Talk:Threema

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Software: Computing C‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software 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.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware articles
C	This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Apps C‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apps, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of apps 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.AppsWikipedia:WikiProject AppsTemplate:WikiProject Appsapps articles

C

This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Contribute to the project:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Good article nominations : Improve Application software, Facebook and Instagram to good article status
Stubs : Category:Mobile game stubs, Category:Stub-Class apps articles

PSW Group and Connect

The reception section mentions both these sources, but I am not sure whether they meet Wikipedia's guidelines on notability/reliability. Connect seems to be fairly relevant as a magazine (de:Connect (Zeitschrift)), but I am not sure about the other one. Connect only lists Threema as the jury's choice. I am inclined to remove both as they do not add much substance to the section.–Totie (talk) 03:00, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PSW has been mentioned in Stiftung Warentest and has now been established for a few years, so I think it can stay. The other source did seem to be more of a random blog and has now been removed. NeorxenoSwang (talk) 18:53, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Russian Register of organizers of information dissemination

I wonder if this is even relevant, since Threema is not based in Russia. Once the law becomes effective in 2018 they might be blocked, but until then the registry entry has no effect. 46.127.132.187 (talk) 15:26, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

EFF's evaluation on Threema

In the article under reception the Electronic Frontier Foundation's scoreboard from 2015 is cited. Nowadays this scoreboard is labelled as outdated. Recently the EFF even called it "dangerously oversimplified" https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2018/03/secure-messaging-more-secure-mess and even the URL in the references for this scoreboard now redirects to this article where the EFF dissociated themselves from the scoreboard. Because of this I think the paragraph on the EFF scoreboard should be removed or at least it should be made clear this is not the opinion of the EFF anymore. 134.100.17.46 (talk) 12:37, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Someone had already made reference to the EFF scorecard being removed; I have emphasised it is archival and have amended the reception to past tense. NeorxenoSwang (talk) 18:54, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Free?

https://threema.ch/en says "Pay once, chat forever." - Slsh (talk) 09:04, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed as of a few days ago NeorxenoSwang (talk) 18:54, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not libre/open-source because no server code available

hi, it seem the server side is proprietary. Has anyone found the confirmation? It would be worth mentioning.

--Tuxayo (talk) 15:44, 31 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]