Talk:.jobs

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet 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.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Business Low‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

"Actual use: A few job-related sites are active in this domain as of late 2005" I just did a google search for: site:.jobs and it returned 21,200 results.--Ortho 14:23, 5 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

And with but a little patience ( aka Time ) it now returns 39,100,000 results. I'm just guessing that between those two points the better fit would not be linear, but exponential. WurmWoode^T 23:08, 4 January 2015 (UTC)Reply

Fair use rationale for Image:Dotjobs.gif edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Image:Dotjobs.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 01:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

steve.jobs? edit

Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Please tell me Apple Inc. doesn't put its career info at steve.jobs. --Damian Yerrick (talk | stalk) 21:23, 8 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

pointless waste of time, energy, and general shit edit

so, why hasn't anyone written that this tld is a pointless waste of time, energy, and shit? seriously what's the fucking point? the arguments put forward are very poor. i've seen only one .jobs domain since 2005, and that's today. and it's a country.jobs. seems like it would cost virtually nothing to run, so any money coming in is going to be pure profit for the company that runs it. which is the only reason i can think of for it to exist at all. so, anyone got any ideas as to how to formulate that into encyclopedic writing?

Add topic