Talk:Comparison of IRC clients

Broken table
The table under "Release history" has an error I can't figure out. It's pretty visible. Would someone better versed in this take a look? Thanks. Jessicapierce (talk) 17:27, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * (Resolved.) Jessicapierce (talk) 17:49, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Comparison of Internet Relay Chat clients. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110831124745/http://www.irc-junkie.org/2010-02-03/limechat-for-the-mac-releases-version-1-5/ to http://www.irc-junkie.org/2010-02-03/limechat-for-the-mac-releases-version-1-5/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090912170438/http://wiki.flashtux.org/wiki/WeeChat_cygwin to http://wiki.flashtux.org/wiki/WeeChat_cygwin
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090507061510/http://en.ntalk.de/Nettalk/en/index.php?page=Download to http://en.ntalk.de/Nettalk/en/index.php?page=Download
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110728124548/http://www.reactos.org/compat/?show=entry&id=285 to http://www.reactos.org/compat/?show=entry&id=285

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:39, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Linking to project-space in an article (plus external link)
Hello,

It seems strange to be linking to Verifiability in the lead of this article; therefore, I'm going to remove that link. There's also a link to someone's personal website in the list – especially considering no other item in the list has an external link, I'm going to remove that too. Please let me know if you object to either of these changes here. Thanks, DesertPipeline (talk) 11:58, 24 May 2021 (UTC)

xdcc in ircii
ircii had the original xdcc script authored by some idiot whose name slips me 158.59.127.130 (talk) 20:03, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Adiirc irc-client missing from the page
Adiirc irc-client is missing from the page, here's the homepage of the client: https://www.adiirc.com/. Earg (talk) 22:55, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Adiirc is not missing, it fails the selection criteria for inclusion. For starters, it has no own article on the English-language Wikipedia. Without such article, it can not be included. Sorry. The Banner  talk 23:23, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Removals by Pppery
User:Pppery Could you please explain why you are massively removing content without prior discussion? Wikipedia is not a top site. If a given client went unmaintained, but was originally meeting the notability criterion, it should be moved to a separate section perhaps. -bkil (talk) 18:05, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * WP:BOLD? Prior discussion is not required to remove content. And nothing was originally meeting the notability criterion - notability is not temporary so something that is not notable now never was. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * This is a list of notable packages, as defined in having its own article on the English language Wikipedia. I see no reason to object against the removals by Pppery. The Banner  talk 18:50, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Let's just start with a concrete question. "HydraIRC" is mentioned in the banner as an acceptable inclusion. Why was it deleted then? -bkil (talk) 19:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Because I didn't see the banner before making my removal and instead independently came up with The Banner's criteria of requiring a standalone article. That banner is a decade old and I'm not sure of the degree it reflects consensus in 2024, if it ever did. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

You talked about notability as the rationale behind your removals, while the banner elaborates: "IRC clients added to this list must either have their own article, in which notability is established, or they must be verifiable using independent reliable sources which discuss the client. In addition to an optional primary source (the author), the client must be supported by either two "passable" independent reliable sources which discuss the client in a few paragraphs, or one "excellent" source which discusses it extensively. These inclusion criteria are the result of long, painful discussion; see the Talk archives, above. Only independent verifiability is required for this list, not general notability(required for article topics)." So, could you reconsider now and revert these changes, after reading through the banner and consensus formed on past discussions as per the archived talk pages? -bkil (talk) 14:29, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * No, because I am not bound by discussions over a decade old and I think that decision was wrong. And consider the more recent discussion at WP:Articles for deletion/Comparison of mobile IRC clients. I think we've clearly reached the point where neither of us is going to convince the other of us of their position so further discussion is pointless. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:25, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * This one, I guess: Articles for deletion/Comparison of mobile Internet Relay Chat clients (3rd nomination)?
 * And adding each and every package, will make it fall foul of WP:NOTDIRECTORY. As long as nobody feels the need to write an article about a package, you can not judge its notability properly. The Banner  talk 16:20, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's the link I meant to use. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC)