Talk:Do Not Track
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Do Not Track article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 3 months  |
 | Global Privacy Control was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 10 January 2021 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Do Not Track. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Merger proposal
[edit]Two very similar articles about this same topic have been created recently. I believe we should merge them since the topic is basically identical. This page currently has more content, so probably makes sense as the destination, though I think ultimately the article should end up at Do Not Track rather than specifying "header" in the title. Npdoty (talk) 07:09, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- The topics are very close. This article, however, could be used to list the various historical proposals (such as several during the tech bubble)...where as the X-Do-Not-Track should really focus on that header, and the history of that header.Smallman12q (talk) 13:13, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, there are a lot of proposals that have fallen under the name should be a single article to cover all of them. I think the header would be a good section in that broader article, since it's related and will often be referred to by the name "Do Not Track". Recent versions of the header are using "DNT" rather than "X-Do-Not-Track" anyway and that could continue to change while the popular name will stay the same. Npdoty (talk) 03:33, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- I agree with that. I think, that it is important to have one article focussing on all new aspects of this dnt-feature.--Teepoet (talk) 22:21, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
Agree. I think there should be only one article as well. Xionbox₪ 06:04, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
- I agree with that. I think, that it is important to have one article focussing on all new aspects of this dnt-feature.--Teepoet (talk) 22:21, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, there are a lot of proposals that have fallen under the name should be a single article to cover all of them. I think the header would be a good section in that broader article, since it's related and will often be referred to by the name "Do Not Track". Recent versions of the header are using "DNT" rather than "X-Do-Not-Track" anyway and that could continue to change while the popular name will stay the same. Npdoty (talk) 03:33, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
- Agree I think that only one article for this feature deserves to exist. --kongr43gpenTalk 11:16, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Update: There's a new related article that's more policy-focused: Do Not Track Policy. I propose we merge these two articles at Do Not Track. Npdoty (talk) 02:14, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
Capitalisation
[edit]The references use title case, and the header DNT is code, so I put the name in the lead to the same as the article title, and put code round the DNT etc. Widefox; talk 13:18, 31 October 2012 (UTC) ..and put a html comment in the article that, we may consider this as a title case article name (an exception) to the naming guideline. Widefox; talk 12:28, 1 November 2012 (UTC)