Talk:Etsy/Archive 1

Archive 1

Proposed Relocation: To Etsy's About Page

I only came here because I couldn't figure out what the heck Etsy was from their Web site. Their About page has a gallery of employees. Their press page has a gallery of miniature newspapers front pages. There is no description of what the site is on the site itself. The level of detail here is ridiculous for a Wikipedia entry. Just ID it as an internet company doing such and such, and then external link to their site, where they have the responsibility to explain the things explained here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.216.99.100 (talk) 12:47, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion (proposal withdrawn)

I've proposed this article for deletion because it's written from a POV perspective, is non-notable, and is likely spam. If you can address these concerns, please do so. Thanks! --Viridian {Talk} 17:18, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

• The article in its re-written form now seems less POV, and google reveals that Etsy does indeed have some level of notability; as such I've removed the deletion tag. My bad for not doing the google search earlier... -_-; --Viridian {Talk} 17:51, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Re: employee names

1. At what point should this article draw the line at listing the names of Etsy employees? -Euonym 23:47, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
2. Where is the source for employee's full names, anyway? Etsy's "Jobs" page lists only first names. Their "About" page does not seem to include all employees mentioned here in Wikipedia. -Euonym 23:47, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Privacy

accidental deletion (27 June 2007)

Apologies; did not intentionally delete all of Vanbertozzi's edits to this section. I have too many windows and tabs open and it will take me a while to sort them out. -Euonym 00:15, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

please clarify section deletion (by 151.197.12.194 on 28 June 2007)

Edit summary: "Removed the privacy section, which is innacurate and immaterial to the article"
1. What was inaccurate? -Euonym 10:57, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
2. How is it immaterial? -Euonym 10:57, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/24.5.196.172
This person has erased the privacy section 5 times, without any explanation or justification. They were blocked on August 10, but they have apparently been unblocked and are continuing to vandalize the article. Twice on September 5.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Etsy&action=history

1. (cur) (last) 03:27, 5 September 2007 24.5.196.172 (Talk) (13,761 bytes) (→External links) (undo)

removing a link to etsynews.

1. (cur) (last) 03:27, 5 September 2007 24.5.196.172 (Talk) (13,806 bytes) (→Privacy) (undo)

completly erasing the privacy section, again

Can anyone justify the extreme quantity of off-wikipedia team links? This is an encyclopedia, not a street teams directory. As to the vandalism of the privacy section, while I don't agree with wikipedia vandalism, I'm having a hard time seeing how the privacy information belongs here. It is important to the users of the site, but not to wikipedia readers in general. It seems more whistle blowing than encyclopedic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.114.139 (talk) 13:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: the Privacy section

I feel that Etsy's privacy stance is a salient feature of that site. I think they have an unusual level of transaction transparency and I think it's different enough to warrant mention. I also think it's important enough to mention as it affects a large number of purchases (all the ones involving feedback) -- and, after all, purchases are the point of the site.

The feedback giant, eBay, has long since had a write-up of its feedback policy in its Wikipedia entry (or it did when I added the section here to Etsy). Euonym 22:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Re: team links

I'll start a new section to discuss this (and external links in general). Euonym 22:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

External Links

General Organization

I've been thinking about restructuring the external links into "official" vs. "unofficial" groups. If there are no objections, I'll probably get around to it within the next day, or someone else can go ahead and do so. -Euonym 22:54, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Done. I've put the EtsyWiki in the "official site" subgroup, but I'm not sure if that's correct. Sorry; I couldn't find it either way on the site itself. -Euonym 06:13, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Street Teams

The question was raised above by 71.246.114.139 13:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC): "Can anyone justify the extreme quantity of off-wikipedia team links? This is an encyclopedia, not a street teams directory."

My opinion:

I don't think there needs to be a full directory of Etsy's Street Teams. A single link to a central Street Teams page would be more appropriate. -Euonym 22:54, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Question: official street team page?

