Talk:RSS (disambiguation)

The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

for Wikipedia RSS feeds see Wikipedia:Syndication

_

On 17 September 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to RSS. The result of the discussion was not moved.

interwikiconflict

See:
- Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Policy on same articles in different languages
- Wikipedia:Template:Interwikiconflict
Best regards Gangleri | Th | T 01:35, 2005 Mar 18 (UTC)

RSS in Wikipedia

For Wikipedia RSS feeds see Wikipedia:Syndication or meta:Syndication_feeds

I've removed the link somebody added to Wikipedia:Syndication per the avoid self-references policy. Basically, if you were to look at an encyclopedia article about RSS (in print, or on another website), you wouldn't expect that to get a prominent mention, so you shouldn't expect it here. There may be some argument for mentioning that link somewhere, perhaps using the "selfref" template, I think this disambiguation page would be too prominent a position anyway. Of course, anyone is entitled to disagree, so I thought I'd state my view here. - IMSoP 15:43, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. If you look to the WP:Syndication page "What links here", you see this policy is limited. Also for some users it might be a helpful navigation. I added it back.--ThomasK 18:25, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Looking at Special:Whatlinkshere/Wikipedia:Syndication in no sense proves that the "policy is limited" - it merely proves that the policy is badly enforced! The argument that "for some users it might be a helpful navigation" is a good one, but in my view (and according to the current text of Wikipedia:Avoid self-references) it is overridden by the fact that a Wikipedia article is intended to be a section of content of an encyclopedia, not a part of the project that is creating that encyclopedia. If you take this article (or the article "Web syndication", or any other) out of the context of this website, it should still be appropriate as an encyclopedia article; a link to Wikipedia:Syndication doesn't make sense in any other context than this website, so is not appropriate.

I'm going to remove the link from here, and the other articles in that whatlinkshere list, and point people to this discussion if they disagree. - IMSoP 12:39, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

~~wikipedia:syndication should stay~~, essentially disambiguation. I completely agree with ThomasK. One of the most important ways to interact with wikipedia is syndication feeds from wikipedia. I have had a difficult time myself attempting to find, and eventually implement additional feeds originating here. These would include 'feeds of personal watchlists', but really, feeds of everything. A comment in my talk page was the only reason i found the wikipedia:syndication page initially. WP:RSS should be top of the list.. in the sidebar even. Indeed -- Here 05:14, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Another week, makes a huge difference ;) I think WP:ASR easily applies here, and the link to wikipedia:syndication should be removed. It should remain here on the talk page. ∴ here…♠ 15:28, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Atom

I don't see how RSS can possibly mean "Atom." That's like saying that Windows might mean Macintosh. Jsnell 00:36, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The link to Atom was originally included in a break-down of the different file formats referred to as "RSS". I personally think that break-down should be reinstated, so as not to "disambiguate" to just another disambiguation list, but in the meantime I've fixed the reference to Atom to make sense in the current context. - IMSoP 12:53, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh

I have changed the refence from "an extreme right wing..." to "a right wing...", because the earlier statement was POV. --Andy123 11:51, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed it back to "a right-wing Indian Hindu organization". This is how the B.B.C. refers to this group.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2831337.stm

Evox777 (talk) 17:56, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Receive Side Scaling

I've suggested a couple of times that there should be an entry to the networking interpretation of RSS. RSS is important to disambiguate because a simple Google search result in more than 2 billion hits.

RSS is a new technology buzzword in high performance networking. The best and most concise explanation of network RSS I know is on the Microsoft site (they standardized the process). A Wikipedia article on the subject would be basically saying the same thing, (though could add more detail such as history, but I don't know it), hence, I posted a link. It's just as important as many of the 802.3 minor standards.

Drdr6 (talk) 18:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Primary topic

This is not an official start of a primary topic discussion, but perhaps in lieu of one I thought I'd share the page view comparison of RSS and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, which is actually quite interesting: [1]. The political party has been quite steady in the 50k to 100k monthly range for years, with a ~~small~~ uptick in recent months. RSS has sometimes been in that same range, but for the past year was consistently above 500k, and then a couple months ago suddenly plummeted 90% to 50k. Seems really hard to predict where those are going to go. My 2 cents: a solid argument could be made for there being no primary topic, but I think there's virtually no chance of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh becoming primary, even with long-term significance taken into account. -- Fyrael (talk) 15:26, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree there is no primary topic - the maths one also gets high views. I don't agree your analysis, btw, the Indian paramilitary group (not a party) sees huge spikes when they are in the news at the daily/weekly level. RSS should be moved, & the plain term go here. The RSS graph is certainly rather odd. Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh is btw, as one might expect, almost invariably referred to just as "RSS" in the Indian media, as "NATO" is in the West. Johnbod (talk) 16:27, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there is no longer a clear primary topic – the popularity of and support for RSS web feeds has declined enormously since the page was created in 2002, as RSS#Current_usage details. I'd suggest moving RSS (disambiguation) to RSS, and RSS to RSS (web feed). The former would require an admin, I think. Qwfp (talk) 19:09, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Um, ok, I wasn't really providing analysis so much as just describing what's on the graph in case someone else came along and didn't bother to click the link. At any rate, I would probably be WP:BOLD and move the DAB page to the base name, but I think there will be technical restrictions so I have to make a request, which will likely result in a move discussion anyway. I guess we'll see. -- Fyrael (talk) 19:33, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I hadn't noticed Qwfp's response before mine. -- Fyrael (talk) 19:35, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Also the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, as part father-movement to the BJP, has no doubt got much higher views since Modi came to power. Johnbod (talk) 20:33, 10 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:RSS which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 20:16, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]