Talk:Internet of things

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Applications Section[edit]

The majority of this section's content here seems to be just links to commercial applications, which resembles advertising. A simplistic comparison would be to list Ford, Toyota, Mercedes etc... on the Cars page. Granted, the Internet of Things concept is much newer, but does anybody object to removing the content that is linked to commercial applications? The wouldn't apply to the UBC paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeminiDrive (talkcontribs) 5 jun 2013 02:17‎ (UTC)

Spelling should be lower case[edit]

Hi, internet of things is not a proper noun and should, therefore, be lower-cased. --EnOreg (talk) 15:26, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

After a week with no objections I fixed it. EnOreg (talk) 07:23, 17 May 2016 (UTC)
The next step will be to move the article to the correct spelling. To this end, I've nominated the current redirect at internet of things for deletion. --EnOreg (talk) 11:49, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Move completed. --EnOreg (talk) 12:28, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Internet is a proper noun however, so it's normal when included in a larger noun to keep that part upper case. Done. I think it does need looking at per WP:COMMONNAME what the title is, checking against MOS as it is most commonly stylised in uppercase, which we need to at least say as such in the lede. (not yet done). Widefox; talk 10:25, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
User:MrOllie can you part revert [1] as at least "Internet" needs to be capital. I've only just fixed that, but your undo reverts without giving a reason (reason was for IP editor). User:Dawkeye please use this talk section as we're flipping between upper and lowercase, so would be worth reaching consensus here (see above). Widefox; talk 11:12, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
From the Merriam-Webster dictionary: "Note: In U.S. publications, the capitalized form Internet continues to be more common than internet, although the lowercase form is rapidly gaining more widespread use. In British publications, internet is now the more common form." [2]
WP:CAPITALIZATION says to follow normal spelling rules, not community preferences. Therefore, things is clearly lower case. --EnOreg (talk) 11:31, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Your reasoning for capitalizing internet seems flawed here, as the internet of things and the internet are separate and distinct concepts (although obviously the former cannot exist without the latter). The consideration in this case should be "is 'internet of things' a proper noun?" rather than whether internet in isolation is a proper noun. I would argue it should be handled in the same way that one would handle writing other technologies like car phone, smartphone or tablet computer. --ClacTom (talk) 12:07, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
How is 'Internet of Things' not a proper noun? There is only one of it, as stated by this very article: "The Internet of Things (IoT) is the network of physical devices, vehicles, [...]" 2001:638:708:303:AA:6127:17E5:4E57 (talk) 10:25, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

The letter "t" for the "Internet of things" tittle should be edited in capital letter. Immeasurable radiance (talk) 07:43, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

At present we have "Internet of things", "internet of things" and "Internet of Things" all in play in the article. We need to choose one of these and apply it consistently. I propose we find Internet of Things to be a proper noun because it probably is and because this lets us avoid the question of whether internet should be capitalized. ~Kvng (talk) 15:03, 11 August 2018 (UTC)
@Kvng: As an interim measure, all spellings should be standardised as "Internet of things" as it is how the article title is styled. Afterwards, a WP:RM could be opened. TeraTIX 23:21, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
@Teratix: unless a specific exception is made, the system automatically capitalizes the first letter of titles so "Internet of things" and "internet of things" would both be consistent with the title. ~Kvng (talk) 23:46, 16 October 2018 (UTC)
@Kvng: I don't mind either 'Internet' or 'internet' as long as it's internally consistent. TeraTIX 02:15, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
@Teratix: go ahead and make a decision and make some edits. Consistency would definitely be an uncontroversial improvement. I personally would try to sort out whether IoT is a proper noun first. Actually I'm often wrong about titles so I try to let others sort it out and then follow along. ~Kvng (talk) 14:10, 17 October 2018 (UTC)


This article is comprehensive and informative but a bit too long. Wonder if we can shorten it and move the more bulky parts to another article? Nice figures. I saw the mentioning of specific companies and products such as "Nest" and GE. Maybe another page on "Industry players and solutions in IoT" would be attractive to provide a more comprehensive spread of industries work? Abr1993 (talk) 19:39, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

The article is definitely too long, but I'm confused about your suggestions. Specific examples are barely mentioned and are well-integrated into the article, so how would this reduce the length? Further, "players" and "solutions" are both WP:BUZZWORDS. This article and topic already attract disproportionate quantities of spam, so any article about companies in the industry would need very strict inclusion criteria provided by reliable, independent sources to avoid becoming a spam-hole. You may find WP:SPINOFF helpful. Grayfell (talk) 20:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
IOT is really just the current hype word that covers what is really about 100 technologies and topics. And a word that encompasses half the world and which everybody wants to associate themselves with. Good luck in trimming this. If I were starting over, it would probably describe the common uses/ meanings of the term, have a little bit on the dozen technologies closely identified with it. And not a whole lot else. First to go would be listings of uses/ application. A good guide would be an article on something that is similarly ubiquitous and broad like the Internet. North8000 (talk) 22:02, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Intro seems industry-written[edit]

Currently (06-Oct-18) the first paragraph in the intro describes the concept of the IoT, and ends by stating that the IoT ″[will result] in efficiency improvements, economic benefits, and reduced human exertions.″ There is no allowance for the inevitable law of unintended consequences. The IoT-related corporations are making "pie-in-the-sky" prophecies. I came here to find out what the acronym "IoT" stands for & so, can't comment on the rest of the article. Just saying the intro could use some qualifiers like: "The promoters of the IoT predict that it will result in in efficiency improvements, economic benefits, and reduced human exertion. Aimzzz (talk) 12:57, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

That was pretty ugly. I have moved this material to the body for now. ~Kvng (talk) 14:53, 9 October 2018 (UTC)


The MIT device to open the computer room door and call the elevator was operational in 1979, so predates the CMU coke machine. Lars Brinkhoff (talk) 09:22, 5 November 2018 (UTC)


While adding some information in the Architecture subsection of the Trends and characteristics section[1], I found that the bulk of the info was copy-pasted from this source (Traukina et al.). I did some editing to change the wordings and referenced the entries accordingly. However, I would like to note that the case could be the same in other parts of this article. I have not checked the entirety of this article because it is quite extensive and also I do not have access to the references used. Perhaps those who do could help in this area. Thanks. Darwin Naz (talk) 22:35, 21 November 2018 (UTC)