I was planning to remove the itemized Street Team list and replace it with an official site link. Where is that? If no one says otherwise, I'm going to point the link at http://team.etsy.com/?page_id=4 -Euonym 06:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Etsicon (Popular Terminology)

I don't know if this section should be deleted altogether, but I do think it should be reduced.
While I understand the importance of defining official-type site-specific terms (such as "hearting"), I don't think every chat room in-joke needs to be included ("NORM!" - which isn't even an Etsy-specific term). As with the Street Teams, I think this level of detail belongs off-Wikipedia, but can be linked to from here. -Euonym 23:10, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Why "Etsy"?

Does anyone know where the name ETSY comes from? It would be an interesting bit of information to have on here, as it is the main reason I came to this entry. -Sebastian notregistered http://www.sspeier.com

--- They refuse to tell anyone the origin of the name. The founder has referred to several different origins in different interviews and on the Etsy forums. One can only assume that it is meaningless. If it does have a meaningful origin, that is fairly irrelevant since it is only known to a few people. Therefore, for all intents and purposes it is a nonsense word. - Sand Moonie —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sandmoon (talk • contribs) 17:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep

i just came here to learn more about this site. wikipedia is generally the first place i like to go for this information so please do not delete 98.195.185.125 (talk) 03:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Put back information

Can we please put back the site features information?! They were deleted as spam by The Ringess but it's actually very important information for someone researching Etsy. The site has unique features from other sites, particularly its competitors, that would be information journalists or detractors would need for articles.

The Ringess, if you read this, please revert your changes! And do a little research before you mark something as spam. 216.166.236.226 (talk) 19:32, 14 December 2007 (UTC)Alicia P

The page omits any constructive reports concerning the site and its issues. Edits have been made to the page to remove informative issues concerning the site. This page reads as a press release and not an informative article concerning this company. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EltheaRosa (talk • contribs) 06:18, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

External links

Hi TheRingess! What part of WP:NOT are you referring to? I'm going by Wikipedia:External_links#What_should_be_linked, which says we should include links to "Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail...or other reasons." Both EtsyWiki and Unofficial Etsy News fit those critera - the first because it has more detail than would be appropriate in this article, and the second because it's an updated news source. Dreamyshade (talk) 20:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry that it took me a while to get back to this. Please see Wikipedia:External links#Links normally to be avoided. Wikis and blogs are listed as links normally to be avoided. I took a look at the Wiki link. It looked to be primarily personal success stories. It's also prominently linked to on the etsy website. It doesn't seem to be too helpful to include it here. It seems to be primarily of interest only to those who might wish to buy and sell on Etsy. We are not a how-to guide. Including it here doesn't improve the article, but possibly makes it less neutral as the wiki seems to be designed to promote Etsy. Also regarding the news link, once again this link can be found on the official site. The news link seems to consist primarily of press releases that promote Etsy, rather than independant articles (just my opinion) and including it here seems unnecessary at best and possibly promotional. It too is also available on the official Etsy website. Perhaps it's time for a third opinion. TheRingess (talk) 21:21, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

I really don't understand at all why the Unofficial Etsy News link keeps getting removed. It is not linked to from Etsy because it is not part of Etsy - thus the 'unofficial' part of the name. I'm sure Etsy would prefer it not to be linked from here, but as I understand it that should have no bearing on what actually appears on this page. It is the only dedicated news source regarding Etsy which is not written by Etsy itself. While it is a blog, you might like to read a recent post about policy to better understand that top level posts are made up of verifiable information, while comments may contain editorial content and opinion: http://etsynews.com/619/an-editorial-from-your-friendly-uen-editors/ Sparkells (talk) 05:43, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

The page reads as a promotion without any articles or links addressing issues concerning Etsy. The UEN link is one of those links but it seems as though there is an interest in making the article seem uninformative concerning relevant reports. It is also interesting that these links have a tendency to disappear quickly. (Elthea (talk) 06:29, 27 February 2008 (UTC))

