Jump to content

Talk:Internet

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 67.160.196.6 (talk) at 16:23, 19 April 2018 (→‎Category "Public Service" ? Media ?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Former featured article candidateInternet is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
In the newsOn this day...Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 12, 2001Featured article candidateNot promoted
June 2, 2008Peer reviewNot reviewed
September 5, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
In the news A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on January 23, 2009.
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on January 1, 2005.
Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive This article was on the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive for the week of May 16, 2007.
Current status: Former featured article candidate

Template:Outline of knowledge coverage

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Meganschuessler (article contribs).

Historically Incorrect Article

The article states that the internet’s origins lay with the United States but any student of history knows this is not true, that in fact there were three on-going attempts to create networks, those were (chronologically listed) NPL, Cyclades and Arpanet, so my question is why does the article promote a false history? DNA Cowboy (talk) 09:23, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading and A Throwaway Description of the World Wide Web

I am actually astonished at such wording, the essential dismissal of TBL’s work that has been described as just ‘a collection of web documents and services’ is factually wrong and worse, has been allowed to remain central to the article and any attempt to rectify that misleading description prevented by the protected nature of the article. No mention of the fact that the web is the device by which most internet services connect and the method by which most people interact with the internet, it is almost as though an attempt has been made to reduce the impact of the Web in favour of the Internet. DNA Cowboy (talk) 08:54, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Internet vs The Internet

Should this be "Internet or "The Internet"? I feel like "The Internet" is better because it is normally used in reference, like "The Internet here is really good" or "The Internet is used around the world." Which is better, or should I WP:BEBOLD and do it?TheGoldenParadox (talk) 20:40, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This has come up before. Wwwhatsup (talk) 22:13, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I am talking about the name of the article itself. In the discussion, the final consensus was that "The Internet" was better. Would it be better as a page title? TheGoldenParadox (talk) 02:41, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. Because we don't use "The" in page titles unless the "The" is actually part of the name of the subject of the article. Please read up on definite and indefinite articles. -Coolcaesar (talk) 04:32, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Coolcaesar is probably correct on this. Look at other articles, like Earth. When speaking we say "the Earth" but encyclopedia articles dispense with "the" in titles as unnecessary. Majoreditor (talk) 06:09, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It should be the internet Ayoyonetizen (talk) 16:36, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

INTERNET

A means of connecting a computer to any other computer anywhere in the world via dedicated routers and servers.Internet is a inter-connection of multiple network.Biolizzy (talk) 13:44, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 31 May 2017, NTIA no longer has a say in IANA-matters

Change the following since it is no longer true: The National Telecommunications and Information Administration, an agency of the United States Department of Commerce, continues to have final approval over changes to the DNS root zone.[1][2][3] Suggested new formulation: The National Telecommunications and Information Administration, an agency of the United States Department of Commerce, had final approval over changes to the DNS root zone until the IANA stewardship transition on the 1st of October 2016.[4][5][6]

NTIA-source : https://www.ntia.doc.gov/press-release/2016/statement-assistant-secretary-strickling-iana-functions-contract Flindeberg (talk) 11:45, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Packard, Ashley (2010). Digital Media Law. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 65. ISBN 978-1-4051-8169-3.
  2. ^ "Bush administration annexes internet", Kieren McCarthy, The Register, 1 July 2005
  3. ^ Mueller, Milton L. (2010). Networks and States: The Global Politics of Internet Governance. MIT Press. p. 61. ISBN 978-0-262-01459-5.
  4. ^ Packard, Ashley (2010). Digital Media Law. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 65. ISBN 978-1-4051-8169-3.
  5. ^ "Bush administration annexes internet", Kieren McCarthy, The Register, 1 July 2005
  6. ^ Mueller, Milton L. (2010). Networks and States: The Global Politics of Internet Governance. MIT Press. p. 61. ISBN 978-0-262-01459-5.

Done EnticingCanine (talk) 20:07, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Internet. 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:

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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:03, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 June 2017

Please change "The Internet is the global system of interconnected computer networks that use the Internet protocol suite (TCP/IP) to link devices worldwide." to "The Internet is the global system of interconnected computer networks that use a Internet protocol suite to link devices worldwide." because if a Postal Network is original Internet (physical transportation network of networks) and if it is digitized connecting Digital Mailboxes(devices like WI-FI) worldwide using different protocol like say IPsec, it still needs to fall under Internet category. Bkammela (talk) 16:49, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done for now: IPsec is a development of original IP so IPSec connected devices are still covered by the definition. Changing the article from "the" to "an" does not change substance of the definition. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 20:54, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Overarching"?

In the final, 4th paragraph of the lead, should "overreaching definitions of the two principal name spaces" instead read "overarching"? Nihil novi (talk) 21:16, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Internet. 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:

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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:23, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 15 July 2017

Ahmedrza677 (talk) 11:34, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Izno (talk) 14:08, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lead edits

@Power~enwiki: With respect to these changes, I appreciate the initiative to edit down the Internet lead. Did you check to see if any of the material you deleted was potentially useful to Internet § History, History of the Internet or History of the World Wide Web? ~Kvng (talk) 17:53, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fairly sure everything is in Internet § History. I didn't check the other two pages. Power~enwiki (talk) 21:21, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First use of the term 'Internet'

Vintage S-1000 Portable AM Radio - 'Internet' Brand Transistor Radio

1970 Transistor Radio. First verifiable commercial use of the term 'Internet' I can date with photos of my 9th birthday. (Born 1961) I had the first 'internet'. I coveted this radio in a shop in 1970 but I remember it for sale at least six months earlier, because I had to save up for it. Internet sold several other radios under the 'Internet' brand. Date 1970 certainly, 1969 very possibly.

Links: http://www.radiomuseum.org/r/unknown_internet_s_1000.html

https://markhillpublishing.com/the-internet-transistor-radio/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by SameTimeSameChannel (talk • contribs) 13:22, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Many sources cite 4-5 years later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SameTimeSameChannel (talk • contribs) 13:19, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

https://cdn.ddweb.pro/900club/images/wheels/scaled/InternetTransistor.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by SameTimeSameChannel (talk • contribs) 13:15, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 3 August 2017

The current version is vandalized. Remove the following phrase: "depression/suicidal thought-inducing" Yizhizhai (talk) 19:59, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 20:30, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ruggedness

The Internet was originally designed to be a rugged intercommunication protocole in case of excessive radiation (microwave, other).

It should be obvious that the amount of excess Microsoft and Bank beautifying protocoles have made it so that that ruggedness is no longer there and so gone, that it is no longer possible to maintain nor have effective communication on any line that might have excess static.

IE: It is not possible to contact your service provider effectively, the amount of Mister Ille propaganda and fast clitch prone beautifying html having made that impossible on any line with some static.

It is not possible to contact your ban effectively, the amount of Executive Ille propaganda and fast clitch prone beautifying bank html having made that impossible on any line with some static.

Used to be that it was said that it takes the beaurocracy to really muck up a good thing. I suppose that in this day and age, that implies that those executives that banks have, including those positions that a service provider would have, would all have gone to those whom needed a landing position from a beaurocratic position, for not much more then having accepted the bribe to move 'people' into choosing individuals whom allowed that direction to be taken.

I see no overal statements to that effect in this Wiki page. Is that on purpose, or plain downright 'three monkeys' oversight?

Thank you for rectifying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 186.91.33.30 (talk) 22:50, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

Please delete all categories except "Internet".

The categories included here are almost - but not exactly - the same as those for "Category Internet" page. There's no obvious reason for users to have to work with two lists and there is more information to found on the Category:Internet page (subcategories for example).

Thanks 67.160.196.6 (talk) 21:03, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A majority of the world's population now uses the Internet

World Internet Users Statistics and 2017 World Population Stats

I feel this should be included and the article, and replace those predictions (such as 44% use by 2020).--RM (Be my friend) 20:04, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 30 August 2017

At Infrastructure, under the Routing and service tiers subheading, the section starts with Internet service providers. It then goes on to reference ISP without specifying that the acronym refers to internet service providers. Please add (ISP) after the words Internet service providers. Momalle313 (talk) 20:34, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Already done in "History" section. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 22:35, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 20 September 2017

"entangled into" to "entangled in" . Do the parts maintain their state or do they become something else that cannot be separated later? 2605:E000:9161:A500:C5B3:12E7:7862:8F3A (talk) 17:09, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: Mention your changes in an x to y format and specify which section of the article you are talking about SparklingPessimist Scream at me! 18:02, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"entangled into" to "entangled in" . you cannot miss it--only one mention. do string search to confirm.2605:E000:9161:A500:C5B3:12E7:7862:8F3A (talk) 21:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: It's part of a quote. — nihlus kryik  (talk) 21:13, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Internet vs internet (decapitalization)

