Talk:Bitly

Off-topic[edit]

How come the API took a dump guys? It was working yesterday and suddenly not. I have wasted a few hours on this now, get your service together.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.40.5.197 (talk • contribs) 22:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Example URL points here[edit]

User 15.203.169.106 (talk · contribs) recently [ changed] the example URL in the article to "http://bit.ly/6wgJO". Checking "http://bit.ly/6wgJO+" shows that that URL points to this article. Recursion FTW! CWC 03:23, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, I thought this was a nice touch! Sprocket (talk) 01:02, 29 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

LIbya?[edit]

Why the hell is their domain Libya? Does anyone know? 98.185.234.63 (talk) 20:10, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Added link for more possible information on this discussion:

http://benmetcalfe.com/blog/2010/10/the-ly-domain-space-to-be-considered-unsafe/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.81.80.134 (talk) 19:06, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's really only for using .ly to form "Bitly", there's nothing special about Libya. No one would ever register a website in Tuvalu if not for the fact that their top level domain is .tv, either. Knight of Truth (talk) 09:24, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No link to website[edit]

It seems pretty silly that we don't have a link to the website on here. Surely we should be able to make an exception for this one page. Does anyone know who would have the power to do this? Mahahahaneapneap (talk) 14:20, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why is a link needed? The link is given clearly in the infobox, and anyone interested can copy that into their web browser. Johnuniq (talk) 00:49, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that not setting the link is kind of silly. Wikipedia not allowing links using bit.ly doesn't mean it prohibits a link to the homepage of that project.Knarrff (talk) 17:30, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Spam-whitelist is where you want to go to get this kind of technical problem fixed. Which I have done already, and the link is now included on the page.--Tim Thomason 03:07, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

the exceptions for plain bitly.com (without params and without path) and some other deeplinks are now handled globally, see [1]. -- seth (talk) 07:32, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Twitter Moving On[edit]

Bitly is no longer the default link shortenor for twitter. A change should be made or an disputed accuracy tag should be added.

I attempted to make this change but t.co (the new twitter link shortenor) is on the external link blacklist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Falkirks (talk • contribs) 20:54, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bitly. 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 https://web.archive.org/web/20101104055802/http://gigaom.com/collaboration/bit-ly-pro-create-short-urls-with-your-own-domain/ to http://gigaom.com/collaboration/bit-ly-pro-create-short-urls-with-your-own-domain/

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 04:14, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What info is collected?[edit]

The article says that "Bitly makes money by charging for access to aggregate data created as a result of many people using the shortened URLs." If anyone knows what kinds of information are collected (e.g. IP addresses and/or location data, or just source pages or number of clicks), that would be very helpful information to put in the article. FideliaE (talk) 03:25, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adding "+" to the bit.ly/whatever does not directly reveal the true URL unless one is registered bitly user and signed in.[edit]

This should be stated in the article. I suspect the article is cleansed by bitly employees. 2600:8806:1400:1100:C566:A4BB:6808:1E25 (talk) 12:12, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bitly Enterprise examples are unlikely to use Bitly[edit]

The company offers a paid solution called Bitly Enterprise that provides advanced branding features, audience intel, omnichannel campaign tracking, custom QR codes and more. Companies can use their own custom domains to generate shortened links; for example, The New York Times uses nyti.ms, and Pepsi uses pep.si, Google uses goo.gle.

the article presents those three services' internal URL shorteners as using Bitly Enterprise, even though i'm pretty sure they don't. At least Google has the resources to have their own URL shortening service rather than relying on Bitly

also, a lot of those terms like "omnichannel" are very specific and could potentially be an advertisement from bitly

SheepTester (talk) 04:56, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]