I also do not understand why the link is removed. The Unofficial Etsy News is not linked to from Etsy, it is not full of press releases, in fact it is full of useful information culled from the forums that might otherwise be lost as those topics are buried by new topics! Maybe it is because it does not always show Etsy in a positive light? (````) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.14.209.251 (talk) 06:36, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that there is any hidden agenda to keep this a positive article. I wrote a lot of the text as it stands right now, and I do like Etsy but not that much. I don't even use it very often - I just thought it deserved a decent article. The reliable sources I found were generally positive about Etsy, so that's what I cited. There are a few editors who are very interested in keeping the External Links section pared down, however, no matter whether those links are positive or negative. HiDrNick, can you contribute with an explanation? In the meantime, I'll try to incorporate this recent news into the article itself. Dreamyshade (talk) 07:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

There are plenty of articles on Wikpedia that take into account controversy about a business' practices, or even additional sources of information. The eBay article includes THREE links to independent sites that write about eBay. The Unofficial Etsy News is the same. It should be kept in the external links section, and someone needs to stop acting like Wikipedia is strictly for company press releases.--Tashagirl (talk) 11:51, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I see that TheRingess has once again removed the UEN link from the Etsy article. Considering that The UEN is the source for another article written by The Consumerist, itself cited in the article, The UEN is clearly considered by others to be a valuable source for information about Etsy not readily (or at all) available from Etsy itself. On the Edits page, TheRingess refers to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:RS as his/her justification - implying, I guess, that the UEN is not a reliable source? Is Etsy itself the only reliable source about Etsy? As I said earlier, the eBay article includes THREE links to independent sites that write about eBay. This seems to be a clear attempt to keep any information other than corporate PR even offered as a link to article readers.Tashagirl (talk) 23:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Tashagirl, since you're a little bit of a new editor, I'm not sure you saw TheRingess' response to your talk page question: User_talk:TheRingess#Etsy.com_entry. Dreamyshade (talk) 08:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm going to make a few points here. The main purpose of Wikipedia is to create an online free encyclopedia. It is not a forum, nor is it a how to guide, nor is it meant to replace search engines like google. Merely adding a link in an article does not improve that article. The only thing that improves an article is content that is verifiable and sourced. To that end, I keep adding the comment that the link is perfectly acceptable if it is used as a citation for material in the body of the article (as long as that material has been fact checked). Though as far as I can tell, this website contains primarily information of interest to the customers of Etsy and not material of interest to an average reader of an Encyclopedia. The website appears to be little more than a blog with multiple editors, with no written policy describing how/when/where the content on the website was checked for factual accuracy. Any comparison to other articles is irrelevant as each article and link should be considered on its own merit. At the ris of breaking one of Wikipedia's core policies, that of assuming good faith on the part of every contributor, the repeated addition of the link by contributors who've made no effort to contribute to other articles seems to be an attempt to drive traffic to that particular website. The community at large considers any attempt to use Wikipedia to drive traffic to a particular website to be spam and a misuse of the project. If you continue to disagree then I might suggest we pursue any one of the various avenues for calm dispute resolution that the community makes freely available. For instance we might start with a request for comment or if that isn't sufficient we might go to mediaton. With all that said, I encourage you to contribute content to the project in this article or any other article that might interest you, but please don't continue to simply add links in order to drive traffic to your site. Thanks.TheRingess (talk) 20:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time/effort to back up your position again, TheRingess! I've grown ambivalent about this link, but I hope we can all come to a consensus about it. Dreamyshade (talk) 21:49, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Not sure why i keep getting removed and taken off wiki? I want to add this external link very appropriate to Etsy and it takes it away. thanks for any input. debbie - dvinedesigns —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dvinedesigns (talk • contribs) 18:58, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

It gets removed because it has the appearance of WP:LINKSPAM, or blatant advertising, and the policy here is that Wikipedia is not to be used for promotional purposes. Please see WP:NOTADVERTISING. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 19:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

geographical distribution

What is the geographical distribution of sellers and buyers? How many outside US? How many outside North America? How global is this? To what extent does it facilitate direct sales from underdeveloped areas directly to consumers in developed areas? Is it crafted items only, or also say foodstuffs like coffee, tea, and cacao (cocoa, chocolate)? -69.87.204.50 (talk) 15:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Hand-made only?

The article is still just barely more than a stub -- please add more information.

The listings do seem to be mostly hand-crafted modern items. But some are modern commercial supplies. Some are older "vintage" commercial items. Most of the sellers seem to be in the US.

There is a feedback system, and completed items can still be viewed. But the price disappears. Is there any way to find out how much items actually sell for? How do sellers set prices? How do buyers research what is a fair price to pay? Selling prices seem fixed. Is there a way to negotiate? How often is this done?

How much of the transactions go through PayPal? What problems are there with this, since PayPal is owned by the competitor Ebay? What sources are available comparing how big ebay, etsy, and any other top category players are? -69.87.204.50 (talk) 15:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Those are all great questions. If anybody can track down sources, I'll happily add this stuff to the article. Dreamyshade (talk) 07:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

CEO

So who is the current CEO of Etsy? Rob Kalin was mentioned to only be up to JULY 2011. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.242.198.205 (talk) 01:19, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Repeated removal of slightly negative paragraph

Over the past year or so, anonymous users have deleted the one negative paragraph in this article at least eight times. The latest person included the explanation "This paragraph is outdated and the issues pointed out are no longer pressing." I think this is worth discussing — I'd like this article to be as fair as possible. I originally wrote that paragraph to balance out the article a little bit, since the other material was very positive. I believe that the first and second sentences (about eBay and seller complaints) cover relatively important events; the third sentence ("feels slow") is based on one person's opinion. I added another sentence with positive opinions, since other people do find the site enjoyable to browse. I also added some recent news. The article is still kind of US-centric, and I could include a few more references (like this review), but I think that's good for now. Dreamyshade (talk) 17:45, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Etsy name

I'd be interested in knowing what ETSY stands for or how they came up with the name ETSY - can someone update the page with that info? Cala 3 (talk) 01:32, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks like there's finally a source for the name in a Reader's Digest interview. This is a note to myself to add that to the article later, along with material from this article about self-employing via Etsy. Dreamyshade (talk) 22:45, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

opening paragraph sounds like a commercial

phrases such as "a crafty cross between Amazon and eBay" and "your grandma's basement" as well as "The vintage items on the site have only one rule to follow: they must be 20 years or older" seem advertorial in nature and inappropriate in any part of an encyclopedic entry, let alone the opening paragraph 72.129.152.57 (talk) 07:29, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Ecologica Malibu event

There's some discussion at User talk:GiannaQ about how to include this recent controversy, for anyone who might be interested in this part of the article's development. Dreamyshade (talk) 20:47, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

This article was edited as part of an edit-a-thon

	This article was edited as part of the San Francisco WikiWomen's Edit-a-thon. The editor who attended the event may be a new editor. In an effort to support new editors & a healthy environment, please assume good faith to their contributions before making changes. Thank you! Sarah (talk) 20:18, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

No criticism section?

Etsy is a disaster for international orders. Ebay has subtle tools that discourage transactions that involve customs. Etsy encourages them. Customs is a very very bad thing, especially for weird products. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.58.205.103 (talk) 23:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

• It sounds like you're suggesting to include details in the article about problems with international selling via Etsy, correct? That could make sense, but we need to follow Wikipedia's guidelines concerning Notability, Verifiability, and Neutral point of view — in other words, we need to find a reliable third-party source (such as a decent newspaper article) describing these problems and then cite their descriptions. Do you know of any sources like that? I can't find any with a quick search. Also, it would probably be best to integrate this information into the main body of the article instead of adding a separate "Criticism" section. This essay on "criticism" includes more detail: "Rather than create a section dedicated to criticisms, instead try to incorporate negative material into the appropriate topical or thematic section that the negative material relates to (such as a particular event, policy, or product)." Dreamyshade (talk) 16:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

• I looked into this again, and I couldn't find any independent reliable sources covering problems with customs and Etsy, just routine instructions and advice about filling out customs forms. Along with searching Google News, I searched Starting an Etsy Business For Dummies (2011), How to Make Money Using Etsy (2011), Etsy-preneurship (2012), and Selling Your Crafts Online: With Etsy, eBay, and Pinterest (2012). Dreamyshade (talk) 21:44, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

• For future reference, this 2011 Inc. magazine feature includes some critical material that we could use to flesh out the history section. It'd also be nice to have a section on site features; the books I found could be helpful for that. Dreamyshade (talk) 06:12, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Background and Etsy wars

Here's an article on Time that seems to maintain a more neutral stance than the Inc.com article and covers a background of the Etsy wars and the changes to Etsy's policies regarding the handcrafted lifestyle/ethos.

You'll need to be subscribed to access it, but here's some background and quotations from the article on content that could be used here: There is some sort of clash or "collision between artisanal purity and capitalist ambition." "[Turning household arts and hobbies into thriving ventures] is a movement as much as an industry, and many of its leaders insist that remaining virtuous means staying small." "The central battlefield for the future of the handmade movement is Etsy...which has helped its legions of handicrafters prosper in a weak economy. "But disenchanted members say that the bigger Etsy gets, the more it tramples over smaller producers and dilutes the charm of handmade goods."

After investments from venture capitalists including Union Square Ventures and Accel Partners (both investors in FB, Twitter, and Tumblr), and a change in management, Etsy is expanding and becoming more of a capitalist business - redefining the word handmade to include foreign factory-made goods with good working conditions, rather than maintaining the small/handcrafted ethos (which doesn't seem to be sustainable with a huge demand and market for handcrafted goods among those "who seek relief from modernity"). There was a sort of war that occurred between "disgruntled Etsians" and the "big sellers" that were violating the handmade ethos, and customers/merchants complained about Etsy's management "playing favorites among sellers by [advertising] bigger producers in splashy features on its home page, where shoppers couldn't miss them." —and etc. The article goes into more detail on the whole story. - M0rphzone (talk) 23:06, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Opening sentence-Problems

"Etsy is an e-commerce website focused on handmade or vintage items as well as art and craft supplies with the same conditions handmade or used goods/vintage." I'm not really sure what "with the same conditions handmade or used goods/vintage" means, but it seems to say that supplies sold on Etsy are handmade or vintage. This is far and away not the case and is not a requirement of the site. Commercial supplies are allowed and welcome on Etsy, and make up the vast majority of supplies sold there. I think that phrase needs to be removed. Any objections? Michellecornelison (talk) 11:54, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

I'll actually go ahead and remove the phrase as I now see it was added recently with no prior discussion. I didn't want to edit the first sentence without posting here, but this phrase is either false or reads to be false. Michellecornelison (talk) 12:35, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Competition

I actually came to this page looking for alternatives for Etsy (something I use wikipedia pages for a lot). A ¨see also¨ section seems like it would be a good idea either with some prominent competitors or a link to an article that was a list of craft distributors? Zigbigadoorlue (talk) 18:48, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

How come Folksy.com isn't mentioned? 86.144.25.176 (talk) 16:22, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Incorrect and outdated production outsourcing information

The current description of Etsy's production outsourcing policies is incorrect. Etsy changed its policies in 2013 so that shops selling handmade goods could 1) hire people and collaborate from different locations 2) use shipping or fulfillment services and 3) work with outside manufacturers. It is inaccurate to say that sellers can sell "allow nearly any item, even mass-produced factory items, to be sold as 'handmade'" as the Wikipedia page currently states. Handmade products must meet the company’s principles of authorship, responsibility, and transparency. Sellers must apply and be approved by Etsy to work with outside manufacturers and Etsy asks that sellers note their use of any outside assistance in their shop's "About" page. Furthermore, through Etsy Manufacturing, which was introduced in September 2015, sellers can connect with small-scale manufacturers that have been reviewed and approved by Etsy. These manufacturers are required to commit to ethical standards on transparency, safe and just workplaces, and customer service. Sellers must also apply and be approved to work with any partners listed on Etsy Manufacturing. I work for Etsy so I am disclosing that I have a conflict of interest; however, the changes I am seeking are to amend the factual inaccuracies that are present in the current information.64.124.192.210 (talk) 18:18, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not really concerned with what you have to say about the company though. Wikipedia reports on what reliable sources say about a subject and the source [1] appears to be reliable. Which words exactly do you consider to be inaccurate? Theroadislong (talk) 18:26, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

The source you mention is reliable, but what is not accurate is the synopsis of it on the Wikipedia page. The referenced article does not say that sellers are allowed to sell nearly "any item, even mass-produced" ones as handmade. The term "mass-produced" is actually not used at all in the referenced article because that is simply not true. The source clearly states that "any sellers who want to hire a partner are required to fill out an application, outlining their personal role in the creation of a product and how they will be using outside manufacturing. Then Etsy’s Marketplace Integrity, Trust & Safety team determines who is and isn’t granted the right to use outside help." So while Etsy does allow sellers to use outside manufacturers, there is still an application process and principles that sellers must adhere to when using outside production assistants. Additionally, sellers are asked to note any outside assistance on their Shop's "About" page. To say that any mass-produced item is allowed on the site is false. It would be great to update the language to reflect this. 64.124.192.210 (talk) 19:26, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I wanted to resurface the above as the information on regarding Etsy's manufacturing policies remains inaccurate. As flagged above, while the source referenced on the Wikipedia page is credible, the synopsis is not an accurate reflection of it. The article does not say that "mass-produced" goods are permitted on the site, but instead explains the process that sellers must go through if they wish to use outside assistance. I've also provided numerous sources above that confirm this notion. 64.124.192.210 (talk) 14:53, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

I have not received a response on the above requested edits in nearly 4 months despite responding to the talk thread above and resurfacing the issue. In light of that, I am making the edits I suggested. I am deleting the reference to "Mass produced" items as that is NOT mentioned even in the third-party source. Additionally, I have added in 2 sentences on Etsy Manufacturing based on a New York Times article (not based on any Etsy-owned or produced content). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.0.145.50 (talk) 19:10, 9 June 2016 (UTC) ]

Verified sources for outsourcing section as an unaffiliated third partyPatbreckf (talk) 05:21, 10 August 2016 (UTC) Do I have to remove the request edit if I think I sufficiently addressed the request?Patbreckf (talk) 05:49, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

References

Company history wrong?

In the present article it is quoted that Etsy was founded in 1998 however on the etsy page itself (in the "About" section) and several other sources 2005 is mentioned as the launch date. See and e.g. 82.18.13.64 (talk) 10:56, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

This date of 2005 agrees with recent articles in The Guardian: "The Brooklyn-based company, founded in 2005..." and Venturebeat: "Back in 2005, in a Brooklyn apartment, Rob Kalin, Chris Maguire, and Haim Schoppik created a company..." --Gronk Oz (talk) 09:59, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

As the users above note, the company history is in fact wrong. Etsy was founded in 2005. I work for Etsy so I am disclosing that I have a conflict of interest; however, this change is not promotional in nature. Would it be possible to amend the founding date to 2005? 64.124.192.210 (talk) 17:55, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I didn't do anything here, but the date has been corrected to 2005 in all places since this request was made. Marking this as answered. Baslsk ^talk~track 09:27, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Etsy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20091005213249/http%3A//www.unionsquareventures.com/2006/06/etsy_1.html to http://www.unionsquareventures.com/2006/06/etsy_1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:57, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Lead section is out-of-spec, + seems biased & reads like an ad.

Among the problems, Wiki Guidelines say Lead should include any controversy. These seem to be intentionally omitted. For example:

"Robert Kalin resumed his role as CEO from December 2009 until July 2011.[12]" Wasn't he was fired ...? Why? ...plus, that link is bad or broken. How many others?

Also many non-neutral phraseology and words such as "garnered." Also...is it Chinese? etc... Needs much work.
--2602:306:CFCE:1EE0:6907:D8AB:D88D:46C7 (talk) 16:53, 1 February 2018 (UTC)Doug Bashford

Redundancies

Dear Fellow Wikipedians: This article contains a few redundancies, some occur across different heading categories. Examples include lists of payment mechanisms and board actions involving board member and executive changes. Information about the shareholder lawsuit is missing an outcome. Such lawsuits by investors are not unusual.

Since this topic is outside my typical content area, I'm disinclined to immerse myself in the details for revising it. Ccxsen (talk) 22:04, 25 April 2021 (UTC)Ccxsen