Talk:PlanetRomeo

This article was nominated for deletion on March 28, 2007. The result of the discussion was keep.

Notability

WP:WEB Notable web site?

Potential pedophile problem. From Google (gayromeo):

"Meet hot asian boys from around the world from our list of asian boy profiles on Gayromeo.com website."

What are the Wikipedia criteria for this? Unsure. Thanks. --John Nagle 17:48, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have to be 18 to join that forum. Boys refers to young adults there. And the website is notable according to wikipedia criteria given there was an article in one of Germany's most important newspapers about it as can be seen from the link. ROGNNTUDJUU! 18:24, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, different nomenclature, and notable web site. --John Nagle 18:35, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You may notice that the text quoted above is from a completly different website (http://www.gayrice.com/gayprofiles/add_asiangayprofiles.php?siteid=10) and has nothing to do with gayromeo except someone put some links in? --84.188.177.119 17:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the German speaking countrys (Germany, Swiss, Austria, Liechtenstein) ist is well known and has from there the Nickname "schwules Einwohnermeldeamt" ("gay registration office") --Fg68at de:Disk 14:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Premium membership

Premium membership does offer greater access to photos. I just logged on, hit "Picture Search", attempted a search, and received the response This function is cost-intensive and puts an added burden on the Server which already has heavy traffic, so it is now reserved exclusively for GayRomeo PLUS Users. To access the page you have requested, you must be registered as a GayRomeo PLUS User. Granted, Fridays, everyone has access to the feature, but, in any case, it would still be accurate to say that premium members have greater access. samwaltz 02:04, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, well then please rephrase your sentence instead of just reverting. I think the reader will understand your statement as meaning "there is a certain amount of pictures that is only available to PLUS users", which is untrue. PLUS users do have a number of additional features, including longer automatic storage of old messages (2 weeks instead of 3 days I think); more space for saving messages; etc., but not "greater access to member photos". How about "greater access to cost-intensive database searches" if you want to mention the picture search restriction?

And sorry for insisting on minor details like this, but I think the text you introduced makes it appear that Gayromeo is similar to i.e. Gaydar in that you can "try it out" for free, but if you really want to use it there is simply no way around registering. And this is not the case; the majority of Gayromeo users are using the free service and have been doing so for years, because the restrictions are minimal; one could even say that there are no restrictions for free users but rather just bonus features for registered users. And that is no marketing speak, but IMHO the main reason for the success of the platform. — ^PDD 16:55, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PFD Followup

There used to be articles on GayRomeo in both the French and Spanish Wikipediae. They have since been deleted, and I can't find the records/discussions for the deletes. Could anyone who is comfortable with the languages work on re-writing/translating them? samwaltz 15:30, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A Spanish article has been written but gets deleted within seconds of being published - with no reasons given. — ^rodevan 10:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gayromeo "free of advertising"?

In the "plus accounts" section, it is mentioned that gayromeo is free of advertising and that members' subscriptions are its most important financial source. All "non-plus" users however know that almost all gayromeo pages have at least one advertisement, so I'm just deleting the claim that GR is free of advertising. --Desiderius82 (talk) 10:06, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 28 September 2015

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 08:14, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GayRomeo.com → PlanetRomeo – The site has been called PlanetRomeo for a while now, including the company names. The site also mentions that the renaming was done to avoid bans in some countries. –Totie (talk) 11:03, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support, this could have been a technical request. Greg Kaye 07:45, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support I thought this site was called PlanetRomeo. What is GayRomeo? Are these different things? If no one has objections I think it can be moved. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:26, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on PlanetRomeo. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120222164753/http://www.gayboy.at/news/index.php?doc=news&nid=14422 to http://www.gayboy.at/news/index.php?doc=news&nid=14422

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 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: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:07, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]