The trend toward decapitalization of the term has hit top-flight style guides already including the AP[1], so it seems that the Terminology section of this article is way out of date. Perhaps it is time it was flagged for a rewrite. I'm still something of a Wikipedia editing newb, so I think the editing is best left up to another. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tastybrain (talk • contribs) 11:23, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Terminology section seems fine to me. Despite the AP standards, there are some experts who still favor the capitalization when it is referring to the proper noun, and lowercase when referring to a generic collection of networks. I personally subscribe to this view as well. Regardless of what version becomes the official standard, the Terminology section still provides valuable information about the term. Jserio2 (talk) 13:47, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
A linked article actually makes a case (at least for 2015 when it was writen) for capitlization, not against it, "...the word internet is uppercase in virtually every reference book on the English language: dictionaries, encyclopedias, the Chicago Manual of Style, even Wikipedia." The rest of the piece is advocacy. Capitalization of the term on WP is currently mixed (Jserio2's style is just one reason for this). This has been discussed a lot both on WP and elsewhere and until a strong consensus emerges, I don't think a campaign to "correct" these inconsistencies would be productive. Arguing about these grammar details never feels productive to me. Maybe that's just me. When we're past the point of feeling inclined to argue about it, that's when the changes can be made. ~Kvng (talk) 16:08, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.poynter.org/news/ap-style-alert-dont-capitalize-internet-and-web-anymore

Semi-protected edit request on 10 November 2017

The provided article is good but small, i would like to add more to this topic so that people don't have to search for necessary details in the DETAILED article, i'll add the important points which might take like 100-120 words and will be only necessary facts and no round-round para's, please help me out to help others out. Warm Regards: Dev Contact me at dls026.dn@gmail.com Devil260 (talk) 20:48, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done We don't contact people on email or wherever else not related to Wikipedia. If what you want add is relevant and verifiable then write it here that is the purpose of this page, then omebody will add it.  — Ammarpad (talk) 21:10, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Internet. 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:

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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:49, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested section on history: Precursors and parallel projects

One of the precursors to the modern Internet is PLATO (computer system), which started in 1960. PLATO should really be worth a mention, as this computer system pioneered the many use-case concepts, such as e-mail and chat. In many respects, PLATO preceded ARPANET (later The Internet) in terms of deployment, and FidoNet (1984) preceded The Internet in availability. -Mardus /talk 17:42, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why doesn't the article say that it's a website

I'm not sure why the article leaves out that the internet is a website. It seems pretty important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.26.87.187 (talk) 09:35, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 7 February 2018

Please fix the broken link in citation #85. The correct URL is located here: http://www.toptenreviews.com/internet-pornography-statistics/ -- Thank you! 207.239.64.196 (talk) 19:45, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The current page you mention has a lot less detail than the previous one, which has an archive. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 01:06, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done: the link is not broken because an archive link is available. I concur with Anon126 in that the current page is a lot less detailed than the previous one. Alternatively, the new link can be added as an additional reference. feminist (talk) 13:25, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Real question?

Are there in Internet the "CODE" to go at more "Web-pages"? Can CODE be used as "normal words" in Internet to research with browser? (Is there a Law about this question?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.38.65.148 (talk) 15:59, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 12 April 2018

Please remove {{Too long|date=March 2018}} at line 2 as the article is not that long, compared to other high-profile pages. It has already been appropriately split into sub-articles, so this template is not of much use. Besides, less than 1 percent of our readers edit, so why bother them with templates they don't understand and clog up the article? This would be a bit of a WP:BOLD edit, but still, I think it would make the article better. Thank you. 172.56.5.164 (talk) 13:30, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done mainly because the tag was a drive-by tag, i.e., the user that added it didn't discuss it here on the talk page and it was also that user's only contribution to this article. I would not object to the tag being re-added if accompanied by a proper discussion here on the talk page. —KuyaBriBriTalk 13:44, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category "Public Service" ? "Media" ?

Firemen, Police, ... "Provided by the government". If the Internet is not a public service that category should be deleted.

The internet is a transport scheme; it neither adds, deletes nor modifies items transmitted. Hence it has zero impact on media and those categories should be deleted. 67.160.196.6 (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Internet&oldid=837245281"