Talk:ConsumerAffairs

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 January 2016. The result of the discussion was no consensus.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Business Low‑importance 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. Companies Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Companies To-do: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes Maintain : Portal:Companies Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs Other : Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner Answer requests for comments

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. Anupam (talk · contribs) has been paid by ConsumerAffairs. Their editing has included contributions to this article.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. SBCornelius (talk · contribs) has been paid by Outspoken Media, on behalf of ConsumerAffairs. COI declared: Also see User:SBCornelius

I see that there were quite a few edits of this page but no discussion. To those editing the page, please start discussing major edits here.

I have just added a paragraph about procedures used for complaints received. Since much of what the site does is collecting consumer complaints, this info needs to be included in the article.

I also reworded the opening sentence.

In the current text there is a mention of a close relationship with the law firm Horwitz, Horwitz & Associates. This info needs to be sourced. Whomever added it, please provide a source citation ASAP, as required by WP:V, or the statement will have to be removed. The same for the info about the "praise of the Society of Professional Journalists, the National Press Club".

Regards, Nsk92 (talk) 03:15, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed three external links, per WP:EL. One is a blog, which is an issue with WP:ELNO, the other two may be useful as refs if someone wants to work them into the article, but their inclusion in EL seems to be just for the sake of listing them. Here are the links if someone wants to work them into the article as refs:

• Lucas, Fred, 'Consumer Watchdog' Website Faces Complaints, Lawsuits, Cybercast News Service, 12 February 2007
• High Tech Pet quoted in the above article, futher reading, 'Consumers Beware of ConsumerAffairs.com' 28 February 2007

--- Barek (talk • contribs) - 00:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

125.238.147.221 (talk) 05:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone really please fix this clearly biased article? It's ironic that a paid editor would be allowed to work on this one. See https://www.truthinadvertising.org/consumer-affairs-com/ for example, especially their statistical analysis of ratings for paid vs unpaid companies. And see some other sites on it. It's doing a disservice to Wikipedia's reputation to let puff articles like this to stand, ones with even admitted paid contributors.

207.216.172.161 (talk) 06:04, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

https://web.archive.org/web/20090813002429/http://www.cnsnews.com/public/Content/Article.aspx?rsrcid=23343

207.216.172.161 (talk) 06:20, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How did all this stuff just slowly get removed from the article? https://web.archive.org/web/20080409153325/http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1206960391035

207.216.172.161 (talk) 06:25, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.asrcreviews.org/2014/10/ersp-reviews-advertising-for-consumeraffairs-com-recommends-marketer-modify-certain-claims/

207.216.172.161 (talk) 06:34, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Before, it was biased for the subject; then it was biased against the subject. I've rewritten the whole article to meet WP:NPOV. The case of Nemet Chevrolet, Ltd v. Consumeraffairs.com has been added. The court decided in favor of Consumeraffairs.com. CerealKillerYum (talk) 14:25, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on ConsumerAffairs. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.forbes.com/sites/mnewlands/2015/10/13/authenticity-is-key-for-online-reviews/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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} 01:35, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

message for consumer affairs how much to end the freign of snakes i ahve came home to find too many sNKES AN PHYTONS BEING AN ABUSE SITUATION IS BAD FOR ME WHEN THERE ARE FAMILY AND BABYS INVOVLED WHEN PREGANAT EVEN WORSE ABUSE INVISIOS CARRY BAGS OF GARDEN SNAKE LARGE PHTONS IN SMALL ITS NOT GOOD WITH ABUSE DO MESTIC VIOLEN E IN DAYLIGHT OR DARKNESS PIONOUS SNAKES MAKE GONE I DONT WANT THIS BACK FALL AGAin the arry over not good is there a suh place as ghost protool tell me truth about physic people these visionarys can hear and see evrything i look forward to 2018 in great antisapation of a n ew life of a native new yorker renovtated and reconstruted p,ps an you tell all snake beings of how to remove a snake from your home will be helpfull wher to go for pionous snake bites in new york ity nr brtooklyn and manhttant keeping saFE AT DAY AND NIGHT MESSAGE FROM CLEO ORIELES END EXTREM E PRJUDICE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE THANK YOU VERY MUCH — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.121.121.99 (talk) 18:32, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On 7-17-2020 I ordered a Mobility Scooter from a company from this address 1FBlock B 108-120 Febgping Road, Dongguan City, Guangdong Province China.. I paid $ 34.98 for it.. I received a very small package with a watch inside.. It had the Tracking Number: LY365837330CN, this is the same Tracking number they sent to me for my scooter... I have a pic of my order & I have pictures of the package the watch came in with the same tracking number as the scooter... when I contacted the company they said the shippers who mistook the batch of the products due to the hot sale reasons,so you have received the wrong item,we are really sorry and have a claim with the shippers. In order to make up for your loss,after communication with there suppliers,they promise that they could resend the right item to me, but to there regret,they ask for the return of the item I received. I told them when I received my original order then I would send them back the watch they sent...they keep just telling me to send the watch back first...after the 3rd email from them I just asked them to send me a refund, they sent me a message saying they would give me Judy 40% of a refund, I told them that wasn’t good enough, they were the ones that messed up, there for I wanted a full refund... here’s there reply......

Dear customer, We’re sorry for the delay. As we checked your troubles, we sincerely want to help you. Our return address is : 1F, Block B, 108-120 Fengping Road, Fenggang Town, Dongguan City, Guangdong Province, China We promise that you will get your full refund. Just offer us valid information of your returned package: 1.Tracking Number(By screenshot or picture) 2.A picture of your Returned Package(which showed return address) Once you meet the above conditions and we check it, we will refund you immediately, and please notice that the shipping cost will be refunded after we receive your package. Deeply sorry for the inconvenience caused again. Thank you! Have a nice day! JANE ———————————————————————————————————————————

Can you please tell me what I can do to get my refund. Thanks Barbara Arnold — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naynay55 (talk • contribs) 03:26, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I recently purchased a product that cost $152.00 with tax. I planned to pay it off within 3 months so I would not incur any interest if I paid it off in the 12-month plan extended to me. The first month, I made a payment of $100 and was charged $8.47 in taxes for my payment (which was deducted from my $100 payment). Isn’t that paying taxes twice? I’ve never had taxes deducted from a payment. Is this a legal practice? 2601:644:801:5540:0:0:0:FBC9 (talk) 22:33, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]