Talk:Web browser

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

WikiProject Internet (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Computing / Software (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Software (marked as High-importance).
 

Semi-protected edit request on 11 July 2017[edit]

2600:1011:B16D:6C65:10E1:7651:B721:1BAD (talk) 04:01, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
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. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 04:07, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Offline browsing[edit]

I come to this article to find out something on "offline browsing", search for the string "offline", make no hit. Is that "normal" ? See also Special:WhatLinksHere/Offline_browsing --Jerome Potts (talk) 02:54, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Browser versus search engine[edit]

It's not clear to me from the article what the differences are between a web browser and a search engine. Would it be possible / relevant to include some information about this for dummies like me? JezGrove (talk) 18:55, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Don't feel so bad, I've had to explain the difference a number of times over the years. I rewrote the article lead with an explanation and 2 refs, including a video showing that many other people share your confusion. Hopefully this will help clarify it. -Pmffl (talk) 03:11, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

This may be one of the least adequate articles on an important topic in Wikipedia[edit]

Not only does it not clearly identify what a web browser is, it leaves out major features of all web browsers that the user needs to be aware of.

For example I just made the most minor changes to the lead, and mention cookies, which are managed by browsers and routinely used by companies to track people across the web, and they've been deleted twice in a row. There's HUGE gaps in this article!!!! GliderMaven (talk) 17:52, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Disagree. It clearly identifies what a browser is in the simplest way possible: "a software application for accessing information on the World Wide Web." That's what a browser is in a nutshell.
As I stated in the edit commit reverting your change, you can add Cookies to the Function section. That's where they belong in this article. -Pmffl (talk) 17:54, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not about simply identifying things in the simplest way possible, it's about covering things, in depth. GliderMaven (talk) 18:18, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Just added a statement about cookies in Function. -Pmffl (talk) 18:04, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
I don't think you understand. That is completely, ridiculously, incredibly inadequate. What is a cookie, what is it for, how do browser's maintain, obtain and use them, what are the privacy implications of them? All of these should be addressed in this article, not necessarily in incredible depth, there is an article about them, but there's literally nothing. GliderMaven (talk) 18:16, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
And the whole article is like that. It's supposed to cover what they do, AND how they work, not which buttons you press. The article should probably be at least twice as long, and possibly four times as long. GliderMaven (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
The point of a wiki is that subjects can be covered in whatever depth is needed (which will be vary widely by person) simply by following wikilinks. Large sections of text should not be copied between articles; that just makes maintenance more difficult and bloats articles, making it more difficult to find the unique content. -LiberatorG (talk) 18:35, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
There's no such rule, and when an article is as terrible as this one, any content at all is an improvement. Articles inevitably overlap anyway. So the problem never goes away. Simply linking to other articles is almost never adequate. You ALWAYS have to summarise the material from the other article to some extent. GliderMaven (talk) 18:49, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Completely disagree with your opinions here. No, this is an article that should be accessible to a general, non-technical audience. Going "in depth" will convolute it. That's what hyperlinks to other articles are for. -Pmffl (talk) 18:33, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Most people don't even know what a cookie is, but it's a major feature of a web browser, and there have been laws that have been passed in the EU to control them. Can I safely assume that you don't even know what a cookie is, but have taken it upon yourself to revert all changes that you know nothing about? Because that seems to be what you're doing. GliderMaven (talk) 18:43, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
Cut the condescending tone. I do agree that cookies and their privacy implications are worth adding, so I just did so in a new sub-section. -Pmffl (talk) 18:47, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
What about cacheing? What about the HTTP protocol, and what about that versus HTTPS? What about certificates? I've barely spent five minutes thinking about it. There's all kinds of things that are user visible, and important, but completely not mentioned. You thought that the cookie stuff was bloated, but that's only because there's nothing else that's covered properly in the article. GliderMaven (talk) 18:55, 19 February 2019 (UTC)