Talk:Steve Jobs/Archive 3

Personal Life
Jobs wore Issey Miyake shirts, not St. Croix []. Apologies if this isn't in the correct format -- this is my first attempted Wiki contribution/edit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kristwin (talk • contribs) 00:11, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Welcome Kristwin. Done. -SusanLesch (talk) 01:59, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Quote Steve Jobs: if you want another Steve Jobs, stop killing of Syrian children
I just came across this quote from Steve Jobs in the Wall Street Journal of Oct 12: 'If you want another Steve Jobs, stop the killing of Syrian children.' It's a great quote and refers back to his Syrian roots. Can someone with editing rights include this quote? Link to article: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203499704576622973183225918.html Thanks 217.164.11.111 (talk) 07:26, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, that's behind a paywall. -- Luk  talk 07:44, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * why would that be a reason not to include the quote? E.g., is it not allowed to cite from books because you have to buy them? In this case, anyone can go to their local library to access the WSJ, if one is willing to make the effort, one can find this article for free 217.164.11.111 (talk) 08:07, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

FWIW - And At The Moment -> According To A (casual) Google Search (Seventh Top Search Entry Cache Down Currently), A Web Cache Link To The Entire Wall Street Journal Article/Quote Seems To Be Available Here - Perhaps Not The Best Kind Of Linking For Wikipedia Articles (due to the changeable nature of web caches, paywall ramifications, etc) But I'm Presently Unclear If Such A Link Is *Entirely OK* (or not) For Use As A Citation In A Wikipedia Article - A Wikipedia Search For A Clear Determination On Using Such Links Hasn't Been Found - So Far At Least. Drbogdan (talk) 12:32, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Maybe I'm misreading the link, but it doesn't appear to be a quote from Steve Jobs, but from a random Elaph reader's comment. The link says One reader strained for a connection. "If you want another Steve Jobs, stop the killing of Syrian children," he opined.  - SudoGhost 12:42, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I *Entirely* Agree - The Quote Seems To Have Been Made By A "Reader" - And *Not* By "Steve Jobs" Himself - To Best Evaluate The "Source" Of The Quotation, The Relevant WSJ Paragraph, Containing The Only Instance Of The Quotation In The Entire Of The Article (Note: The Same Quotation Is Repeated As The "Subtitle" Of The Article?), Is Copied Below:

 The matter of Jobs's genius engaged Elaph's readers. One reader strained for a connection. "If you want another Steve Jobs, stop the killing of Syrian children," he opined. A proud national chauvinist or two noted the educational accomplishments of Jobs's biological father, his doctorate from an American university, and argued that the son's genius was an extension of his father's.
 * In Any Case - Hope The Above Helps. Drbogdan (talk) 14:38, 14 October 2011 (UTC)

Innovative Tribute for the Man Who Changed Everything
On October 13th, a college student, Brenda Melgar, performed a tribute speed painting of legendary Steve Jobs. She did so on a 4ft x 4ft canvas in a span of 25 minutes at the University of Houston. The young student's Time-Lapsed Video is part of a class project for her entrepreneurship class. Regarding why she decided to paint Steve Jobs, Melgar stated, "As a future entrepreneurship student, I find Steve Jobs' willingness to overcome any obstacle highly admirable. I decided to pay tribute to him in an artistic form because he is proof that you can do what you love and be successful."

(Bmmelgar (talk) 06:11, 16 October 2011 (UTC))

Edit request from, 16 October 2011
The line " The case is the subject of active criminal and civil government investigations " should actually be

" The case was the subject of active criminal and civil government investigations "

Andyscott12 (talk) 17:00, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * mabdul 19:51, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * On what evidence? Presumably any personal criminal case might be closed with him gone, but a civil case would likely keep going, against his estate, no?  Or was there some news on case closures that we can cite?  Dicklyon (talk) 20:11, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Pointing out the obvious
Do we really need to have "Steven Paul "Steve" Jobs" at the start of the lede, with emphasis at the "Steve" part? Is it really hard for readers to figure out that: Unlike Bill Clinton (William Jefferson Blythe III/Clinton) and Bill Gates (William Henry Gates III), where some people may not be aware that "Bill" is a shortening of William, it's quite obvious as to where "Steve" comes from. Is it really necessary to point out the bleeding obvious? --  李博杰  &#124; —Talk contribs email 07:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) "Steve" is a shortening of Steven, and that
 * 2) He is commonly called Steve, as shown in the article title two centimetres above?
 * Yes. What you must remember is that there are many people out there without brains who must be spoonfed. And people who are learning the english language. Akjar13 (talk) 14:16, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

edit request
Edit request:

Steve Job's respect comes through in DJ KRΦSS's recent Steve Jobs Tribute track http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=texBm4kKQfE

needs to be added to the post life section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.92.91.75 (talk) 05:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * ❌This type of tribute is the sort that has been the subject of much discussion on the page. The consensus was that only a few would be mentioned, and those would only be the ones who knew Jobs really well. These are already on there. You could however, make a page for DJ KRΦSS and mention his tribute there. Akjar13 (talk) 09:14, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Accumulation and dedication of merits and for Steve Jobs
Accumulation and dedication of merits and for Steve Jobs, May he is blessed for his future path… We hope you could help to forward this article, let us help him to send this message out…

Regardless what product, say iMac, iPod, iPhone or iPad, These are just a DEVICE (tools that we need in life) but these are not Our Life! Everyone should go back to their life. Oh Children! Please go back to your beloved parents, live your dutiful life to your parents; Oh Young People! Please go back to the goals you used to have, strive and learn, to create a more meaningful, prosperous and harmonious future; Let us all go back to our duties we have in our life.

Steve Jobs dedicated his life in designing multi-functional tools for all, it has become a very useful tool for people in different level and different field, but these are not our life, these are just tools to make our life easier. We should be grateful to him (Steve Jobs’ inventions).Use these tools (iMac, iPod, iPhone, iPad) wisely (i.e, to help others and ourselves, to save time and space), but also know when to put it aside, and go back to our family, friends & mother nature; back to our human life, don’t live in regrets in our later years because we didn’t live our life to the fullest. From we don’t know why are we born, we live on and not sure of what we want.

Even if you are using other devices, we sincerely hope that all can help in this accumulating and dedication of merits to Steve Jobs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.134.217.65 (talk) 10:42, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, what? If this is mere praise or criticism this is irrelevant and will be deleted. If this is a form of edit request, please make it clear. Akjar13 (talk) 10:59, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Infobox Picture
I think that the Infobox picture for Steve Jobs should be changed from its current version to this version: Steve Jobs Memorial Picture. Does anyone know the licensing information behind this picture?

The reason I think the article change to that photo is because most of the wikipedia articles for other prominent historical engineers/scientists has an official portrait. Look at the articles for [Thomas Edison], [Samuel Morse], [Wright brothers| The Wright Brothers] and [Albert Einstein].

Anyone else agree that this article should have a more professional portrait rather than a random snapshot?

Mar2194 (talk) 02:00, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

It should, so long as the replacement can be freely used on Wikipedia. Unfortunately, I am currently unable to check the picture you have provided, but I support the idea. Akjar13 (talk) 09:07, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Please see the discussion of the infobox picture at Talk:Steve Jobs/Archive 2. The image proposed,, is a cropped version of an image from an Apple.com webpage that has been repeatedly deleted from Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons as a copyright violation. -- Rrburke (talk) 20:56, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from, 20 October 2011
His birth name was Abdul Latif Jandali; what you listed is his adoptive name

209.86.226.30 (talk) 22:46, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * References please. Materialscientist (talk) 23:21, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Ya what? Do you have a source?MilkStraw532 (talk) 00:02, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * One source I found listed that as his father's name. Another, http://propakistani.pk/2011/10/21/steve-jobs-had-syrian-origins/, listed it has his name. However, the fact that propakistan.pk seems to be the only source (as the others I found either copied directly or quoted this), I'm not sure it can be counted as credible, especially considering his birth certificate says Steven Paul Jobs. The Haz talk 19:17, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Little-known factoid re. Steve Jobs and his reaction to the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami
Hi all - just dumping this here. I'll not add this myself as I have a WP:COI when it comes to Apple. A lot has been written about Steve and his .. um ... managerial style and alleged lack of philanthropic activities, but here's an interesting counterpoint. Earlier this year, Steve sent an email to Japanese Apple employees, cc'ing other employees and offering support and the services of the company (link to many articles here). It shows a different side to the hard-nosed businessman that he's usually portrayed as. I can also personally confirm the veracity of this email, as it's still in my inbox. Anyways .... - A l is o n  ❤ 07:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the sharing. Wish there was something more concrete to go on. Perhaps next week, when the book is released, there will something reliable to add on this topic. In the end, whether your a Fanboy, or a Fandroid, all information must be nuetral.-- JOJ Hutton  16:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Over-emphasis on Jandali
Some people are trying to insert Jandali's claims that his first wife's father opposed their relationship and that he opposed giving up Jobs in adoption before their marriage. That may or may not be true. In either case, it is one side of the story. We do know Jandali made no effort to find Jobs until he read about his fame and fortune and he admitted in the cited British article, written when Jobs was near death, that Jandali had no relationship with his daughter Mona who was born within a marriage. We also do not know that Jandali was a "professor". Being a professor means tenure. It means a lifetime job. Before you become a professor, you are an assistant professor, an associate professor and generally you work your way up in the hierarchy. There is no evidence of that. Mention that he taught political science and that the bulk of his career was in Nevada casinos accurately sums up his life. Anything more belongs in his own bio, if he is of the stature to deserve his own biographical article. Jandali is a footnote to Steve Jobs' life, and certainly not a central personality. Just because a British paper makes an unsupported claim does not make it so. So calling him "professor" is pure bunk. Saying he taught poly sci during the sixties is accurate because that appears in several sources. Any further claim along those lines is unsupported. The NYT and other articles gave more information about Steve Jobs' adopted father, who was influential in shaping the early years of Jobs' life. That section should be expanded, if any of this is expanded. The over-emphasis on details about Jandali, who appears at the end of Jobs life, is opportunistic and undue emphasis. Skywriter (talk) 06:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

One user (KarlBattery) continues to insert material that several editors indicate is inappropriate. For example, Evenrød made this point --> (Out of the 5 citations listed for just one sentence, not a single one verifies the sentence's claim)

And yet, KB continues to take out the fact that Jandali lost touch with his daughter Mona Simpson for several decades until she searched for him and found him. That was documented on 60 Minutes yet KB deleted it. That suggests a little obsession with Jandali's public relations. One example is the deletion of factual information and replacing it with undue emphasis on Jandali's teaching political science classes back in the 1960s. He wants us to call him Professor and yet there is no reliable information that he had a position as a professor anywhere. There is information that he taught college classes but that's quite different from holding the highest academic position in a college or university. It is not a verifiable claim that Jandali was a Professor. The major part of Jandali's career was in the food and beverage industry. KarlBattery wants to change that to the leisure industry and delete fact that he works in a casino. What's up with that?

Further, KB is introducing error when he inserts into the article that Simpson introduced Jobs to his birth mother. Jobs' biographer on 60 Minutes says Jobs searched for his birth parents, found his mother and it was she who told him he had a sister. For the sake of accuracy, I think this article has to go with that. The 60 Minutes piece is online, if you'd like to look it over.

KB says, The convention, where we know who birth parents are, is to detail them prior to adoptive parents. I know of no convention like that. What is the link? The point on Wikipedia is to be factual and accurate and to source information properly. While it's OK to include who the birth parents are, it is inappropriate to give undue emphasis to them or to interrupt the flow of narrative with extraneous information about them.

I hope KB opts to discuss this on this page. Thanks. Skywriter (talk) 07:38, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Liver cancer was due to pancreatic cancer?
This 60 minutes interview with biography Isaacson links a few seemingly isolated facts. Isaacson and the 60 minutes reporter indicate that Jobs refused surgery for 9 months and that this may have contributed to the spread of the cancer to his liver. A few minutes later, Isaacson explains "the cancer had gone to his liver". This means that it is possible that Jobs' negligence was the reason why had needed a scarce liver transplant. I think we can leave it at some sort of indication that the liver problem was a spread the same cancer to his liver. At the moment, the two are presented as distinct etiologies.--201.73.204.178 (talk) 01:06, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The "may have" seems safe enough to report. More than that we don't know.  And I don't think you can fairly characterize a person's medical choices as "negligence" lacking a lot more to go on, if ever.  Dicklyon (talk) 01:13, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * They use the phrase "magical thinking". Can we?--201.73.204.178 (talk) 01:32, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Better to use the word "metastasis". It's medically accurate for the spread of cancer from one organ or organ system to another. Jobs's delay may, or may not, have had anything to do with that spread, so let's keep the speculation out of the article. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 02:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * No one will no for sure, but it is highly likely that is exactly what happened. According to the biographer on 60 Minutes, the doctors told him his pancreatic cancer was in the 5% of very highly curable types.  Jobs' turn to macrobiotic diets, and a spiritualist, instead of immediate surgery and follow-up chemotherapy, is almost certain to have caused his death. HammerFilmFan (talk) 05:25, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * His procrastination in getting modern standard/Western/whatever medical care is the lesser point. What I think should happen is that the liver transplant be preceded by some statement that Jobs had metastatic cancer in his liver. Perhaps that paragraph should be joined with the paragraph that related the initial discovery of the cancer, in order to make the relationship clear to the reader.--201.73.204.178 (talk) 07:07, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Jobs' or Jobs's?
Which should be used in this article? Jobs' or Jobs's? Jeancey (talk) 06:11, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

It would be great to agree what the proper possessive of the Steve's last name is, at least for the purpose of using it uniformly in this article. The article has been changed back and forth several times to reflect both forms. According to most respected authorities on grammar and style, the proper form should be Jobs's and not Jobs' (see here for specific sources: Apostrophe). The popular press has been known to use both versions (see the References section for examples of both), so it's not clear that one is clearly preferred to another, at least in popular use. But in any case, Wikipedia articles should reflect proper grammar, so I'm therefore inclined to follow authorities on grammar and style and use the form Jobs's. Any other opinions? cherkash (talk) 02:52, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * My copy of The Elements of Style says since it's a proper name, the possessive should be "Jobs's", although it does appear unwieldy to many. I can't lay my hands on my copy of the AP Style Guide, but I believe it says the same. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) (talk) 02:59, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I concur with the The Elements of Style and N5iln, the possessive should be "Jobs's" Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 16:50, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Most guides agree that there are only a small minority of exceptions to using 's after a name ending in s (one commonly cited one being Jesus'). Some say base it how you would pronounce it.  For me, that means use Jobs's.  Dicklyon (talk) 05:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * "Some say base it how you would pronounce it." For me that would be Jobs'. Honestly, in all the English classes I've taken, I've been told it's sacrilege to ever put 's after something ending in s, especially a name. The common reference was that it was always Jesus' not Jesus's and is always pronounced "Jesus," not "Jesuses." However, as Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln) noted above, Strunk writes that it should be 's after a name ending in s, except for ancient names such as Jesus, in which case it would be Jesus'.[||Strunk] In other words, Jobs's is technically correct and it shouldn't be written how it sounds. (I'm used to hearing Jobs' not Jobs's.) The Haz talk 20:21, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You should compare what you remember hearing with what actual guides say. Maybe you'll learn that you remember it wrong, which is actually a fairly common problem.  Some books:, , , . Dicklyon (talk) 20:55, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I did compare. Maybe you only read the last two sentences of what I wrote? As I stated, what I'm used to hearing is incorrect. Also, I just retook some English classes over at Harvard last year where there was discussion as to whether there is a new standard for this. It had nothing to do with whether or not I was "remembering correctly." The Haz talk 19:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Its Jobs'. If you have a spell check on your computer like I do, notice all the red underlines under Jobs's, when you type it. That should have been the first clue.-- JOJ Hutton  20:25, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * That would be the correct plural possessive of the generic term "job". Spelling checkers are not clever enough to understand what's a name and what's a generic.  Dicklyon (talk) 20:47, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

This was changed in the article even though there isn't any consensus here, so I went ahead and changed it back. All of my english classes in high school and college have told me that Jobs' is correct and Jobs's is incorrect. Could this possibly be a British English vs American English issue? Jeancey (talk) 00:00, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I was thinking the same thing. I learned in first grade that it is Jobs'. Not sure how it was formatted first. Think I'll take a bit of a look, although there may not be many instances to look at.-- JOJ Hutton  00:50, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Originally it was Jobs'. Also, the majority of the articles use Jobs' in the title, and only two use Jobs's. Jeancey (talk) 00:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I sort of took a quick look at an old version of the page from before he died, and I saw more instances of "Jobs'" than "Jobs's". If both are allegedly correct, then we should probably use the format that was used in the article more often, before this thread was open. I was, however, not aware of the longer version being used in print, until I read some of the sources provided here.-- JOJ Hutton  02:34, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * To be fair, only two sources use Jobs's. The rest use Jobs'... except for one smart person who used Job's.... which we can all agree is wrong :P Jeancey (talk) 02:38, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Only two sources? What do you mean?  Here are a few more. Dicklyon (talk) 03:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I meant two of the cited sources in the article. The rest of the cited ones use Jobs' Jeancey (talk) 03:51, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Anybody who wants to participate in this discussion should first read MOS:POSS. I'd say we should follow Strunk and White (the 1st alternative) i.e. it's Jobs's. I'll also note that that folks who want Jobs' have a definite lack of reliable sources in their statements. Smallbones (talk) 03:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Lacking any evidence about Jeancey's high-school memory "All of my english classes in high school and college have told me that Jobs' is correct and Jobs's is incorrect", it would be better to stick with what is taught in all the grammar guides, and put it back to "Jobs's". Nobody has presented any coherent reason to think that "Jobs'" is better, unless we think an old version of a wikipedia article trumps grammar guides. And no, it's not a US vs UK thing either. Dicklyon (talk) 03:57, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, if you read the WP:POSS, it seems to indicate that dropping the s is a more modern usage, and that current writing style prefers that. From what I have just read on(I know, not so reliable) American English seems to use s' more, and British english seems to use s's.  If this is actually the case, the proper usage in this article would be s' Jeancey (talk) 04:06, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't understand how you read MOS:POSS that way. Yes, it pretty much allows all options, but certainly doesn't encourage option 2. Options 1 and 3 would call for "Jobs's", as do most of the grammar guides.  You may be right that Americans are more likely to misremember their high-school grammar classes; many seem to think that an apostrophe-s after an s is something you're not supposed to do; I don't believe it was ever actually taught that way.  Dicklyon (talk) 04:20, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The ease of a single formula (add 's no matter what to singular items) won me over years ago; it's kind to second-language speakers, too. But unfortunately other forms persist. As long as the same form is used throughout an article, we can't insist on one version. Tony   (talk)  04:48, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I just checked my manual of style, published in 2010. It says either way is acceptable, which means we could debate this endlessly but no one will be able to convince the other.  I suggest we get an administrator to make a ruling and we stick with whatever they say.  That seem reasonable?Jeancey (talk) 04:49, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * MOS:POSS is a blight on WP:MOS. I fought hard, a couple of years back, to have it actually make recommendations rather than flaccidly waving through every half-rational option on equal terms. For me, it's a matter of how it is said. That's called practice 3, at the guideline. The other practices are a pain in the proverbial. Now, the only difficulty that would remain is this: how do we say the possessive of "Jobs"? That varies! I would prefer "Steve Jobs' invention"; others go for "Steve Jobs's invention". But it's a matter of real language in use, not of the written language in isolation. This is one of the few cases I would be happy to leave to a local vote, based on editors' actual speech: as opposed to "authorities", "reliable sources", or even the Jobs family's preference. The last place I would look is in style guides other than WP:MOS. CMOS16, for example, makes a collective fool of itself on possessive forms. I've surveyed all the major ones, and very many minor guides that know squat (in the technical sense of the term) about this matter.
 * No, wait: the last thing I would do is ask an administrator! Would you ask a police officer to decide for you how you should vote?
 * N oetica Tea? 04:56, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Does the fact that 34 References use Jobs' and only 1 uses Jobs's count for anything?Jeancey (talk) 04:58, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * This "fact" is BS. What the heck do you think you're counting?  Even if you're just looking at ref title as listed in this flaky wikipedia article, there are more than 2 with Jobs's, and now since I've started looking and making corrections, the number is growing.  Someone probably went through and did a global replace at some point.  Dicklyon (talk) 05:39, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure enough, I found it. In this diff, a careless and foolhardy editor replaced all the correct occurrences of "Jobs's" with "Jobs'".  Now, you want to help repair the mess?  Dicklyon (talk) 06:06, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I would prefer if you kept this civil and not become passive aggressive. Every single one of my changes was in article text. Not ONE was in the name of reference.  Despite this, I went ahead and checked every reference that uses Jobs' and fixed the one that was wrong. Please do not attack me any more and keep the discussion focused on the article. thanks! Jeancey (talk) 06:32, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I apologize. The edits to the "articles" I mistook to be "references"; and I should have said the edit was whatever, not the editor.  I'll look again and see if I can figure out how the refs got mangled.  Thanks for helping to fix them.  Nevertheless, the edit seems foolhardy, and I restored the consistent use of "Jobs's".  Please do start an RFC if you feel another need to make such a huge change to an article that follows the best grammar guides already.  Dicklyon (talk) 06:40, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, here it is. User:Hydrargyrum made the careless changes to the ref titles, on Oct. 12, the day after you changed them all in the article.  Dicklyon (talk) 06:53, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I was taught much like The Haz: if the noun already has an 's', you simply add an apostrophe to get the possessive. Then, someone here at WP told me that both forms were acceptable. I actually prefer the semantic simplicity of not having "s's" (i.e. sn 's' on both sides of an apostrophe) and nobody's going to change how I write such possessives. Anyway, as Jobs is the closest thing this world have ever had to Jesus, that alone justifies that he should have an s-apostrophe too. ;-) -- Ohconfucius  ¡digame! 06:18, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, it depends a lot on whether it's a singualar or a plural, and if a singular name depends somewhat on whether it's one syllable or two, or on pronunciation. The article was nearly consistently "Jobs's" before Jeancey showed up on Oct. 11 and inverted.  I've just finished repairing it.  Let's don't go through this again.  Dicklyon (talk) 06:35, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I changed someone else who added them shortly after his death, on October 5. It was Originally Jobs' when I got to the article except for one Jobs's.  Please stop accusing me of things, I was simply changing grammar as I learned it and cited my source to you.  You promptly dismissed it because you didn't agree with it.  Please see WP:TRUTH.  I haven't made any attacks on you, and I would prefer if you didn't attack me either. Thanks! Jeancey (talk) 06:38, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It was an observation on your edit, not an attack. My observation about the state before Oct. 11 was correct; I suppose I could have looked to see if there were other inversions earlier; not so surprising, I guess.  But now let's stick with the style recommended by guides.  Dicklyon (talk) 06:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The problem is that the guides aren't consistent. Newer guides seem to say that either works.  Older guides seem to say s's, so perhaps consensus is changing? That's where the real issue is, in my opinion. Jeancey (talk) 06:59, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The guides are fairly consistent. Yours just doesn't have any guidance.  Look at the five linked above.  I checked the history some more; it was pretty mixed before Oct. 5, and you're right, fairly unstable after that. Dicklyon (talk) 07:12, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * We clearly aren't getting anywhere in convincing each other of anything. I've gone ahead and added the RFC tag, hopefully we can get some other opinions.  I will abide by the consensus. Jeancey (talk) 07:16, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I come in from the RFC with a suggestion - I am, I swear, totally indifferent. I will flip a coin. Heads, ends with 's. Tails, with s'. This agrees with our terrible MOS. Is this acceptable to both sides? Hipocrite (talk) 11:52, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * That's not a helpful comment. Something based more on actual advice in sources would be appreciated.  No source recommends "Jobs'" over "Jobs's", as far as anything presented above shows; and plenty suggest the other way.  Let's look at it this way:  we finally have gotten to a state that is consistent with guides, internally consistent, and doesn't mangle the titles of sources.  Did we ever have such a state before?  No; so changing it would require consensus.  Dicklyon (talk) 15:15, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Since it appears that both uses are used in reliable sources, and neither one is wrong, nor is either one preferred, it only makes sense to go back to the format that was used more often in the article before his death and before this became an issue. I only took a quick l;ook at an older version of the article, but it appeared that "Jobs'" was used much more than "Jobs's". Changing it now without having a strong consensus to do so, is staring to be contentious and disruptive. So please stop this edit war before both of you are blocked. In the end, that helps no one.-- JOJ Hutton  15:29, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Since I started this discussion, the only changes I have made regarding this topic were to fix reference titles that were incorrectly changed, nothing more. Jeancey (talk) 16:32, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It wasn't my intention to cast blame on anyone. Sorry if I made it sound as if I was. I do agree with you, that it should be Jobs', but at this point only for the reasons that I have already stated.Whatever I may have learned in grade school is irrelevant. Yet it appears to be a lesson in phonetics, that perhaps nobody will win, because both are correct. Wikipedia guidelines usually tend to favor the original wording when matters such as this come up. I tend to agree with that as well. This should be changed back to its original, or most used format, unless overwhelming consensus decides otherwise. As far as the edit warring goes, I will not take part in any formatting changes, until or unless the situation dictates it.-- JOJ Hutton  16:48, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * It is stable now with "Jobs's"; and the assertion that "nor is either one preferred" is strongly contested by people who have looked at and cited grammar guides and who are familiar with English usage. Assertions to the contrary are from people who have presented no evidence, and who totally mis-remembered and over-extended what they taught in high school.  Look at Jeancey's flat-out wrong and strident edit summary of Oct. 11: "The possesive of jobs is Jobs' not Jobs's!)" Dicklyon (talk) 18:45, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Again... please please please stop attacking me and stick to the discussion about the issue. This has nothing to do with me.  If you continue to attack me when I have said nothing against you as a person, I will ask for some admin intervention.  This is at least the third time I have asked you this. Please stop. Jeancey (talk) 18:52, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree with Jeancey that Dicklyon's comments throughout are far too strident. Hipocrite (talk) 18:54, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree, too. Dicklyon (talk) 19:08, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Well I have a copy of Webster's Dictionary (2004) sitting right in front of me and on pg 1672 under "Rules of Punctuation" it lists both as taking either. The examples being Keats' and Keats's. So, as I stated previously, both are correct. In the end its a all about phonetics and how we say it, and if you think its stable now, that's only because its formatted they way "You" want it. So you need to stop pushing your personal preference on the article's format, when it was formatted differently before this thread was opened. Without strong consensus, the formatting should not have beenchanged, given that it was originally formatted as Jobs'.-- JOJ Hutton  20:17, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed, Jeancey and others have argued that "Jobs's" is incorrect. Those of us who respect guides argue that it is "preferred", as most of the guides clearly show.  Some (like your dictionary) don't say much one way or the other. Dicklyon (talk) 17:33, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't see anything in the sources that say that one is preferred over the other. All I can say is that both are correct, and as I said before its all about how a person prefers to pronounce it I guess. Its the "Tomato" or "Caribbean" debate as far as pronunciation goes. So as long as its clear that there are style guides for formatting Jobs', no one can say that there all sources say Jobs's.-- JOJ Hutton  17:44, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm fairly confident at this point that it is entirely up to personal preference on the way that it is said. If this is the case and it's not incorrect for either version to be in there, then it should be based on the way that it was before all of this debate, when the article was more stable.  I haven't looked through the history yet, but maybe the majority of usage in the article before his death should be the one we use. Jeancey (talk) 17:51, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * So you're stilling saying that the advice of good grammars guides should be ignored? Or contesting that such advice exists?  Either way that's quite a different story from the one you told when you flipped it from "Jobs's" to "Jobs'" claiming that it was incorrrect based on your memory.  Dicklyon (talk) 18:06, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * You can review a pretty good sourced summary of guides and practice in our article space at Apostrophe. Dicklyon (talk) 18:10, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, my original edit saying Jobs's was incorrect was incorrect itself. Please stop bringing it back to this.  This discussion isn't about that. Also, please stop completely ignore perfectly valid sources that simply do not agree with your view.  Some guides say that both are correct.  Therefore, no one can argue one ISN'T correct.  We should now be discussing which should be used as per wiki policy, which I believe is the original state of the article.Jeancey (talk) 18:23, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * What source have you (or anyone) presented that I'm ignoring, or that disagrees with what the summary article that I linked said, or that contradicts the preferences of the guides that I have linked here? Sorry if I missed it.  Dicklyon (talk) 18:32, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * They don't disagree with the other sources. They say that s' is perfectly valid. You have continually said that s' is not valid, based on all the grammar sources.  I quoted and cited a source on your talk page and you said that I should get a "real guide."  You dismissed it out of hand.  That's what I'm talking about.  I think that we should change it back to what it was before he died, before anyone changed it. Whatever that is.  If it's s's we should keep it at that.  If it's s' then it should be changed to reflect that. Jeancey (talk) 18:49, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * At User_talk:Dicklyon I acknowledged that "Singular nouns ending in -s: You can add 's or the apostrophe alone to show possession when a singular noun ends in -s. Whichever rule variation you choose, be consistent within each piece of writing." is "no real guidance". It is not contradicting what the real guides say, just not commenting on what is preferred.  Similarly, I acknowledged the dictionary statement reported above, that "Rules of Punctuation" it lists both as taking either. The examples being Keats' and Keats's. and noted that "Some (like your dictionary) don't say much one way or the other."  That's all good.  But some still claim "Don't see anything in the sources that say that one is preferred over the other."  This is nonsense.  Read the article.  Read its sources, or others.  If you have a source that says nothing about that, that doesn't imply that sources in general have nothing to say about what is preferred. Dicklyon (talk) 19:01, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * "Real Guide" implies that my guide is not real or accurate and should be ignored for one of your guides. I'm going to stop discussing with you because you haven't really provided any new arguments to reply to.  I'm going to wait for more people to provide their views via the RfC. Jeancey (talk) 19:16, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, yes, after its contents have been acknowledged and found to have no info on the topic of which is preferred, it would be best to ignore it and move on. Dicklyon (talk) 21:14, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Coming to this rather late. And I apparently can’t follow my own principle about arguing on the Internet. Steve Jobs’s looks and sounds like insane wiki-crap. Is it too hard for wikipedians to just follow what the real pros do or does everyone have to try to prove how Wikipedia is a soap box atop which bright boys can change how the English language works for the proper betterment of mankind? Just take a look at how CNN does it here and how the Associated Press does it here. It is Steve Jobs’ comments about…. And Macworld spells it Steve Jobs’ legacy. And PC World calls it Steve Jobs’ health. All these publications realize that a possessive of someone named “Jobs” ought to be spelled the way it sounds; we don’t sound it out “Jobsuz health.” Even the Germans have this figured out. Witness how Der Spiegel does it: Steve Jobs' health… Jobs' death… Jobs' products… and Jobs' garage. Get on the ball please and fix this.

P.S. I don’t care what sort of kazoo club places someone can cite as examples of the wrong way; it is A) still the wrong way, and B) likely doesn’t have the total reputation and weight of all the above, which represents the the biggest names in English-language publishing on both general- and computer-related topics. Greg L (talk) 22:40, 22 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I know, really, who could justify siding with such commie retards as the Washington Post or the Wall Street Journal or the Christian Science Monitor or Reuters? Dicklyon (talk) 23:23, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * PS. Macworld and other PC rags swing both ways; probably they don't have a MOS. Dicklyon (talk) 23:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I notice the Associated Press also uses spaced em dashes; and CNN prefers spaced double hyphens. I guess we'll have to fix MOS:DASH again now, too.  But if the two biggest authoritities on English style don't agree, what hope do we have?  Fall back on Strunk & White, Chicago, and such academic elites? Dicklyon (talk) 00:23, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, I didn’t read the above thread, Dick, to ensure where you stood on this issue. Had I understood you were on the wrong side of the issue, I wouldn’t have weighed in. A lot of places “swing both ways.” In most cases, it is because of a weak senior editor. Nearly all English-language newspapers not only use the AP’s feeds, they also use the AP’s style guide. That’s a lot of readership. Why would someone write “Jobs’s” if one doesn’t pronounce it “Jobzuz”? Here’s what James Kilpatrick, the famous American editorial columnist and grammarian once wrote about this issue:

APOSTROPHE The three uses for the apostrophe can be summarized as POP: the first P stands for possession, the O for omission, and the second P for plurals.

“Listen to the sound of the phrase.”

Possesives:

It’s “John Adams party” not “John Adamsuz party” Therefore, it is “John Adams’ party.”

It’s “Jesusuz life” not “Jesus life” Therefore, it is “Jesus’s life.”

Plural Possesives:

Mr. and Mrs. Regan. It’s the Regans’ car.

Mr. and Mrs. Jones. It’s the Joneses’ car.

Don’t use apostrophes with words that are already possessive, such as “our” or “your”. It’s “ours” and “yours” not “our’s” and “your’s”.

COMMA Use of the Harvard comma before “and” in a series: Use it.

The following is an excerpt from an article on the overall use of the comma by James Kilpatrick:

Let us talk common sense. We punctuate for two reasons only — for clarity, and for cadence. Why did I just put a comma after “clarity”? I put it there for cadence’s sake. I wanted to slow the sentence down. The comma provided a pause for emphasis and for separation. The punctuation would have been equally “correct” if I had written “… for two reasons only — for clarity and for cadence.”

Consider: “The door flew open and Lancelot fled.” Now, again: “The door flew open, and Lancelot fled.”  What is the correct usage? It depends entirely upon the meaning one intends to convey.

When the comma is omitted, we have a sense of ongoing narrative. We anticipate that something more is to come. “The door flew open and Lancelot fled. Guinevere turned to the guards. …” Insert a comma after “open,” and the sentence changes. The pause provides a dramatic effect. “The door flew open, and Lancelot fled. The affair is over.”

In certain constructions the comma is indispensable. “Helen is a pretty tall woman.” Or, “Helen is a pretty, tall woman.”  The whole meaning of the sentence is controlled by the comma in, “Helen saw Fred when he came in, and blushed.
 * He wrote the above in some magazine before the Internet; I had to write that one down because it made so much sense. It’s good advise to follow for writing text that doesn’t draw undo attention to itself. Greg L (talk) 00:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Greg, no problem. Now you owe me one.  I was going to ask if your assertion that "Jobs's" was incorrect was because you mis-remembered your high-school English, like some, or because you prefer not to pronounce it that way.  Now we know.  And that's fine, if that's how you pronounce it.  Personally, yes, I do says "jobzuz", and it's hard for me to think of doing otherwise.   I guess that's really the main reason that sources differ.  Nevertheless, we can follow the reputable guides, instead of arguing about which newspapers feed more of the world... Dicklyon (talk) 00:44, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Interesting (about how you hear it in your mind). Apparently there are different schools of thought on this subject because I’m quite sure neither the famous grammarian James Kilpatrick nor I ran off half-cocked about proper punctuation. For some reason, my sister in law comes to mind. She’s has since passed away (so I can make fun of her now) but she once told me “I hate it when people mispronunciate words.” I smiled. Greg L (talk) 01:03, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, if it's any consolation, the argument has been going on for well over a hundred years: (long before arguing on the Internet left you a retard). Dicklyon (talk) 01:30, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * And this book has a more nuanced view of what the Associated Press style is. Very interesting.  Dicklyon (talk) 01:33, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Speaking of the AP and journalists, I just noticed what Garner (The Oxford dictionary of American usage and style) had to say about that: "Although the AP Stylebook calls for nothing more than an apostrophe if the word already ends in -s, most authorities who aren't journalists demand the final -s as well".

Comment - In the end, this issue may just come down to a simple straw poll, although I hesitate to start one at this time. It will be curious to see which version of the possessive Walter Isaacson uses in Steve Jobs (biography), which officially hist newsstands tomorrow. I'm sure it will provide us with a more clear understanding, and should carry a lot of weight in this discussion.-- JOJ Hutton  21:05, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, I wasn't willing to put our style in his hands, but I should have, since he uses "Jobs's" consistently throughout. Dicklyon (talk) 22:29, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Why would it come to a straw pole? Why not go with what most guides say is preferred? Because all you have is a dictionary? That can be fixed, at Google book search. I looked at about 40 hits of books with previews including the words "apostrophe", "possessive", and "name" on a page. Not all are relevant, and a bunch are too old to matter, but I didn't filter out any of the last 50 years that had anything to say on the topic.

Here they are; I copy examples of one-syllable names ending in "s" when they have such:

Book where "-'s" is preferred or "standard" or required:


 * The copyeditor's handbook
 * commenting on CMOS and CBE: Johns's (always 's with a few exceptions)


 * The Complete Plain Words
 * Jones's James's "certainly the commonest practice with monosyllables"


 * The Elements of Style (Strunk and White)
 * Burns's (always 's, with a few exception for Moses', Isis')


 * A guide to grammar and usage for psychology and related fields
 * Jones's ("one should probably follow Strunk and White's advice")


 * The New York Times manual of style and usage
 * James's, Chris's, The Times's (always keep the s with monosyllabic names)


 * The Concise Wadsworth Handbook
 * James's (some exceptions if it sounds bad to do so)


 * The Oxford dictionary of American usage and style
 * Jones's (says the AP stylebook says Jones', but "most authorities who aren't journalists demand the final s as well")


 * Greedy Apostrophe: a cautionary tale
 * Charles's (notes exceptions for ancient/biblical Moses')


 * Woe Is I Jr.: The Younger Grammarphobe's Guide to Better English in Plain English
 * Klaus's (always 's)


 * Grammar by diagram
 * Chris's, Jones's (standard)
 * Chris', Jones' (simplified)

only weak preference for s based on examples, or monosyllabic not addressed:


 * The Christian Writer's Manual of Style
 * Bliss's (but let euphony be your guide)


 * English Grammar Workbook for Dummies
 * Jess's (but "in all but the strictest situations, either form is acceptable")


 * How to Use Parts of Speech, Grades 6-8
 * Charles's (they also allow Charles', and we can argue whether it counts as monosyllabic, but they note that adding 's is "always correct")


 * Effective Writing Skills for Public Relations
 * no monosyllabic examples, but "if in doubt, always add the 's"

guides expressing OK both ways, with no preference:


 * Modern American Usage 1966
 * no monosyllabic example but "the writer may choose the one that his ear prefers"


 * Young Writers Guide e-book
 * Chips' Chips's ("it is a matter of personal style")

Seems clear enough that the current scheme is in line with the preferred approach as expressed in numerous guides (there are still many more and better ones, in many cases without online preview; a have a dozen or more on my shelf I could consult if anyone cares). But for those of you who have one, like your dictionary, with nothing to say on the topic, don't take that as evidence that neither approach is preferred. For the monosyllabic names, the "-'s" is much more strongly preferred than omitting the "-s"; not as much on polysyllabic names, and many guides mention explicitly. Dicklyon (talk) 22:22, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Here is a thought: do this article's readers even care? Sure, we can go by what style guides say, but for whom are we writing this article? Average readers or grammarians? I have a doubt that the majority of readers would care about whether we use '' or ' in this article. Different people can have different preferences, as has been demonstrated in this discussion, so a straw poll might not be a bad idea actually.


 * Oh, and just as a note, this discussion on grammar is probably not just relevant to this article, but relevant to probably close to all of the English Wikipedia's articles, since obviously every article here is (or should be) written in English.


 * I better get the popcorn. ;-)


 * &mdash;{&#124;Retro00064&#124;&#9742;talk&#124;&#x270D;contribs&#124;} 23:05, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Of course, the majority of readers won't know or care. And some will think it's wrong, whichever way we do it.  But the point of having a style guide, and having a style based on best practices, is to make the presentation and meaning as clear as possible to readers, and the way to do that is to stick fairly close to usages that conform to the normal and expected rules of the language, rather to employ the less-preferred alternatives and exceptions that are tolerated in informal usage.  Dicklyon (talk) 00:38, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * And yes, it is of wider interest, which is why I started an RfC at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style. Dicklyon (talk) 00:43, 24 October 2011 (UTC)


 * This is quite the long discussion. The true purpose of language is communication. As long as the communication is clear, then it is correct. This idea got lost somewhere along the way. I know most grammar perfectionists don't want to hear it (and I used to be one), but it should be more accepted as reality. Every word we have is made up, and every rule is made up. As someone who has a last name ending with 's' I've always done "Jenkins's" but really, what does the majority think? If 30% like one way but 70% like the other, it make no sense to go with the 30% if some book someone wrote 50 years ago says they're right. Language is one of the few things that is changeable. Richjenkins (talk) 14:36, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * See usage in books if you think majority rules: . Though as Greg points out, it may be the opposite in news, due to AP style. Dicklyon (talk) 18:45, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I think this article should use the s's ending because most of the sources say that is the style to use and the majority of books use Jobs's. The readers can just read it as Jobs instead of Jobsus. It doesn't matter how it sounds because this is about the grammar of words, not the phonetics. - M0rphzone (talk) 07:26, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm reverting too much
I probably violated 3RR by now, but I keep finding these big bold red error messages in the article's references section after people make changes and don't check their work. I'll stop now, but please, people, check your edits. And whoever thought it was a good idea to put all the ref definitions at the end, such that you can't edit a section without breaking things, please think twice before ever doing that again. Dicklyon (talk) 00:08, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Would it be possible to simple edit the article and fix the error message, rather than just reverting wholesale? Jeancey (talk) 00:11, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Probably so, but it wasn't immediately obvious, so I didn't try. Dicklyon (talk) 03:32, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Biological family
Since he did not meet his birth mother and biological sister until he was almost 30, I put this content under his "Personal Life" - it was not part of his "Early life and education". Parkwells (talk) 01:28, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Good move, I would say 30 years old does not cound as early life.Beefcake6412 (talk) 19:48, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Criticism section
User Gateman1997 removed the Criticism section citing (incompletely) WP:CRIT. I don't give a stuff if the content is moved, but I object to it being deleted. The relevant section from CRIT is:


 * There may be times when critical material should be presented in a dedicated "Criticism" or "Response" section within an article, but entire articles dedicated to Criticism are discouraged. Articles dedicated to negative material may be a point-of-view fork, which is generally prohibited. Rather than create a section dedicated to criticisms, instead try to incorporate negative material into the appropriate topical or thematic section that the negative material relates to (such as a particular event, policy, or product).


 * When the sources indicate that a section should be devoted to third-party opinions on a topic, avoid using the term "criticism" in the section title. Although the word "criticism" can sometimes encompass both positive and negative assessments, often carries a negative connotation. Alternative words, such as "evaluation," "review," "critique," or "assessment" have a similar meaning as "criticism", but without the negative implications. The word "reception" is a neutral term that is often used in section titles in articles about books and films. The term "criticism" may be appropriate if it is commonly used by the sources which discuss the topic. Likewise, sections or articles dedicated to "controversies" should be avoided.

I think there is good reason to have a Criticism section in this article to balance the more hagiographic tributes. YMMV. Equally, I'm not wedded to the section title, but more to the content. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I am a big fan of steve jobs but there are reasons for criticism, and all views should be supported in this page so as not to infringe on NPOV.Beefcake6412 (talk) 19:48, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Criticism sections in biographies are mostly deprecated in favor of on-topic, relevant discussion of issues directly pertaining to the subject. For example, two of the most criticized U.S. presidents, Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon, have no criticism sections. I would be interested in seeing a FA-Class biography that has a criticism section.  I don't believe they exist. Viriditas (talk) 22:33, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The point here is that Wikipedia discourages a separate "Criticism" or "Controversy" section and rather encourages that material about any criticism and controversy be integrated into the article without being separated out. That's been done, so the point is moot. Yworo (talk) 22:34, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * The point about criticism of this man is that contrary to his business success, as a person he was awful. Imagine denying paternity of his child, and refusing to acknowlegement who he was to his own father. Not to mention dating the 15 year older Joan Baez solely because she had been the lover of Bob Dylan. Jobs was a creep.

Clothes
Did he only have one outfit? Why did he always wear the same clothes? Axl ¤  [Talk]  01:07, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Um, is that really relevant to the article?--Rollins83 (talk) 13:29, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, it is. He wore the same distinctive outfit. Surely there is a reliable source that mentions this? Axl  ¤  [Talk]  14:07, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Have a look at reference #108 in the article. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 16:01, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Did he have several identical sets? Why wear only one outfit? Axl  ¤  [Talk]  18:02, 25 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I thought the article referenced explained it well. "...both because of its daily convenience (the rationale he claimed) and its ability to convey a signature style... So I asked Issey to make me some of his black turtlenecks that I liked, and he made me like a hundred of them." Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 18:12, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Don't you think that information should be in this article? Axl  ¤  [Talk]  18:22, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Probably. (Interesting aside, I recently read an article related to decision fatigue. One of the premises of the article was that small decisions create as much fatigue as large decisions so one should get rid of small decisions such as what clothes to wear in the morning. I was left wondering if Jobs had intuited that. I currently am halfway through Isaacson's biography of Steve Jobs, I suspect even more now that Jobs did.) Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 17:52, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Off-topic but related: Alan Turing also had some issues with clothes, apparently unable to tell the left from his right shoe, and this went on for years at a time with Turing showing up wearing the wrong shoes. Einstein sometimes forgot to put his socks on and when he remembered, he would put them on over his shoes.  Einstein would often soak his feet in cold water to help him focus, which is probably where Jobs got the practice from in the first place. Viriditas (talk) 11:40, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I actually read from Mona Simpson's eulogy for her brother, that Steve would order several pairs of the same jeans or of the same shirt.... 220.128.190.242 (talk) 04:49, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from, 30 October 2011
he was a follower of zen buddhism and many articles were found as proof, zen buddhism has origined in south india by a palla king named "Bodhi dharma" also known as "da-mo" in chineese.

G1naveen (talk) 06:44, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. You also need to be more specific about what you would like us to change, as it is unclear from your request. Steven Zhang  The clock is ticking....  07:54, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

"Occupation" and "Board member of"
Shouldnt some of this info be edited to reflect his death? Also he resigned from Apple as CEO weeks before he died. I might be missing something so I'm just putting this question out there. I could be wrong but I didnt think these were the types of things you held onto even in death. --76.10.163.162 (talk) 22:49, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I actually thought the same thing, but the infobox reflects his career during his entire life. Those were his occupations, despite his resignation and death.-- JOJ Hutton  23:05, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Steve Jobs Played Harmonica?
This Diana Walker photo from the inside cover of Steve Jobs by Walter Isaacson shows (from a couple different angles, a pile of harmonicas on the corner of Steve's desk. Could this be noted in the Personal Life section? Harmonica is, at least in my view, one of the least likely instruments for him to have played. I think this offers a glimpse to his personality. Image from the book --Tqbrady (talk) 22:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Least likely? Try to think this through.  There's this guy named Bob Dylan, maybe you've heard of him?  Honestly, this says nothing about his personality at all.  Harmonicas were quite common in the 1960s and 1970s. Viriditas (talk) 22:37, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * A picture of a pile of harmonicas in not a reliable source stating that Jobs played the harmonica. We can't interpret sources. Maybe he was selling off his unplayed harmonica collection on eBay! Yworo (talk) 22:44, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Doubtful. It is more likely that he had several harmonicas in different keys. Viriditas (talk) 22:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Me having a piano in my home doesn't mean I play Rachmaninoff.....220.128.190.242 (talk) 05:15, 2 November 2011 (UTC) Shencypeter (talk) 05:16, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Jobs's Children
Why are the names of his three children with his wife never named? On her page they are-- Reed, Erin, and Eve. Also, I don't know if this is important, but Reed is currently a member of the Stanford University fencing team: http://www.gostanford.com/sports/c-fenc/mtt/jobs_reed00.html --Lbr123 (talk) 23:24, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅. -Classicfilms (talk) 20:27, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Edit Request - 10/28/2011
"in response to the detecting, increasing in size the at least one of the graphical representations;"

This is taken directly from the patent website but I feel there should be a "[sic]" used because of the error with the extra "the". ✅ Thank you. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 20:49, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Undone. "The at least one x" is perfectly standard and correct claims legaleze to refer to a previously introduced "at least one x"; in older patents it was expressed as "said at least one x".  Here are half a million examples.  Dicklyon (talk) 22:16, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

You're right. Thank you for your legaleze expertise. Although, "the at least one of the x" is used substantially less than "the at least one x," it still checks out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.120.213.143 (talk) 21:29, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Although reporters wrote glowing elegies after Jobs died, Los Angeles Times media critic James Rainey reported that they "came courtesy of reporters who—after deadline and off the record—would tell stories about a company obsessed with secrecy to the point of paranoia. They remind us how Apple shut down a youthful fanboy blogger, punished a publisher that dared to print an unauthorized Jobs biography and repeatedly ran afoul of the most basic tenets of a free press.[187]

No closing quotation mark. ✅ Thank you Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 20:31, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Major media published commemorative works. Time published a commemorative issue for Jobs on October 8, 2011. The issues cover featured a portrait of Jobs, taken by Norman Seeff, in which he is sitting in the lotus position holding the original Macintosh computer, first published in Rolling Stone in January 1984. The issue marked the eighth time Jobs has been featured on the cover of Time.[183] The issue included a photographic essay by Diana Walker, a retrospective on Apple by Harry McCracken and Lev Grossman, and a six-page essay by Walter Isaacson. Isaacson’s essay served as a preview of his biography, Steve Jobs.[184] Bloomberg Businessweek also published a commemorative issue. The cover of the magazine features Apple-style simplicity, with a black-and-white, up-close photo of Jobs and his years of birth and death. The issue was published without advertisements. It featured extensive essays by Steve Jurvetson, John Sculley, Sean Wisely, William Gibson, and Walter Isaacson. Isaacson’s essay served as a preview of his biography Steve Jobs.

The closing sentence is repeated in the ensuing paragraph. ✅ Thank you. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 20:34, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't think so many comments from others about his death is necessary. This is intended to be a somewhat static encyclopedic entry, not a running commentary or a newspaper article. I assume this section is so bloated due to his somewhat recent death, but I feel these comments should be winnowed down considerably as it seems a bit histrionic and sensational. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerrod111 (talk • contribs) 18:50, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I agree with your comment. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 20:49, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

"a eight-year battle with cancer" should be "an eight-year battle with cancer". Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.126.196.100 (talk) 04:05, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ But you should really make a new request each edit. Jeancey (talk) 04:07, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Infobox picture
I think we should revert back to the original infobox photo: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steve_Jobs&oldid=38747352

The current photo places an emphasis on the iPhone which is just one part of the story - the original photo offers a more general image. As it is, the article has too many post-2005 photos since this is what is currently available in terms of free images which distorts the overall point that this is a biographical article meant to span Jobs's entire life. Until we can get more images that span his entire life, I think we should at least try and keep the portrait photo as general as possible. I'll wait a few days to hear from other editors. If there is consensus, I will revert back to the original photo. -Classicfilms (talk) 21:00, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Apple has released this photo to the press. Can you please review the Apple's license and see if that's appropriate for Wikipedia? By the way, the same photo was used on Time's cover, which was also deleted as non-free. You couldn't even use Walter Issacson's book cover Steve Jobs (biography), which in itself was comissioned by Fortune Magazine in 2006. Honestly, I'm tired. 220.128.190.242 (talk) 01:59, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


 * This explains the image use policy: Image use policy.I liked the cover image too but it was not a free image as Jeancey explains below. -Classicfilms (talk) 04:59, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Why should you be able to use the cover of a copyrighted book, or the cover of a copyrighted magazine? How does that make any sense? We do not hold the copyright, therefore it can't go on wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder... does that make sense? Jeancey (talk) 02:13, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes it makes sense. The goal here is to improve Steve Jobs to good article status, and there's this statement: "" There are many non-free images of Steve Jobs already on WikiMedia, with plausible rationales for the pages they are used on. That means the image can be used with an acceptable rationale; but the rationales are easily challenged. Instead of being improved upon, the images, of goodwill or not, are simply undone. If we had a picture of Steve Jobs with the Mac in 1984, what kind of rationale are we calling for?Shencypeter (talk) 07:47, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I disagree. The photo you've suggested not only deemphasizes any gadget Steve might be holding, it also deemphasizes Steve himself. Also, it appears you've already taken charge in removing some of the post-2005 photos that you felt there were "too many" of, so I'm not sure that your concerns regarding the infobox photo are still valid (if they even were).--Matt Yohe (talk) 04:15, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Please do follow No personal attacks. Actually I was echoing Apple's own statement: "Apple statement: 'Apple has lost a visionary and creative genius, and the world has lost an amazing human being." If you want to restore the word inventor, find a source and add it. As for the photos, photos usually reflect the section they are placed in and in biographies that means the span of a person's life. By all means, restore the photos - and please Assume good faith. My goal is to improve the article so that it can go back up for Good article nominations again - I've been through GANs before and excess photos sometimes cause a problem -as well as a lack of balance in terms of periods of life. As for the infobox photo, I'm not sure what has been invalidated. Infobox photos encompass the life of a person and my point was that to hold any one single object that Jobs is associated with would thus exclude the others. The image I pointed to was in the infobox for quite some time so I'm not sure I see the problem with using it again. -Classicfilms (talk) 04:59, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I haven't specifically looked it up, but shouldn't infobox pictures be headshots rather than full body shots? If that is indeed the case, then the current picture fits it much better. Jeancey (talk) 05:07, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * That's a fair point Jeancey, hold on let me check.-Classicfilms (talk) 05:10, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I can't seem to find that it is specified anywhere - WP:IBX, WP:IMAGE - though you do make a fair point about using a headshot. In my past experience with GAN and FAN's, the image in the photobox can become an intense topic of conversation - I don't have a personal investment in which one is used, just that it is a photo that will get through GAN/FAN without controversy. -Classicfilms (talk) 05:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, who is attacking who, ClassicFilms? And responding to another topic in this topic is confusing and unhelpful.--Matt Yohe (talk) 05:29, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn - My apologies if you felt an attack, it was not my intention. As I was stating above I was trying to help the article since I've worked on a few Good Articles and Featured Articles. At this point I'm going to withdraw the request to change the image. -Classicfilms (talk) 05:42, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't feel attacked, I just didn't know who you were directing the linking of No personal attacks at. Assuming it was me made me confused since I am definitely only concerned with a person's words and am not looking to start a personal fight. --Matt Yohe (talk) 06:04, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

'Inventor'?
Whilst Jobs was renowned as a supreme and idiosyncratic marketeer, his status as an actual 'inventor' is highly questionable. He, himself, essentially claimed that taking other people's (good) ideas and selling them was the core of his approach. (I don't have a references handy, but perhaps others can help out). To put 'inventor' as his first attribute in the introduction has something of the feel of a post mortem reinvention of his persona. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.114.111 (talk) 23:55, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * He definitely held quite a few patents. I think that qualifies him as an inventor. Jeancey (talk) 23:57, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Interesting point though I have to agree with 86.179.114.111 - he never actually invented any of the products that Apple is known for. Holding a patent doesn't mean he actually invented the object. He was, however, a remarkable visionary when it came to both the digital age and marketing the objects invented by others. -Classicfilms (talk) 00:18, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Sentence now reads: "American businessman and visionary." -Classicfilms (talk) 01:07, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Is it an interesting point? And, what's this "he never actually invented any of the products..." talk? How many patents must someone have been an author on before he can be called an inventor? I'm not necessarily arguing for restoring the word "inventor" in the opening sentence, but I do question the justification behind this edit. --Matt Yohe (talk) 03:50, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * in·vent/inˈvent/

Verb: Create or design (something that has not existed before); be the originator of. Make up (an idea, name, story, etc.), esp. so as to deceive. I think to invent is used by Steve Jobs as a keynote buzz-word. "Today, Apple is reinventing the phone. and there it is..." Shencypeter (talk) 03:57, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Many good sources do refer to him as an "inventor", primarily even. And he is listed as inventor on at least 34 U.S. utility patents (I'm not counting design patents, as those are not usually considered to be inventions).  I don't think "inventor" is the right top-line description of him, but it should be included.  Dicklyon (talk) 04:07, 4 November 2011 (UTC)
 * He holds patents and there are many sources referring to him as an inventor and that's all that matters. Editor's own opinions and arguments of whether he is or is not is irrelevant. Take this debate to a blog. BashBrannigan (talk) 04:24, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Please see my comment in the section above. The quote from CBS below reflects a common way of describing Jobs:
 * Dan Farber at CBS summarised Jobs this way: “He was not an inventor in the classic sense, tinkering with program code to create the Worldwide Web or tinfoil to reproduce sounds on a phonograph. “Jobs was more of an orchestral conductor, charismatic and dictatorial, assembling the people and pieces of existing and emerging technology to craft an object of desire that reflected his personal aesthetic and vision for how people and machines should interact. “
 * http://www.firstpost.com/world/dream-of-being-your-own-inventor-not-the-next-steve-jobs-100958.html
 * -Classicfilms (talk) 05:06, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


 * If Steve Jobs doesn't qualify as an inventor, then who does?--72.152.237.28 (talk) 03:26, 7 November 2011 (UTC)


 * There's a very good argument made that he was a tweaker, not an inventor, in a current The New Yorker article, The Tweaker: The real genius of Steve Jobs by Malcolm Gladwell. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:44, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
 * All these arguments against Jobs being an inventor could just as easily be made about Edison. BashBrannigan (talk) 03:27, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed.
 * Jobs was an inventor.
 * "Steve used to say to me -- and he used to say this a lot -- "Hey Jony, here's a dopey idea."
 * And sometimes they were. Really dopey. Sometimes they were truly dreadful. But sometimes they took the air from the room and they left us both completely silent. Bold, crazy, magnificent ideas. Or quiet simple ones, which in their subtlety, their detail, they were utterly profound.


 * And just as Steve loved ideas, and loved making stuff, he treated the process of creativity with a rare and a wonderful reverence. You see, I think he better than anyone understood that while ideas ultimately can be so powerful, they begin as fragile, barely formed thoughts, so easily missed, so easily compromised, so easily just squished." -- Jonathon Ive, Apple Campus, Celebrating Steve, October 19, 2011 -- Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 04:01, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Since "visionary" is a vagueness term out of some political speech, can we go back to the clearly defined and substantiated word "inventor"?--98.88.36.141 (talk) 03:18, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Dont' know what you mean by "some political speech". Jobs has been called "visionary" numerous times by numerous sources. I also think visionary has a very specific meaning. "Visionary" is fine. Saying that, "inventor" is also appropriate. BashBrannigan (talk) 05:41, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Jobs biological parents
Why is that not mentioned? His biologial mother was American and his biological father Syrian. link

--85.165.214.159 (talk) 14:23, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It is mentioned. Under the Personal Life section. Jeancey (talk) 15:06, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Portrayals and coverage in books and film
The Book "iCon" was released in 2005, not in 1996 (it is about Steve's return to Apple in 1996): http://eu.wiley.com/WileyCDA/WileyTitle/productCd-0471720836.html The Book "The Second Coming of Steve Jobs" was released in 2001, not in 2005: http://www.alandeutschman.com/books_jobs_061206.htm --Kjuto (talk) 18:48, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 * ✅ Jeancey (talk) 19:02, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Documentary: Steve Jobs: The Lost Interview 2011 Conversation with Robert X. Cringely in 1995 for TV series The Triumph of the Nerds. http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi3675495961/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sayte21 (talk • contribs) 09:37, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Child businesspeople?
Jobs working for HP as a young adult does not make him a child businessperson. Many people work jobs as young adults: these people are called employees, not businesspeople. Jobs founded Apple when he was 21. At 21, a person is certainly an adult. This category is inappropriate. Yworo (talk) 21:23, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

I also don't see why he would be classified as an Internet pioneer, in fact the word 'internet' has only been mentioned 3 times in the article. He strictly programmed computers, moderately designed hardware and was a businessman. I doubt launching a website to promote your brand would be considered as pioneering the Internet. YuMaNuMa (talk) 14:28, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Ready for GA review?
I saw this on the GA nomination page. It appears to be a "drive-by" nomination by an editor who is not even a contributer to the article. Before a GA review happens, is there consensus from the article's main contributers that it is stable and close to meeting the good article criteria? AstroCog (talk) 13:49, 21 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I had the same thought. With popular articles like this drive by noms can be a waste of the reviewers time. While there is nothing preventing these sorts of noms and no procedure I know of for dealing with them I would suggest simply removing it if no one who is familiar with the articles steps forward. AIR corn (talk) 10:35, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Citation needed
I've searched the internet for proof that in the section Death: "Apple sued three "small fry" bloggers who reported tips about the company and its unreleased products and tried to use the courts to force them to reveal their sources.", but I found nothing. Can anyone cite that? Or it might be removed Anish 9807 <font color="#0000FF"> t c   11:45, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Photos
I put up a photo, File: Steve Jobs.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Steve_Jobs.JPG)Something's gone wrong, there is another photo on the site, not the statue at Budapest (made by me) Plese help me to put in the correct photo. derzsi elekes andor


 * I've already fixed it. Thanks for using the article talk page. Yworo (talk) 19:14, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Apple web update...
Steve Jobs is not mentioned on Apple's (apple.com) homepage anymore, please edit that area of the Death section. Source: apple.com

76.121.2.76 (talk) 01:26, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Done. Removed that entirely actually since it mentioned Pixar.com as well, which will likely disappear at some point in the near future anyway. This is wikipedia folks, not a news division. Matt Yohe (talk) 01:28, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Claim Jobs was Buddhist
I've removed the claim that Jobs was Buddhist. Reliable sources say he was influenced by Buddhism. The source that was cited in the infobox is internally contradictory. 

First, it says he went to visit Neem Karoli Baba, who was a Hindu guru, and that he returned a Buddhist. You don't return a Buddhist from visiting a Hindu guru. Then, it gives expert testimony from Robert Thurman, who is an expert on Buddhism, who is quoted as saying "I wouldn't say Steve Jobs was a practicing Buddhist". In order to become a Buddhist, one has to take Buddhist refuge. If Jobs had taken refuge, Thurman would have had no hesitation identifying Jobs as a Buddhist without qualification. Unless we have a better, consistent source, preferably that states what Buddhist teacher Jobs took refuge with, this should not be in the article. Perhaps he was a Buddhist, but we need a better, non-contradictory source. This one seems to have been written by an ignoramus, someone unable to tell one Eastern tradition from another who interviewed some people who wanted to claim Jobs as one of their own, with no reliable sourcing. Please let's not base such a claim on such weak reporting. If Jobs was a Buddhist, surely he said so in some interview during his lilfe! Yworo (talk) 00:43, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

It is also the opinion of other Buddhists that Jobs was not a Buddhist unless he had formally converted by taking refuge. See for example, Was Steve Jobs really Buddhist? in The Buddhist Door. They ask the very same question, when did Jobs ever take refuge or even clearly state that he was a Buddhist? Like many in the 1960s, he went to India and explored a number of Eastern traditions, but there is no evidence that he converted to any of them. And without conversion, you have not made a religious affiliation, but rather have simply accepted an influence. Clearly Jobs liked Buddhism, but stronger support is required to claim that he became a Buddhist. Yworo (talk) 01:00, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Sources say that his funeral was held at a church,that too is pretty ironic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anmolbreak (talk • contribs) 20:05, 29 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Not sure whether that's ironic or not, since I don't think we really know what his spiritual or religious beliefs were. It's most likely he was spiritually eclectic, never left his birth religion, whatever that was, explored and was influenced by the Eastern religions he studied, but ultimately never converted from or to any religion. Yworo (talk) 20:10, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I've continued to explore the sources available, and I think we may be able to reliably call Jobs a Zen Buddhist. I'm still digesting a few much more reliable sources but I think I'll be able to add something based on much more reliable sources soon. Yworo (talk) 20:21, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Zen Buddhist

Ok, done, a single sentence based on a reliable blog article by Steve Silberman, investigative reporter for Wired and backed up with a USA Today article. Silberman's article is based both on Walter Isaacson's biography as well as personal experience (he meditated at the same Zen center during the same period). This could perhaps be improved with a direct cite to the biography if necessary. Yworo (talk) 21:12, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit request on 1 January 2012
In the philanthropy section there is a typo. Please change "Apple has gone onto become the single largest contributor" to read "Apple has gone on to become the single largest contributor". In other words, "onto" should be "on to".

Jdb463 (talk) 20:14, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ – Acps110 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Quick change under "Management Style"
the text "Michael Dell was asked what he would do if he owned then-troubled Apple Computer" should probably be changed to "Michael Dell was asked what he would do if he ran then-troubled Apple Computer" (shareholders OWN Apple, management RUNS it). The source of this quote is ambiguous as to Dell's hypothetical role but it seems obvious from his answer that he imagined himself as running the company, not owning it outright (if he was Apple's sole owner he wouldn't have to "give the money back to the shareholders"). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.85.225.106 (talk) 17:59, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. Yes, agreed. -SusanLesch (talk) 18:05, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

Abdulfattah "John" Jandali
After reading this i'd recommend to reformulate the 2 first lines of the §Personal Life. Its not clear if he was a teacher and therefore that Joanne was his student (sources in the article aren't clear enough either. I know WP:BOLD, but my english isn't that good, I think. Kyro (talk) 21:05, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 7 February 2012
Typo on the death. Says "Aged" rather than "Age"

208.122.65.254 (talk) 13:31, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Not done: The "aged" in the infobox is auto-generated. It has the same meaning as "at the age of" and is used there and n the lede. It doesn't appear to be a typo, but you are welcome to suggest an alternate sentence for the lede. Celestra (talk) 16:08, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * The script automatically writes the current age of living subjects from their birth date until today's date. After the subject's birthday of any year, the age will automatically increment. For the deceased, the script is given the date of death parameter (used for age calculation), and the past tense of "age" is written. Shencypeter (talk) 08:45, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Lead section
Seeing that the lead section needs to be within "four paragraphs", I think it can be further compacted by removing redundant information, such as "a rare form of pancreatic cancer" (later fully stated as the endocrine tumor / cause of death), and "entrepreneur in the high tech business" reads like an understatement and an abrupt end to the section. The lead section does not summarize the honors and public recognitions section... (the paragraph in the said section beginning "He was widely regarded..." seemed like a good ending to the lead section at the time..). Suggestions? Shencypeter (talk) 04:04, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Consider: "he died of respiratory arrest" instead of "respiratory arrest was listed as the immediate cause of death with ... ... as underlying cause..."Shencypeter (talk) 04:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree with all of your suggestions. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 05:37, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Top Secret security clearance
Steve Jobs had a Top Secret security clearance from November 3, 1988 until July 31, 1990 with the "employing agency" being Pixar.

See Page 149 of 191 in released FBI document, referencing Defense Industrial Security Clearance Office. Found at: [] Lent (talk) 22:35, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Vandalism imminent
We're about to get vandalized...On 4Chan - /b/res/382742803#382752469 Daviddwd (talk) 02:58, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Update: the article just got semi-protected. Problem solved. Great going, guys. :) Daviddwd (talk) 03:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 24 February 2012
Please change "was an American businessman and inventor" to "was an American businessman, designer and inventor". Most of his patents were design patents, not utility patents. He only had about 40 utility patents and most of his utility patents were software patents. Here is a link to a presentation of Steve Jobs' patents. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/08/24/technology/steve-jobs-patents.html

Livepaul (talk) 23:46, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * ✅. I seem to remember it being in there before, but I can't recall or think of why it was removed. Jeancey (talk) 00:23, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Reality Distortion Field should be merged here. Small article devoted to a term to just describe Steve Jobs. It is not notable enough on its own. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 01:10, 27 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. Should make for a nice sub-section. Keep it as a redirect. HereToHelp (talk to me) 04:46, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. I leave it up to other editors to make further changes or move it if they so desire. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 10:35, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah, I just summarised it and linked it back, given that Reality distortion field existed (it looks like it was restored on the 28th). I don't think we really need the Dilbert parody, tangential "used to criticize Apple" or the "term has extended in industry to other managers and leaders" in what's meant to be a biography of Jobs. --McGeddon (talk) 14:53, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It's now been redirected back here again by Hariztoh9, because there was "some support" for the original redirect in this talk thread. Note that the current version of the section has less content than the now-redirected article had, so we should remember to restore that somewhere. --McGeddon (talk) 17:38, 2 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Done. --Harizotoh9 (talk) 17:43, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 29 February 2012
The title of the statue picture is "Steve Jobs statue at Science Park, Budapest", but the statue is not at the Science Park, but at Graphisoft Park. Calling it a science park (lowercase) is still not accurate as Graphisoft park is an office park, not a science one. Please correct the title to "Steve Jobs statue at Graphisoft Park, Budapest".

Hu:Totya (talk!)  12:01, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Science Park, Budapest is here
 * Graphisoft Park and the statue is here
 * Graphisoft Park website


 * ✅ Frank  &#124;  talk  13:51, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 1 March 2012
Edit some grammar in the subject.

Raghurampage (talk) 19:06, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Please change " He is is best known as the co-founder" to " He is best known as the co-founder".


 * ✅. Jeancey (talk) 19:11, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Add in "Steve Jobs on Apple philosophy"
"I would trade all of my technology for an afternoon with Socrates." - Steve Jobs (He indeed could say this, as he were a buddhist - so why not mentioning at least once his being a student of a good teacher like Socrates or Buddha?)


 * The article already details his involvement with Zen. "An afternoon with Socrates" is not related to Apple philosophy, and would be off-topic in that section. Yworo (talk) 19:15, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

Early career section is a mess
What first drew my attention to this section was a possibly incorrect link to Hariakhan Baba. Within the Hariakhan Baba article it says that he stopped teaching in 1924, long before Steve Jobs was alive. That article suggests one may be thinking of Haidakhan Babaji whom taught from 1970 to 1984. I don't know enough about Hinduism to make this correction to the article, because I might be unaware of something regarding these two men.

Furthermore, I am having a hard time understanding why any of this information about Steve Jobs and his religious and drug experimentations has to do with one's "early career". I think personal life issues should be in a separate heading than "Early Career". Hazel-roo (talk) 17:05, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Steve Jobs' Grammy Award
It currently states that Steve Jobs "received" the Grammy. It should note that he was "awarded" a Grammy which was accepted by Eddy Cue. (You can read about Eddy Cue here.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Macintoshkid (talk • contribs) 16:45, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

iMac inaccuracy
The subsection entitled 'iMac' states: "There was some technical revolutions for iMac too. The USB ports being the only device inputs on the iMac."

First of all, the second statement is only true of the very first iMac model and some of the other early models sold in 1998-9 (e.g., M6709LL/A, M7345LL/A, M7440LL/A, M7469LL/A) and the 2000 Indigo (M7667LL/A). However, it is misleading, since there were Firewire ports in addition to USB ports on the 1999 iMac DV (M7493LL/A), DV SE (M7668LL/A), and the 2000 DV I/R (M7639LL/A), DV+ (M7676LL/A),and nearly all later models right up to 2011. So, it is not the case that the presence of only USB ports was a defining feature of the series, even in the early models. See <http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/imac/index-imac.html>. This claim should be clarified or deleted.

Second, the article that is cited to back up the claim that the first iMac was revolutionary in having no other kinds of input ports, <http://www.applegazette.com/imac/apple-history-evolution-of-the-imac/>, offers no concrete support for that claim.

Finally, both of those sentences are grammatically awful. The singular verb form 'was' does not agree with the plural noun it modifies, 'revolutions'. The sentence should read "There WERE...revolutions...." "The USB ports being the only device inputs on the iMac" is a sentence fragment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.218.17.146 (talk) 04:31, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

The 'Business Life' section, particularly from 'Inventions and Designs' onwards, contains appalling grammar and needs a complete re-write. Much of it reads as though it has been through Google Translate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RuffianXion (talk • contribs) 20:58, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

now that steve is dead
how long must we wait before it becomes appropriate to delete this article? or put it into a archives? is there a wikipedia policy concerning 'public business figures'?-- because the general manager of the jiffy lube in my home-town (a very cool guy! also played high school baseball!  won state!) is also probably deserving of some recog. .neinsig. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rasko99 (talk • contribs) 14:55, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * actually, it's this comment that should be deleted. It's just a personal rant. BashBrannigan (talk) 22:06, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Um, Charlemagne has been dead for over 11 centuries. And his article is still here. Just because someone died, doesn't mean their article can be deleted. —  AMK152  (t • c) 20:50, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As 'AMK152' correctly says, articles are not deleted when the person has died. Instead it simply needs to put a death date into the infobox which has already been done. Jwikiediting (talk) 21:41, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Reality Distortion Field - stray section
Hi all. I think the RDF section may fit into "Management Style..".... I might have missed the archived discussions before when this section was made. Any opinions?Shencypeter (talk) 13:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Weasel words
I have added the weasel words template because of statements like iMac’s colorful appearance showed how high Steve Jobs immediately set the bar for innovative and disruptive design. The template can be removed after getting rid of such "colourful" statements. BeŻet (talk) 09:57, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

A film about Steve Jobs
Croatian writer Giancarlo Kravar: Based on the authorized biography written by Walter Isaacson, have begun preparations for the filming of Steve Jobs. For the writer, according to U.S. media, elected Oscar winner Aaron Sorkin, and the film will realize Sony.78.2.97.91 (talk) 15:29, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia not a forum & talkpages are a place to discuss how to improve the associated article, not to discuss the subject. Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 17:16, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Apple II and plastic
The article states that Apple II was the first computer to be enclosed in plastic. However I'm pretty sure the Xerox Alto has been also enclosed in plastic as seen in. Is this correct? BeŻet (talk) 13:45, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
 * No, the alto had a metal case. If I can find a link I'll provide it. BashBrannigan (talk) 01:10, 11 May 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, found this: http://www.wadlow.org/xerox-alto.html which says "Each Alto is housed in a beautifully formed, textured beige metal cabinet" BashBrannigan (talk) 01:16, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for this clarification. BeŻet (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:47, 24 May 2012 (UTC).

viewpoints
Hi to all. I think article needs an integrated section with viewpoint name, to talk about Jobs's viewpoints (specially about life, death ), faith and  etc. I can make it. Are you agree? Mohsen.1987 (talk) 17:05, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Apple started in a garage
The part about Apple and that they started Apple in a garage seems to be wrong. "Jobs, Wozniak, and Ronald Wayne founded Apple computer in the garage of Jobs's parents in order to sell it"

According to Steve Woz from his book.

" Stanford 1934 graduates Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard founded Hewlett-Packard in their garage in 1939. Now, a lot of people confuse that story with Apple’s, saying that we started Apple in a garage. Not true. HP started in a garage, true. But in the case of Apple, I worked in my room at my apartment and Steve worked in his bedroom in his parents’ house. We only did the very last part of assembly in his garage. But that’s how it goes with stories. " Wozniak, Steve (2007-10-17). iWoz: Computer Geek to Cult Icon (p. 123). Norton. Kindle Edition. Henriknj (talk) 17:35, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
 * The statement may be incomplete, but I don't think it's incorrect. Markula met the Apple team in the garage, and Woz was there to demo it in the garage so the garage played a significant role. Woz's clarification that much of the earliest work was done in their bedrooms before moving to the garage could be mentioned, but it almost seems a matter of trivia. Is it important enough to include? BashBrannigan (talk) 01:02, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Steve Jobs Birthplace
Hi,

I was wondering if the birth city is accurate for Steve Jobs. I have seen numerous sources list San Francisco, however, I have also seen Green Bay Wisconsin listed. Which is accurate? It is interesting to note his parents were both UW students/employees and his sister was born in Green Bay. As an example of a site that lists Green Bay, www.city-data.com lists Steve Jobs as a celebrity born there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.62.94.170 (talk) 20:04, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * From what I understand, he was put up for adoption pre-birth and his mother went to the couple in San Francisco to actually have him. So His parents lived in Wisconsin, but he was actually born in San Francisco. I might be wrong though. Jeancey (talk) 20:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

So I found a copy of the birth certificate which is dated March 2, 1955 - though he was born on Feb 24, 1955. The name of the hospital is blank - which doesn't really help to establish where he was born. http://www.astro.com/imwiki/adb/Stevejobs.jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.62.94.170 (talk) 12:36, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * That would be incorrect. The picture you linked gives his date of birth as February 24, 1955, in San Francisco, California. It was received by the registrar and filed on March 2, 1955. No hospital might indicate a Home-birth. Jeancey (talk) 15:03, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Listing Jobs' other sister
Is it appropriate on Wikipedia under "relatives" to list next to his blood sister, Mona Simpson, his adopted sister, Patty Jobs? Walter Dufresne (talk) 15:17, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Jobs images
Can we get a single picture of Jobs in this thread before he got cancer? The man lived a long life. For most of it, he looked good. Any other half-decent bio-article of this length, be it Joseph Stalin or Oprah Winfrey you'll find pictures of them from throughout their lives, not just from the five-year period we knew them in before they died.
 * Steve Jobs had cancer for almost the whole time Wikipedia existed, so we didn't get the chance to photograph him before that. Pictures other people have taken are copyrighted so we can't use them. If you have some photos you took of Jobs when he was well, and you're willing to release them for free use, I'll bet the Commons would be happy have them. Keep your fork, there&#39;s pie (talk) 02:40, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Philanthropy
Apple's philanthropy is mostly irrelevant to Jobs' personal philanthropy. Most of it should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.223.185.25 (talk) 18:48,19 July 2012 (UTC)

In this section, rather than speculating that he 'might have done philanthropy', I think it is worth including what Steve Jobs said in public: "Bill is basically unimaginative and has never invented anything, which is why I think he's more comfortable now in philanthropy than technology. He just shamelessly ripped off other people's ideas." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.147.191.50 (talk) 18:02, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Birth Parents
Maybe somebody can work the following into the article: Why did he meet his birth mother, but shunned his birth father? What is the key detail Im missing? Im not understanding why there was lingering resentment towards the birth father, but he met his birth mother. Marc S. Dania fl 206.192.35.125 (talk) 14:17, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I think the article already sufficiently covers this topic. I'm inclined to think the phsychological reasons behind Jobs' choices would be too much detail and perhaps even innapropriate for an encyclopedia. BashBrannigan (talk) 17:43, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * If we had to cite Issacson's book for everything we want to put on here, users might as well go read the book, right? Shencypeter (talk) 06:35, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Steve Jobs chanting Hare Krishna
Steve Jobs

“… I would walk the 7 miles across town every Sunday night to get one good meal a week at the Hare Krishna temple. I loved it. And much of what I stumbled into by following my curiosity and intuition turned out to be priceless later on.”

Steve Jobs never mentions getting FREE meals at the Hare Krishna temple.

"The first story is about connecting the dots ... it started before I was born" -

He only says that he LOVED walking over two hours each way "to get one GOOD meal a week at the Hare Krishna temple."

There is significant difference.

Steve made a conscious and specific point of chanting (saying, speaking, intoning, verbalizing, communicating, vibrating) Hare Krishna.

Steve was known both as a private person and an accomplished marketing genius. He did not take the time for an extended chanting of Hare Krishna, nor did he suggest that the Stanford graduates go to a Hare Krishna temple for a "free" meal.

He closed his address by thrice reminding them to "Stay Hungry."

He had already told them where he loved getting good meals and priceless knowledge.

Steve was familiar, as all devotees are, with Srimad Bhagavatam 3:33 6

"Anyone can become eligible to perform Vedic sacrifices if he ONCE utters the holy name of the Supreme Personality of Godhead or chants about Him, hears about His pastimes, offers Him obeisances or even remembers Him."

http://skywriter2012.wordpress.com/veda/steve-jobs-chants-hare-krishna-at-stanford-2005/

96.33.162.73 (talk) 03:05, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, maybe I'm dense, but I can't figure out what you're saying. What's your point? BashBrannigan (talk) 03:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

It is not about what I'm saying, but about what Steve said ...about connecting the dots.

Point #! - the article states: "He continued auditing classes at Reed while sleeping on the floor in friends' dorm rooms, returning Coke bottles for food money, and getting weekly FREE meals at the local Hare Krishna temple.[44]

The author's statement falsifies Steve's intent and quote by implying that he walked over 2 hours to satisfy his hunger with FREE meals. Steve says no such thing.

Read (and listen) to Steve's exact quote. Look at the printed words (dots?) and follow them from when he says "it started before I was born" to where he chants "Hare Krishna...I loved it" to the end of the paragraph "and much of what I stumbled into ... turned out to be priceless."

The rest of Steve's 'first story' is 'just one example (i.e. the Mac fonts)' of the priceless knowledge he acquired...by following his curiosity and intuition.

POINT #2 - the article correctly states that after chanting Hare Krishna for a few years ...

"He also became a serious practitioner of Zen Buddhism, engaged in lengthy meditation retreats at the Tassajara Zen Mountain Center, the oldest Sōtō Zen monastery in the US.[53] He considered taking up monastic residence at Eihei-ji in Japan, and maintained a lifelong appreciation for Zen.[54] "

Again this may be true, but his interest in Zen Buddhism and other spiritual traditions could perhaps be further clarified by noting that, as he neared death, he specifically chose to chant ONLY "Hare Krishna. I loved it" at the Stanford commencement and avoided even mentioning words like 'meditation' 'Zen' or 'Buddhism' - this was NOT an accident.

In summary ... If the author is too dense to appreciate the subtleties of Steve's speech, perhaps his opinion that Jobs received FREE meals at the Hare Krishna temple should just be deleted and replaced by Steve's exact quote.

“… I would walk the 7 miles across town every Sunday night to get one good meal a week at the Hare Krishna temple. I loved it. And much of what I stumbled into by following my curiosity and intuition turned out to be priceless later on.”

The statement about his interest in Buddhism could also be clarified as follows...

"... ALTHOUGH he became a serious practitioner of Zen Buddhism, engaged in lengthy meditation retreats at the Tassajara Zen Mountain Center, the oldest Sōtō Zen monastery in the US, and considered taking up monastic residence at Eihei-ji in Japan, and maintained a lifelong appreciation for Zen" ...

... he nevertheless avoided any mention of meditation or Zen Buddhism in what he himself wanted to be his 'farewell message" at Stanford, and suggested to his disciples that they "Stay Hungry." He recommended getting "one good meal" and chanting Hare Krishna instead.

"It was their farewell message as they signed off. Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish. And I have always wished that for myself. And now, as you graduate to begin anew, I wish that for you. Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish." I think both Steve and I have made our point clearly. Further understanding may perhaps be acquired by following Steve's advice.

"Hare Krishna. I loved it"

96.33.162.73 (talk) 12:00, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm very sorry, but your writing is still unclear to me. As best as I can understand, you seem to feel Wikipedia misrepresents Jobs when he refers to getting free meals at the Hare Krishna temple. However, from reading Jobs' speech, when he says "I loved it" it seems grammatically clear he was referring not specifically to the temple, but to all the experiences listed previously within the paragraph, including the free meal. Wikipedia can only use reliable published sources free from editors' own interpretations. If I haven't properly understood your argument, perhaps another editor can assist. BashBrannigan (talk) 04:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 30 July 2012
The section "Stock options backdating issue" includes a dead link and incorrect numbers. The stock price at backdated option issuance (the backdated issuance date) is $18.30 as stated, but the stock price at actual option issuance (the true issuance date when the price had risen) was $21.01, not $21.10, and the effective income allegedly not reported by Jobs, and recorded as an expense by Apple, was $20,325,000, not $20,000,000 (i.e., [$21.01 - $18.30] x 7.5m). Not noted in the text, but can be validated by the following source, the backdate was October 19, 2001, and the true issuance date was December 18, 2001. The source is http://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2007/comp20086.pdf, which is the actual complaint that was filed by the SEC. The relevant pages are 8-10 of the complaint.

Stealthmouse (talk) 12:06, 30 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Minor edits like this don't need a request template. You may ask at the help desk though.--Canoe1967 (talk) 09:35, 1 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm reopening the request. Minor edit or not, a request template is necessary when the article is semi-protected and the requester is not autoconfirmed. I'm going offline now or I'd handle it. To Stealthmouse: it would be helpful if you'd provide the exact "before and after" changes you want, verbatim. Rivertorch (talk) 10:47, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: make 4 more edits to other pages, then you can edit this page yourself. Mdann52 (talk) 15:12, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 1 August 2012
Please change:

iMac Main article: IMac

Apple iMac was introduced in 1998 and its innovative design was directly the result of Jobs's return to Apple. Apple boasted "the back of our computer looks better than the front of anyone else's".[141] Described as "cartoonlike" the first iMac, clad in Bondi Blue plastic, was unlike any personal computer that came before. In 1999, Apple introduced Graphite gray Apple iMac and since has switched to all-white. Design ideas were intended to create a connection with the user such as the handle and a breathing light effect when the computer went to sleep..[142] The Apple iMac sold for $1,299 at that time. There was some technical revolutions for iMac too. The USB ports being the only device inputs on the iMac. So the iMac’s success helped popularize the interface among third party peripheral makers, which is evidenced by the fact that many early USB peripherals were made of translucent plastic to match the iMac design.[143]

To:

iMac Main article: IMac

Apple iMac was introduced in 1998 and its innovative design was directly the result of Jobs's return to Apple. Apple boasted "the back of our computer looks better than the front of anyone else's".[141] Described as "cartoonlike" the first iMac, clad in Bondi Blue plastic, was unlike any personal computer that came before. In 1999 Apple introduced a graphite gray Apple iMac and has since switched to all-white. Design ideas were intended to create a connection with the user, such as the handle and a breathing light effect when the computer went to sleep.[142] The Apple iMac sold for $1,299 at that time. There were some technical revolutions for iMac too.With USB ports being the only device inputs on the iMac, the iMac’s success helped popularize the interface among third party peripheral makers, as evidenced by the fact that many early USB peripherals were made of translucent plastic to match the iMac design.[143]

Please change:

iPod Main article: IPod

The first generation of iPod was released October 23, 2001. The major innovation of the iPod was its small size achieved by using a 1.8" hard drive compared to the 2.5" drives common to players at that time. The capacity of the first generation iPod ranged from 5G to 10 Gigabytes.[144] The iPod sold for US$399 and more than 100,000 iPods were sold before the end of 2001. The introduction of the iPod resulted in Apple becoming a major player in the music industry.[145] Also, the iPod’s success prepared the way for the iTunes music store and the iPhone.[134] After the 1st generation of iPod, Apple released the hard drive-based iPod classic, the touchscreen iPod Touch, video-capable iPod Nano, screenless iPod Shuffle in the following years.[145]

To:

iPod Main article: IPod

The first generation of iPod was released October 23, 2001. The major innovation of the iPod was its small size achieved by using a 1.8" hard drive compared to the 2.5" drives common to players at that time. The capacity of the first generation iPod ranged from 5 to 10 Gigabytes.[144] The iPod sold for US$399 and more than 100,000 iPods were sold before the end of 2001. The introduction of the iPod resulted in Apple becoming a major player in the music industry.[145] Also, the iPod’s success prepared the way for the iTunes music store and the iPhone.[134] After the first generation of iPod, Apple released the hard drive-based iPod classic, the touchscreen iPod Touch, video-capable iPod Nano and screenless iPod Shuffle in the following years.[145]

Please change:

iPhone Main article: IPhone

Jobs began work on the first iPhone in 2005 and the first iPhone was released on June 29, 2007. The iPhone created such a sensation that a survey indicated six out of ten Americans were aware of its release. Time magazine declared it "Invention of the Year" for 2007.[146] The Apple iPhone is a small device with multimedia capabilities and functions as a quad-band touch screen smartphone.[147] A year later, the iPhone 3G was released in July 2008 with the key feature was support for GPS, 3G data and quad-band UMTS/HSDPA. In June 2009, the iPhone 3GS, added voice control, a better camera, and a faster processor was introduced by Phil Schiller.[148] iPhone 4 was thinner than previous models, had a five megapixel camera which can record videos in 720p HD, and added a secondary front facing camera for video calls.[149] A major feature of the iPhone 4S, introduced in October 2011, was Siri, which is a virtual assistant that is capable of voice recognition.[146]

To:

iPhone Main article: IPhone

Jobs began work on the iPhone in 2005 and the first iPhone was released on June 29, 2007. The iPhone created such a sensation that a survey indicated six out of ten Americans were aware of its release. Time magazine declared it "Invention of the Year" for 2007.[146] The Apple iPhone is a small device with multimedia capabilities and functions as a quad-band touch screen smartphone.[147] The iPhone 3G was released in July 2008 icluding the key features: support for GPS, 3G data and quad-band UMTS/HSDPA. In June 2009, the iPhone 3GS with added voice control, a better camera, and a faster processor was introduced by Phil Schiller.[148] The iPhone 4 was thinner than previous models, had a five megapixel camera which can record videos in 720p HD, and added a secondary front facing camera for video calls.[149] A major feature of the iPhone 4S, introduced in October 2011, was Siri, which is a virtual assistant that is capable of voice recognition.[146]

Reasons: Grammar, clarity/readability.

RuffianXion (talk) 12:08, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It's very hard to see exactly what changes you want to have made. Since you have a username, just wait until you've surpassed the number of edits you need, and make the changes yourself. Nczempin (talk) 14:30, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree. The first change is just a was to were. I will fix that and close the request.--Canoe1967 (talk) 15:10, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

List of vegetarians
Some input please. Was Steve Jobs a vegetarian? There is dispute whether he should be listed at List of vegetarians. Did he ever make any public statements about being one, in the final decade of his life?  D r e a m Focus  15:15, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * There's little question Jobs was a vegetarian, but from what I've read it wasn't for moral reasons. I know some are vegetarians because of moral reasons and regard vegetarianism as you would a religion. For those it would require strict adherence to be a "true vegetarian". Jobs seems to have been a vegetarian solely for his belief in its health benefits and his personal tastes, It was a strongly held and lifelong practice, but not morally based. BashBrannigan (talk) 00:29, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * He ate fish, eels, and eggs. Perhaps the list should have a section listing the reasons why someone choose not to eat most types of meat.   D r e a m Focus  02:08, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect statement: Bono did NOT say Apple was the largest contributor to the Global Fund
Under Philanthropy:

"Through its sales, Apple has been the largest contributor to the Global Fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, according to Bono.[157]"

This is incorrect. In the article sourced, Bono said that Apple was the largest donor to Product [RED]'s gift to the Global Fund. Product [RED] is a much smaller charity than the Global Fund. What Apple contributed was a large part of Product [RED], but not necessarily a large part of the Global Fund. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.27.28.71 (talk) 05:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 22 September 2012
The subsection &ldquo;Apple II Computer&rdquo; contains this sentence:
 * At the same year, they began work on a supercomputer named Lisa; it featured a bit-sliced architecture.

Proposed new version:
 * 1) First, it's not clear that a brief reference to the Lisa even needs to exist in a subsection created for a different machine.
 * 2) If a Lisa reference is retained, it should link to the Apple Lisa article.
 * 3) The Lisa was an innovative personal computer, not a &ldquo;supercomputer&rdquo;.
 * 4) The Lisa did not use a bit-slice architecture, it used a mainstream Motorola 68000 processor.
 * 5) The leading phrase &ldquo;At the same year&rdquo; is awkward.
 * That same year, they began work on a computer named Lisa which would feature a graphical user interface.

98.218.86.55 (talk) 19:35, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

✅ Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 19:23, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

Jobs had worked for Apple until the day before his death
At the end of the "Health Issues" section. This implies that he died on August 25, the day after resigning as CEO. In fact he died on October 5. The reference mentions a phone call with Tim Cook the day before he died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.89.216.53 (talk) 07:21, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I rewrote it. The sources say he worked for Apple up until the day he died.    D r e a m Focus  08:43, 20 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Should be continued — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.216.214.59 (talk) 21:55, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Whoops. Fixed it now.   D r e a m Focus  21:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Aids
It is documented about Jobs having full blown aids but it wasn't included in the article. It needs to be added — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.180.228.247 (talk) 23:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Do you have any reliable sources for that? Jeancey (talk) 23:35, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Here is a reliable source. http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Steve_Jobs_purported_HIV_medical_status_results%2C_2008 Wikileaks factchecks the background of the submitter and the authenticity of each document they publish. Although they aren't 100% sure about the dates, they put it up because there is a plausible explanation. So it could be included as, "It has been reported [..] might have been HIV positive," or "Because of documents published in 2009, it has been rumored that Jobs had AIDS," or something like that. His family hasn't denied it and I am sure they would have cleared it up if they knew it wasn't true. 2001:5C0:1101:9D00:1D16:75B7:F44D:67 (talk) 02:04, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * a known fake. See http://wikileaks.org/wiki/Correction_of_DPA_article_in_respect_to_WikiLeaks_and_Steve_Jobs_HIV_test BashBrannigan (talk)
 * It wasn't proven to be counterfeit. The page I linked already contained the amendment from your release. An explanation that was offered was that the computer document is a re-issue. What about the handwritten one? This (possibly fake) medical report should be added as a source to a statement that says it has been alleged (but not proven) that Steve Jobs was HIV positive (no matter if the scanned page is legit or not, there was at least one person who alleged it). 2001:5C0:1101:9D00:FC16:959C:B484:CFF (talk) 15:25, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No way. You'll need references to reputable media for this to ever get into Wikipedia. BashBrannigan (talk) 17:39, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Critics
There should be a critical section about him. This should include the testimony of 70 people who said he twisted and distorted the truth in an FBI file. It should also include that he didn't actually invent anything. He just used things that already exactly and put a new name on it. The iPad is merely a tablet computer which have been sold for well over a decade. The iPod is an MP3 player. The Mac is an x86 PC with a Unix system he stole from AT&T and put a GUI on top of it. Jobs was just really good at marketing but there isn't anything better about his stuff, there is just an apple on it and it's more expensive. I also heard he never donated anything, not even to cancer research. He could have given half his fortune to cancer research and we would have a cure today. I don't see why this article should be about praising and his life. I would like someone to gather some sources and write it in a way that complies with Wikipedia standards, as I am probably too biased as a computer scientists who feels that this guy capitalized on other people's inventions. 2001:5C0:1101:9D00:1D16:75B7:F44D:67 (talk) 01:47, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Feel free to contribute content from reputable sources. BashBrannigan (talk) 01:55, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, I am just going to put some sources here first.

No giving to charity: http://www.forbes.com/sites/larahoffmans/2011/10/06/the-charity-of-steve-jobs/ http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/08/29/the-mystery-of-steve-jobss-public-giving/ Stealing other's ideas: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20124720-37/jonathan-ive-steve-jobs-stole-my-ideas/#! http://techrights.org/2011/10/23/steve-jobs-exposed/ FBI file and witness testimony (drug use and twisting and bending the truth, p. 38): http://vault.fbi.gov/steve-jobs/steve-jobs-part-01-of-01 Please review the sources and confirm their credibility. Thanks. 2001:5C0:1101:9D00:FC16:959C:B484:CFF (talk) 15:16, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm looking forward to the reliable source that states that if Jobs donated to cancer research, that a cure would have been found. I missed that news.  --SubSeven (talk) 16:26, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
 * He didn't believe in science and medicine and refused life-saving procedures. He didn't have any reason to give to cancer research:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/10/20/60minutes/main20123269.shtml I will talk to some renown cancer foundation like Komen for the Cure and ask how money $ m would be needed to determine the ultimate cure within a reasonable amount of time t for a number of cancer types n (since a decease is not an NP-complete problem, I'd say a reasonable time would be 1 to 3 years). 2001:5C0:1101:9D00:3B:3DC1:9344:17D3 (talk) 00:07, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Was He Evil?
Jobs has regularly been referred to as a genius, but considering Apple's notoriously anti-democratic DRM policies, he could only be considered an evil genius. (alternatively) Steve Jobs was either unaware of Apple's anti-democratic DRM policies, or himself opposed democracy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Puzzyfuppy (talk • contribs) 01:42, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * DRM isn't anti-democratic, and it's a big jump to blame it on Steve alone and consider him anti-democratic for that. There was a reason why, when he started iTunes, he intended it as a replacement for music piracy (according to his biography).--Jasper Deng (talk) 01:53, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
 * He did it to sell his music players, not to stop piracy.  D r e a m Focus  22:20, 14 November 2012 (UTC)