Talk:Facebook down for "upgrades"; multiple blogs suggest site was hacked

Not news

I'm afraid I don't see how the status of a social networking website is worthy of a news article. Apologies if further developments to this article are going to clarify why this is notable but I see no evidence at the moment that this is newsworthy. Adambro 17:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I reckon this is a notable story given Facebook's size, the exposure of private information especially in the context of security concerns in regards to abuse of the service. Constafrequent 18:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

It is now notable. When I first saved the article, as "developing" this new layer hadn't been added. -- Zanimum 18:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Back online?

The site seems to be back up as of this time. Jcart1534 19:12, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes and no... if you go to www.facebook.com/login, it works, if you just go to the home page, it still shows the upgrade message. -- Zanimum 19:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Home page shows like normal, it seems... Thunderhead - (talk) 20:41, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Blogs

blogs are not considered credible sources. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 18:27, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

How are they less credible than individual people? If I knew these people, and interviewed them, that would be "original research" and okay. However, if two bloggers that maintain tech blogs post about the situation, it's suddenly not okay? -- Zanimum 18:34, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Blogs are not credible for a variety of reasons. The key issue here is that as that is their status they should not be listed as sources. They may be listed as external links. --Brian McNeil / ^talk 19:54, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Reprinted

At Afriquenligne. -- Zanimum 13:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Good, we're attributed. Thunderhead - (talk) 13:26, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

link to XSS

a link should be placed to XSS so readers know what it is and how they could protect them self if they wanted