #4: Coverage is neutral: Yes, this article is neutral and professional. Even when talking about the different forms of paying online (Bitcoins, Paypal) there is little to no bias present. Excellent work. #5: References to reliable sources: All of the sources seem to be credible, the one concern I might have is that you guys found information on Bitcoin from another wikipedia page. I would instead use the sites that the wikipedia editors of Bitcoin used to back up your information. In conclusion, I believe it is an excellent article. My only suggestion that I would have is to add images in order to spice up the page. But, overall, there is a lot of great, credible information that is portrayed in a clear, organized, and unbias manner. Haleighammon (talk) 17:43, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I thought this group did a very thorough edit of their stub article. After reading some of the comments you made on the talk page before making edits to the wikipedia page, it seems like you all stuck to your plan and executed your edits very well. One thing I thought was extraneous was the history on online shopping. Although it is interesting, you could've put a hyperlink to the wikipedia page for online shopping instead of including all of that on the online wallet page. I enjoyed that you included a section for securing your wallet and tips/concerns. For someone looking to start shopping online more or signing up for PayPal, the security part is an important section to have on the Wikipedia page. I wish the payment process section was more condensed because again, it seems to focus more on the process of online shopping instead of the online wallet. I enjoyed reading about PayPal and Google Wallet, that was very beneficial to add to the page. Overall, it was a very extensive article that could have been more concise but I thought you included a lot of very important information and it was organized well. Meganzabrowski (talk) 21:13, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think this group did a good job and that the article does not "feel" like a stub article anymore. I think that this page contains a vast amount of information and explains what an online wallet is well. Furthermore, I like how the group outlined the different steps neccisairy to utilize online wallets. Since this page contains so much information, it feels slightly dense. I think that the article would benefit from further segmenting the information and by the inclusion of pictures (to break up the reading). I think you could group all of your examples into an "Examples" section, and sub section each example. I also think that Bitcoin should not have been included as an online wallet. Unlike the other online wallets that the group discussed, Bitcoin is an online currency. Overall I think that the group did a good job of lengthening the article and adding relevant information. Dzlotnit (talk) 00:19, 28 March 2014 (UTC)Dzlotnit[reply]


This group researched heavily into their topic and this page goes into great detail to explain Online Wallet. My biggest issue with the page however is the aesthetics/organization of the page. The introduction of the page should give a general layout of the topic, but I felt that it was too specific at some parts. For example, you included bullet points about payment processes, which I felt could have been part of a different section. Under the section "Payment Processes", I felt that having separate sections for each step abruptly broke the flow of the section, I would suggest keeping the information, but combining it to one or a couple paragraphs. Another concern I had was the lack citations under the "Refunds" section. The information is very useful and critical, but adding more citations or sources would validate the point even more. Overall, it seems like the group put a lot of work and effort into research for this topic and provided a lot of information, but it could just be organized slightly better. Prabragu (talk) 02:19, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Overall this group did a very good job editing their stub page. They provided a nice intro section to introduce the reader to an overall summary of the topic and set a foundation for what an online wallet is for the reader.They also had a nice structure with several clear headings and sub-headings. Overall, all of the sections were well balanced however I do think that some of the sections could have been given more attention. Because the article was about online wallets, I think that the security section could have gone into more detail just because as we move towards more and more people using online payments, the number one, most talked about concern is security. Another nice breakdown was that they included sections for several different online wallet services including Google Wallet, BitCoin, and PayPal. The group also did a good job using a neutral tone throughout the article. They also provided several sources in their references page, however this was also a place of concern because there is a warning banner at the top of the page, indicating that additional citations are needed for verification. Dferruggiaro (talk) 16:24, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


The improvements made by this group have definitely been beneficial to the quality of this article. One high quality characteristic I noticed especially was a clear structure. The seven steps of the payment process were structured nicely and made it easy to read and follow. Along with the great structure, this group also managed to make quality edits while keeping a neutral viewpoint. Also, they included an impressive amount of sources to back up their edits, improving on the measly two on the article before the project. Finally, the lead section did a satisfactory job summarizing the key points of the article. Kwschulz (talk) 20:56, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is well written. It covers various aspects of the topic including security issue and refund problem which I would like to know if I intended to learn something about Online Wallet. However, I think the content could be rearranged in a better way. In the leading section and the fourth section, both mention the payment processes, which I think is kind of redundant. In addition, if section six to eight could be combined into one section (e.g. Payment Systems) and divide it into three subheadings, then the structure would look better and the content would be more solid. The only problem in this article is the citation, which I believe is not formal and you should definitely work on it. Overall the content of the article is well organized and balanced with neutral opinion.Zhang0302 (talk) 03:09, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Online_wallet&oldid=1209521607"