Talk:Microsoft: Difference between revisions
→Semi-protected edit request on 24 April 2024: rm null request |
→Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2024: new section |
||
Line 132: | Line 132: | ||
:{{not done}} it's not clear what changes you want to be made. [[User:Timur9008|Timur9008]] ([[User talk:Timur9008|talk]]) 15:55, 30 March 2024 (UTC) |
:{{not done}} it's not clear what changes you want to be made. [[User:Timur9008|Timur9008]] ([[User talk:Timur9008|talk]]) 15:55, 30 March 2024 (UTC) |
||
== Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2024 == |
|||
{{edit semi-protected|Microsoft|answered=no}} |
|||
"On April 30, 2024, Microsoft unveiled plans to invest $17 billion in developing AI and cloud infrastructure in Indonesia. The initiative aims to bolster the country's digital transformation efforts, with the establishment of data centers and partnerships to drive innovation across various sectors, marking a significant step in regional tech advancement." [172] |
|||
Change to $1.7 billion not $17 billion. The source says its $1.7 billion. [[User:IcarusVI|IcarusVI]] ([[User talk:IcarusVI|talk]]) 17:42, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 17:42, 1 May 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Microsoft article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Microsoft" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent. |
Hey, my addition got removed!!
The most likely cause is because you failed to cite your addition with a reliable source, see Wikipedia:Verifiability for the official policy. This part of the article is really biased towards/against Microsoft!!!
Microsoft is a very old article with lots of discussion; consider re-reading the passage in question over again before getting upset. If there's still a problem, make a note on the talk page and just let it stew for a month or so; this kind of thing is watched by plenty of people. Where's the criticism?
It's interspersed throughout the article. Do not add a criticism section; it goes against the style guidelines. Various online sources say Microsoft's IPO peaked at $29.75 and ended the first trading day at $28, including Microsoft itself; however, the article states it peaked at $29.25 and ended at $27.75, what's the deal?
Sources are conflicting on this. We decided to go with the older published sources. Why is there a history section when there are already 2 separate articles?
Because according to various comments on featured article nominations articles need to be self contained and at least contain a summary, which is what the history section sets out to do. Why are there so many references, even on stuff that's common sense? It makes the article hard to edit!
It's due to the slightly controversial nature of the subject matter; what's common sense to one person has often been called into question on this article, so everything - literally - is referenced. Unfortunately, it does make the article rather cumbersome to edit. Such is the nature of Wikipedia. The page size is really large!
This is due to the heavy amount of detailed referencing with templates, as well as inline comments to editors on certain parts of the article. The actual readable prose size should actually be fairly mediocre. According to WP:LEAD there must be X paragraphs and there is only Y!
Pay attention to the prose size of the article (not the size when you press edit), it isn't that long. WP:LEAD is general guideline and the gist of it is to summarize everything concisely in the article without teasing the reader about every little detail. It is one of the most refined and tightly written parts of the article. It isn't comprehensive/the article is really short/it looks like a stub!
This is strictly about the company; generally we don't go beyond a general description about its products unless one is a pivotal point in the company's history as this is covered by daughter articles and simply summarized. We focus mostly on the corporate aspect of the company as those generally don't have daughter articles and are taken care of in articles about a company. What this results in is a comprehensive, heavily summarized article that goes into detail about the documented corporate affairs of Microsoft. There are no bolded names in Key people in the infobox!
This is really arbitrary and has no standard, so we choose the simplest route for now - none at all. Is there anything that needs particular attention?
Anything else to keep in mind while editing?
Yes, make sure to follow the Manual of Style as usual, especially in regards to the use of Template:nbsp and numbers. Please remember to only make links that are relevant to the context. Also, remember that this is a stable article for the most part, so take care while editing while still being bold. Finally, avoid using Microsoft itself as a source. |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Microsoft is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 11, 2006. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This level-4 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future: |
MOS:TIES should control on this issue
I just twice reverted an attempt by User:Graham11 to convert this American English article to British English, especially with regard to abbreviations and initialisms.
There is no doubt that Microsoft is a predominantly American subject. It was founded in New Mexico, incorporated in Delaware, and then moved to and still maintains its headquarters in Redmond, Washington.
Under MOS:TIES, "An article on a topic that has strong ties to a particular English-speaking nation should use the (formal, not colloquial) English of that nation." In formal written English, many style guides (including Garner's Modern English Usage and the Bluebook), newspapers (including all five newspapers of record), and many professional publishers still prefer the traditional "U.S." over "US". Coolcaesar (talk) 05:15, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- MOS:US begins:
This clearly tells us clearly that "US" is a permissible style in American English (even in an encyclopedic register) and that, per MOS:ENGVAR, we should generally prefer styles like "US" which are common to all varieties of English. (Were "US" not appropriate in American English in an encyclopedic register, MOS:COMMONALITY, which that quotation refers to, would not apply.) Do you read it otherwise, Coolcaesar?US is a commonly used abbreviation for United States, although U.S. – with periods and without a space – remains common in North American publications, including in news journalism. Multiple American style guides, including The Chicago Manual of Style (since 2010), now deprecate "U.S." and recommend "US".
For commonality reasons, use US by default when abbreviating, but retain U.S. in American or Canadian English articles in which it is already established, unless there is a good reason to change it. Because use of periods for abbreviations and acronyms should be consistent within any given article, use US in an article with other country abbreviations, and especially avoid constructions like the U.S. and the UK.
- Of course, MOS:US does allow "U.S." to be retained in American English articles where "there is [not] a good reason to change it". In the immediately following sentence, it gives an example of such a good reason: harmonizing country initialisms such as "US" and "UK", as "U.K." is never permitted on Wikipedia outside of a quotation and we cannot have two different country abbreviation styles in the same article. In this case, the article also uses "UK", so the only way to bring the article into compliance with the MOS is harmonize the country abbreviation styles. Graham (talk) 05:40, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Just noticed this. I strongly disagree. It sounds like you are interpreting MOS in such a manner in order to find excuses to convert articles on American topics entirely to British English, which is terribly inappropriate. All you will succeed in doing is alienating editors accustomed to writing in American English.
- Keep in mind that English Wikipedia is already hemorrhaging editors like crazy. I keep running into articles that have been obviously vandalized in their lead sentences, but no one is bothering to fix them for as long as three, four, or five years because the regular editor base is already too small (probably down to less than 20,000). I've also noticed that over the last two years, Google has begun to deprioritize Wikipedia articles in its search results because too many articles have been overrun with misinformation or vandalism and the existing editor base has been unable to contain the damage.
- The last thing we need to do is alienate the users of the single largest English dialect by number of native speakers. The less offensive and more appropriate approach is to provide country names in this article in full as much as possible, rather than convert the entire article over to British English. I'm planning to make those revisions when I have the time, then I will switch this mess back over to American English. --Coolcaesar (talk) 16:49, 26 March 2024 (UTC)
New cat
Please could somebody add Category:Companies in the Dow Jones Global Titans 50 ? 78.148.152.27 (talk) 22:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.152.27 (talk) 12:21, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
@ 120.29.72.247 (talk) 19:48, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Please! Edit this text in the page of the "Microsoft"!
to edit these things in the wikipedia. KielYam1212 (talk) 15:50, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
- Not done it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Timur9008 (talk) 15:55, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 1 May 2024
It is requested that an edit be made to the semi-protected article at Microsoft. (edit · history · last · links · protection log)
This template must be followed by a complete and specific description of the request, that is, specify what text should be removed and a verbatim copy of the text that should replace it. "Please change X" is not acceptable and will be rejected; the request must be of the form "please change X to Y".
The edit may be made by any autoconfirmed user. Remember to change the |
"On April 30, 2024, Microsoft unveiled plans to invest $17 billion in developing AI and cloud infrastructure in Indonesia. The initiative aims to bolster the country's digital transformation efforts, with the establishment of data centers and partnerships to drive innovation across various sectors, marking a significant step in regional tech advancement." [172]
Change to $1.7 billion not $17 billion. The source says its $1.7 billion. IcarusVI (talk) 17:42, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia articles that use American English
- Wikipedia former featured articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- Old requests for peer review
- Wikipedia In the news articles
- B-Class vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia vital articles in Society and social sciences
- B-Class level-4 vital articles
- Wikipedia level-4 vital articles in Society and social sciences
- B-Class vital articles in Society and social sciences
- WikiProject Artificial Intelligence articles
- B-Class Microsoft articles
- Top-importance Microsoft articles
- B-Class Microsoft Windows articles
- Top-importance Microsoft Windows articles
- WikiProject Microsoft Windows articles
- WikiProject Microsoft articles
- B-Class Computing articles
- Top-importance Computing articles
- B-Class software articles
- Top-importance software articles
- B-Class software articles of Top-importance
- All Software articles
- All Computing articles
- B-Class Internet articles
- Mid-importance Internet articles
- WikiProject Internet articles
- B-Class Robotics articles
- Mid-importance Robotics articles
- WikiProject Robotics articles
- B-Class Technology articles
- WikiProject Technology articles
- B-Class company articles
- Top-importance company articles
- WikiProject Companies articles
- B-Class organization articles
- Low-importance organization articles
- WikiProject Organizations articles
- B-Class Brands articles
- Top-importance Brands articles
- WikiProject Brands articles
- B-Class United States articles
- Mid-importance United States articles
- B-Class United States articles of Mid-importance
- B-Class New Mexico articles
- High-importance New Mexico articles
- WikiProject New Mexico articles
- New Mexico articles with to-do lists
- B-Class Washington articles
- High-importance Washington articles
- WikiProject Washington articles
- Washington articles with to-do lists
- B-Class Seattle articles
- Top-importance Seattle articles
- WikiProject Seattle articles
- Seattle articles with to-do lists
- WikiProject United States articles
- B-Class video game articles
- High-importance video game articles
- WikiProject Video games articles
- Wikipedia semi-protected edit requests