Talk:Java (programming language)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Former featured articleJava (programming language) 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.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 17, 2005.
On this day... Article milestones
March 23, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
June 24, 2005Featured article reviewKept
July 25, 2006Featured article reviewDemoted
August 8, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
June 15, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on May 23, 2004.
Current status: Former featured article

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment[edit]

Sciences humaines.svg 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): Abharati. Peer reviewers: Abharati.

Above undated message substituted from assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 01:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]


This article has a section on 'editions' (SE, ME, etc). But nothing on the differences between versions. Java 1.7 (and 1.8, though not yet finalized) is in some ways quite a different languages from 1.0. Does anyone think there ought to be a 'Versions' section with brief notes on the main changes (or perhaps just the language changes) in each version? These could include links to information on the relevant topic elsewhere on WP.

Merger proposal (2020)[edit]

I propose to merge Java version history into Java (programming language)#Versions. I see this as the natural follow up to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Java version history which was recently closed as keep. There is important information on Java version history, but the state of reliable sources about the subject remains unclear. Modernponderer helpfully linked to some sources at the deletion discussion, and I believe those sources are an excellent reason to include this information here, but I still don't see the logic in maintaining version history as a separate article. None of the sources provided are about Java version history, they're about modifications to the Java programming language that were made with each new version; precisely the type of information that belongs in the the history section of this article. That's an important distinction that wasn't stressed enough in the deletion discussion. Java version history as it exists now is just too much of a violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY, with far too little notability of the subject itself, to qualify for an individual article, and the series of keep per x votes with little or no explanation following the relisting, don't change that. --PuzzledvegetableIs it teatime already? 16:50, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Vote NO MERGE - only because this is being used as an alternate way to delete the "Java version history" article right after it was voted down. • SbmeirowTalk • 17:33, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"[V]oted down" is too strong. Deletion discussions are supposed to seek WP:CONSENSUS, rather than count votes. The discussion was relisted due to lack of consensus, and nothing changed. Nearly every subsequent edit fell under the category of WP:NOTARG. The discussion, which was closed by a non-sysop, should have been closed as no consensus or else left for a more experienced sysop to close. Ordinarily, this would warrant renomination, but seeing as I don't actually agree with the nom that it warrants deletion, I am seeking consensus about a merger instead. --PuzzledvegetableIs it teatime already? 18:44, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
no merge This article is already long enough. --Salix alba (talk): 21:49, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
no merge Agree, this article is already long enough. peterl (talk) 06:22, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy close as the proposal would be in gross violation of WP:SIZERULE – unless of course this would actually be an end run around the recent deletion discussion as has already been suspected here, with the vast majority of the article in question's content being removed. Modernponderer (talk) 01:43, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
no merge I agree this seems like someone trying to weasel around the earlier deletion being shotdown. *IF* I were to even entertain this idea (and it totally violates several things including WP:SIZERULE), I would rather see it merged in the other direction where the Java language history is merged into the larger Java platform history. Merging the platform history into the language history seems like a good way to subsequently remove the platform history as it would no longer be on topic after the merge and could be removed over time. —Uzume (talk) 14:26, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No merge this is pretty obviously too long to belong on the main page unless the information is shortened greatly, which I think would be a mistake. (talk) 15:59, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If you people are going to merge, kindly merge all contents. As belong to java world, this page is really helpful for us. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 10:39, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Java Programming Language language" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information.svg A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Java Programming Language language. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 15#Java Programming Language language until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 23:17, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

গারি গেম — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:38, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

implementation dependencies[edit]

The lead section says "designed to have as few implementation dependencies as possible". Can we add some clarification as to what this means? Are these implementation dependencies referring to implementation of the language itself (JVM) or programs written in Java? 2600:1702:2BE0:CB80:95B0:AB36:5DEF:1924 (talk) 04:34, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 May 2022[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Pretty much a snowball close for the first option, more opposes than supports for second option and historic oposition to moving on the page concerened points to a consensus against moving. Salix alba (talk): 18:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

– Per WP:PTOPIC. xtools says that Java had 94,580 views in the last 60 days, with Java (programming language) having over roughly eleven times as much views (1,041,585). Rusty4321 talk contributions log 23:29, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose 1st, Support 2nd — and move the disambiguation page (Java (disambiguation)) to the basename. Primary topic swaps are often messy, especially at this magnitude. However, I generally believe there's no primary topic between • the programming language, • the island, and possibly • the coffee — and the safest bet might be to have the disambiguation page at the basename. Paintspot Infez (talk) 01:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose Java programming language move. That owuld only be a PTOPIC to a computer programmer. To a web user, it could mean JavaScript (ECMAscript) instead of JAVA. Even then it would not be the primary topic. Instead it would be either the island, or a generic term for coffee (which the programming language even acknowledges with its cup-of-coffee logo). Instead the disambiguation page should be at the primary location. -- (talk) 02:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • If the dab page is made primary, the island, programming language and coffee should be moved to the top as "may generally refer to" as a top section. -- (talk) 02:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose 1st, Support 2nd, move DAB to base name. No PRIMARY.--Ortizesp (talk) 03:22, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose 1st, support 2nd, move Java (disambiguation)Java. The programming language dominates search results and page views, and has slightly more incoming links. It seems to be the primary topic by usage around the English-speaking world. However, the island remains primary by long-term significance. Where the two criteria disagree, putting the dab at the base name serves our readers best. Even if justified, a new primary topic would break a lot of incoming external links. Certes (talk) 08:51, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: WikiProjects Disambiguation, Indonesia and Software have been notified of this discussion. Certes (talk) 09:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - an island of 130 million people (in itself larger than all but just a handful of whole countries) and 1000s of year history may not be the primary topic? I get that we wikipedians are a bunch of early 21st century computer geeks, but a programming language is rather insignificant and transient in relation to the island of Java. --Merbabu (talk) 09:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose - this is very similar to the attempted argument that Tasmania is not in Australia - it fails to understand the larger picture and context. Java as the location is the primary/first level in historical and other senses, while the programming item might be something in the visual capacity of a particular audience, however this is an online encyclopedia. If it ends up with culturally narrow terms trumping the original name, by the reasoning given so far, then by precedence, a large number of current primary topics might be expected to be usurped by tangential, ephemeral subjects and topics. JarrahTree 09:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - a careful read of the talk page shows this is a cyclical exercise - there have been previous discussions... JarrahTree 09:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose - this has been discussed before. The island is of far greater significance and is more widely known than a computer language. Davidelit (Talk) 10:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - Java programming language was named after Java Coffee which came from the Island Java is home to 147 odd million people. Java the programming language is being dropped from many platforms its not going to sustain the longevity of an Island with over 1000 years of history. Java programing language also contains a hat note to Javanese language the language spoken in Java and for which we have a separate Wikipedia as well. This change has been suggested to death please Wikipedia:Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass.
  • Because many of the previous discussion took place at Talk:Java doesnt change anything. Gnangarra 11:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - this is the... 6th? of these RMs. I will simply quote my favorites from the previous ones:
If anything, admins should ban further RMs of this specific set until either everyone is a Java programmer or the island sinks into the bottom of the ocean. Hard to tell which one will happen first. Juxlos (talk) 11:22, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose 1st, support 2nd, there is no clear primary topic, the island is primary by long-term significance but not usage, the DAB is the best compromise. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:24, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both. Because we are on the web, articles on topics related to computers often get a number of views that might otherwise seem inordinate. (In fact, arguably, this request itself is likely to receive more support on this talk page than it would have if the discussion were taking place on the island's article.) However, the island remains the primary topic. Dekimasuよ! 13:56, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong oppose. The island with its huge population and long history is clearly the primary topic by far. Dan Carkner (talk) 16:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both in spite of the page view ratio. Long-term significance should have preference here; also, for non-geeks, any move would go against WP:ASTONISH. –Austronesier (talk) 19:06, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Add Just curious about the page views, does anyone know what is going on here? –Austronesier (talk) 19:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      Views for C (programming language) track those for Java (pl) very closely. Perhaps they jump when university courses start and stop or switch between home and on-site working due to Covid. I can imagine 100 students each loading the page at home vs. one corporate server caching it for everyone in term time. Certes (talk) 22:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose 1st, support 2nd -- The programming language probably fails long-term significance (depending on how long you measure 'long-term' in the future direction.), but there's no clear primary topic here. Dab page seems best. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 23:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: To those proposing the island is not the primary topic, if hypothetically, the programming language was not called "Java", but "California", what would you suggest is the primary topic? The US State or the computer language? Noting that if it was a country, Java island would be the 8th largest in the world by population (larger than Russia, Mexico, Japan, Germany). It is also the central powerhouse of Indonesia, the fourth largest country in the world. California by comparison would be the 38th largest country. --Merbabu (talk) 23:44, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It's an interesting point to which I can't conjure a convincing answer, so I think I'll strike my above comment. The annual pageviews for California are higher than Java (programming language), but even if they weren't I'd still say California. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 00:54, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for giving consideration and even changing your position. I’m sure we wouldn’t be having this discussion if the name was “California” rather than “Java”. Or “Japan” or even “Dublin”. —Merbabu (talk) 04:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    For better or worse, California takes up a much more prominent place in the global imagination than does Java. Despite its much smaller population, its article gets read by five times as many readers [1] [2]. – Uanfala (talk) 09:52, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It helps that California is in the Anglosphere and Java isn't. Juxlos (talk) 15:56, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    California is not a perfect analogy, but it still works. Alternatively, and in the same vein, I doubt very much we'd be having this debate if the word was "Tokyo", "Dublin", "Fiji", "Tahiti", "Majorca" or "Greenland". --Merbabu (talk) 22:51, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    California is a region (ie. Baja, Alta, Norte, Sur, Norcal, Socal; and Gulf) and a few states. If it were a common name generic name for coffee, it would be a disambiguation page. Just like Victoria is a state and a name, so is a disambiguation page. -- (talk) 03:08, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Victoria the places are all named after Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom. Java has had the name for what, 2500 years? Juxlos (talk) 01:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both - for the various reasons I (and others) suggest above including systematic bias, and long term relevance. --Merbabu (talk) 23:44, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both. per above. 1 million pageviews is becoming irrelevant when we talk about 147 million people, the most populous island in the entire world (more than Russia). We don't move C (programming language) to C, just because it has significantly more views. Bluesatellite (talk) 03:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both. The island is still the primary topic. The programming language was named after the coffee, which in turn was named after the island. JIP | Talk 11:47, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both. Nobody dispute long-term significance of the island. On the other hand, as Dekimasu mentioned computer-related topics tend to have higher page view ratio hence it's clear example of systematic bias. Therefore long-term significance should be preferred on this case. Ckfasdf (talk) 14:47, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both per long term significance. BilledMammal (talk) 05:04, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support 2nd WP:PRIMARYTOPIC lists two criteria. The programming language clearly wins the first. The island arguably wins the second. My read is there is no primary topic at this time and Java should be a disambiguation page. ~Kvng (talk) 13:58, 20 May 2022 (UTC) WP:STICK arguments above are compelling. ~Kvng (talk) 14:02, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both WP:SNOW Java is Java, what else would it be. Are we going to rename apple as apple (fruit)? In ictu oculi (talk) 19:46, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both The term comes from the island name, everything else (slang/type of coffee, programming languages) is derivative. Java without qualifiers should be the island, everything else should be in the Java (specifier) format, which is the current state of things. Fbergo (talk) 15:03, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose both, an island with over a 100 million residents and a long history is the primary topic with lasting relevance. Modern things named after the island or after the coffee named for the island are not close to being as significant, no matter the page views. There is also a systemic bias in that computer search queries are often biased towards computer terms. Pikavoom Talk 06:26, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.