Talk:Google services outages

2020 comment
Should this page be renamed to Google Services Outages? Squid45 (talk) 12:12, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I just did this! -St.nerol (talk) 12:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Move
This page was recently moved from 2020 Google services outages to Google services outages following the AfD discussion. However, the article still only covers the three 2020 outages and makes no mention of Google outages in other years. Shouldn't this article be moved back to the old title until it has been adequately expanded with information regarding Googke's non-2020 outages? InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:24, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * No. The old title still exists as a redirect.  Pushing the title to and fro would be unproductive.  What's needed is more content . Andrew🐉(talk) 09:34, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree with Andrew. I'm not very interested in working on this article myself, but the sources I provided in the AFD can be used to expand this article back as far as 2008. SpinningSpark 10:43, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Of course I realize this article needs to be expanded, but until somebody does that, this article still solely covers the outages in 2020. As a result, the broader title may prove to be confusing or misleading to some readers. InfiniteNexus (talk) 14:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Well put a needs expansion template on it. There are a lot of articles that need this kind of work.  Renaming it is a bad idea and what we now have accords with the discussion at AFD.  Reverting to a specific year is an invitation to create outage articles for 2022, 2019, 2018 etc etc etc.  This is the title for the direction we want the article to develop. SpinningSpark 14:55, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Still don't think this is an ideal solution, but ✅. InfiniteNexus (talk) 15:37, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Well the ideal solution is to actually expand it, but the template you used wasn't ideal either. I've replaced it. SpinningSpark 16:06, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

I am inclined to favor List of Google services outages and reformatting away from sections to a table. This would also cut down a lot of detail currently in the sections, intentionally. As a soft criteria to be included in the new table, there should be at least three references per outage that show the media cared and found this outage notable. Thoughts / objections? SnowFire (talk) 20:26, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Expansion to include more years is the more pressing need for this page rather than converting into a list. I'm certainly not in favour of cutting down its size in its present very limited state.  I think that inclusion criteria based on how much attention it got in the media is a really bad idea per WP:NOTNEWS.  As I suggested at the AFD, criteria similar to those in List of major power outages works for me (though not necessarily those exact numbers). SpinningSpark 22:42, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * The problem is that it's disproportionate coverage. These outages are just barely enough to be entries in a table, but don't really deserve prose sections IMO.  If we wanted a more stringent criteria like the power outages list, then I'd argue all three of the current Google outages should be deleted entirely as not important enough!   That said, I !voted delete in the AFD, so I suppose my biases are clear enough here.   Maybe I'll try a draft page to show what I'm thinking of...  SnowFire (talk) 22:47, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Of course they don't fail those criteria, that's just nonsense. They meet all four of them.  Bullet #1; none of them were planned.  Bullet #2; more than 1,000 users were affected.  Bullet #3; all three lasted for more than an hour.  Bullet #4; more than a million person-hours lost – since Google users are numbered in the millions and #3 has been met, then #4 is also automatically met also. <b style="background:#FAFAD2;color:#C08000">Spinning</b><b style="color:#4840A0">Spark</b> 12:32, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:21, 2 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Team Youtube.jpg

Infobox event
Is this infobox really adding anything to the article? Most of it is inapplicable due to it covering multiple events, and the 'Target' field suggests these were cyberattacks, which no one seems to be claiming. If we strike those parts nothing's left except the image, which could just be included with the relevant article text. Walkersam (talk) 05:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)