Talk:Windows Live

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was TO REDIRECT CERTAIN ARTICLES TO THEIR OFFICIAL NAME per discussion and Table 2 (Proposed Decision column) below.

Hi,

Several articles have names which aren't actually the product names. Here's a list of misrecognized service/product names:

Table 1

As you can see from the table, the most widespread problem is the use of "Windows Live", when the actual service only includes "Live" in its name.

Would there be a problem if I started hauling through these pages, moving them accordingly? I'd also like to improve some of them a lot.

--Szajd 17:31, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, first, I think you should do some more research.... The majority of those names are left that way to keep the name as short as possible. Several of those articles actually mentioned that is is "also known as". I don't see the point in changing Live.com mobile to Live.com FOR mobile, it just sounds too long and tacky when it still describes what the article is about. Windows Live Search, Search Mobile, Search Academic, Search Books should be left the way they are (and especially Publisher, no way is the name being changed to Live Search Books Publisher Program!). Windows Live Maps should be left, it is not exactly a full division of Search, even though it has the Live Search logo at the top, and yet again, the article says "also known as Windows Live Search Maps". I moved Windows Live Search Product Upload and Windows Live Search Products to Windows Live Product Upload and Windows Live Product Search respectively, as their names did seem to be incorrect. Apart from the two product articles, I feel that the rest should remain the way they are. Despite the fact that some websites would call them just Live Search or Live QnA etc. it would be just an abbreviation, and their proper name does include Windows in it (the one exception being Live.com, nothing else to it). If you want some reference, check out Windows Live Betas Swanny92 02:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree with you Swanny92. It's a good move for Windows Live Product Upload, but I still prefer "Windows Live Search Products" to keep it under the "Search" stream - similar to Windows Live Search Academic. And Szajd, most of the articles already mention their alternative names in the first sentence (even bolded), so I don't think they should be moved for the same reasons Swanny92 said. Also, if you would like to improve them, feel free to do so. Pikablu0530 02:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Don't Wikipedia articles get their credibility from having the title of the article being the same as the subject of it? I'm sure there is a rule about it somewhere. The names were officially changed by Microsoft, read [2], and should reflect that in the article's title. --A Cornish Pasty 13:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I disagree with you, Swanny92. The stuff I listed above are the actual product and service names. If you would like me to, I'll collect a whole lot of reference for it (the product pages itself, most of the official blogs, interviews with Microsofties on the product teams, Microsoft press releases [which obviously include the totally-official names, since they go through massively under Marketing and PR], most of the marketing sites and sister sites for the products, etc. Yes, some Microsoft sites are inaccurate; as you've pointed out, Windows Live Betas is one of them.

I think the official information about this is overwhelming, compared to just one site (but, again, I didn't include actual references [i.e. links], because I don't have the time right now, but if you want me to, I'll more than happily collect them for you later). It's not like I didn't do enough research (I could say that to you instead, but I won't), and it's not like these names are abbreviations. Yes, Live Search was named Windows Live Search -- as a beta (before it was released to web).

I still stand by my "opinion" (= "my" facts :)). Oh, and about "no way is the name being changed to Live Search Books Publisher Program!" -- I hope you do agree with me, that it doesn't actually need a seperate article... I strongly believe it should be just a section of the article about Live Search Books. --Szajd 07:22, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

Nobody seems to say a thing about my arguments above, but I figured I should include the promised references, before I kindly ask you to voice your opinions about the facts I state.

So, the problem is: there are several Windows Live articles, that I believe are mistitled, because they're not under the appropriate names of the services. Swanny92 and Pikablu0530 argue that the names I state as correct are already in the first sentences of the articles, as "also known as" names. As I see it (but correct me if I'm wrong), they believe that every Windows Live service has Windows Live in its name, while I see that it's clearly not the case (especially with the Live Search related sub-services).

Currently, Wikipedia is telling wrong information to the world, by not changing the product titles in the articles to the accurate product titles. