Talk:Tox (protocol)

Prose
I was able to convert the list format in the features section into prose. I was also able to give the prose sentence improvements. Geo g guy (talk) 06:02, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Compatibility with other systems
The article doesn't mention whether Tox is capable of communicating with other open-source audio or video conferencing systems, such Ekiga, or whether such compatibility is contemplated in the future. It would be too much to expect, though, for it to be able to communicate with Skype clients, since Skype is closed-source and proprietary. — QuicksilverT @ 18:26, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

Tox Foundation
I considered last changes made by Stqism inappropriate, since they were made mostly to cover his own tracks in this shady history with stolen money of Tox Foundation. Therefore, I undid his edits. Digital.Maniac (talk) 06:38, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Connection to 4chan
It's pretty well known that Tox comes out of 4chan's /g/ (technology) board, but given the nature of the site I'm not sure how you'd verify that in a cite-able manner — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hatesdigimon (talk • contribs) 00:19, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Repo
I don't know how (I'm not an editor), but the repository should be changed - it points to a fork, and is presumeably made for purposes of advertisement. It does not point to the actual toxcore by irungentoo, but to a fork (c-toxcore) by someone else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.4.89.211 (talk) 18:49, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
 * c-toxcore (aka toktok) is an official fork of the old irungentoo's codebase, which was created around the time the original developer pretty much stopped supporting the code. Since only irungentoo was able to merge pulls, developers had to create a fork in order to develop toxcore further. This blog entry on Tox official site can be used as a confirmation of the official nature of this fork: https://blog.tox.chat/2016/10/update-ubuntu-yakkety-packages-tox-in-app-store-and-toxcore-updates/. As such, link to the project's repo should not be removed nor changed. 134.191.220.74 (talk) 07:50, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

No information about the protocol
Considering that this article supposedly is about the Tox protocol, it is disappointing that it contains no information about the actual protocol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.127.31.113 (talk) 07:48, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 6 December 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: Consensus is that there is no primary topic, and that the article on the place in France should be moved to Tox, Haute-Corse. (closed by non-admin page mover) BegbertBiggs (talk) 22:53, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

– WP:PRIMARYTOPIC per page views. Kleinpecan (talk) 09:25, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Tox (protocol) → Tox
 * Tox → Tox (commune)
 * Support first, oppose second. No WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. For the second, I propose Tox, Haute-Corse, which seems to be the convention for French communes.--Ortizesp (talk) 15:26, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Your reason here for supporting the first sounds contradictory: if there is no primarytopic, why should any one specific meaning be moved to the un-disambiguated name? You later say you actually oppose the first in a second !vote. Could you please clarify what your position is, possibly simply by striking one of your two !votes? DMacks (talk) 19:32, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Hey, I would like to strike my first vote above, if you may remind me how to do so?--Ortizesp (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Wrap it in . DMacks (talk) 22:17, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose 1st, support Tox, Haute-Corse per Manual of Style/France- and French-related articles since there is also a settlement. No primary topic, the place gets 103 views but the protocol gets 1,708, the protein gets 268 and the wrapper gets 224[]. The protein and place probably have more long-term significance than the protocol so a DAB seems best.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 17:27, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Support this alternative.--Ortizesp (talk) 20:40, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Support both with Tox, Haute-Corse as the disambiguation for the commune. The protocol isn't that prominent, but I think it is primary if you ignore the dictionary definition of an abbreviation for "Toxic", as the other definitions are even less prominent. User:力 (powera,  π,  ν ) 02:00, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * What about the long-term significance of TOX? Surely this in addition to the problems with PT swaps suggests the DAB is the best option.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 10:23, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced that TOX is more important than a thousand other proteins, and it would certainly not be capitalized "Tox". However, a fair point about the PT swaps; it's possibly better to wait a few months for the second swap (if prominence of the protocol grows from now). User:力 (powera,  π,  ν ) 17:07, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Tox (protocol) has a lot of activity as a result of vandalism and cleanup/patrol related to it. Doesn't mean it's not the most-viewed page among the DAB options or that it's not the most popular among actual readers, but simply a confounding variable in this dataset. DMacks (talk) 15:30, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose 1st, support Tox, Haute-Corse for 2nd per User:Crouch, Swale above. The safest bet would be to have a disambiguation page (Tox (disambiguation)) at the basename. Paintspot Infez (talk) 16:03, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose 1st, support Tox, Haute-Corse for 2nd and move Tox (disambiguation) to basename. In ictu oculi (talk) 17:00, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose 1st, support Tox, Haute-Corse for 2nd and move Tox (disambiguation) to basename. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:45, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

COI edits
Wikipedia needs reliable, secondary sources - see WP:RS. Github, blogs, and other self published stuff is not sufficient and has led to this article being stuffed with bloat and promotion. In particular, an editor with a conflict of interest absolutely should not be edit warring to keep in writing about themselves and/or their own work, especially not cited to their own websites. MrOllie (talk) 12:20, 12 February 2024 (UTC)


 * While I agree with the conflict of interest in some of those edits, the list of Tox clients was useful and I don't see any other references that could support them besides the self-published ones since we don't have news/media covering library updates. Could we revert just the clients list? Sumosacerdote (talk) 20:49, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
 * (Disclaimer: I'm not involved in any way with the development of any library, client, program or application that uses Tox. I'm also not involved in sales, promotion or any kind of publicity towards that protocol.) Sumosacerdote (talk) 20:52, 5 May 2024 (UTC)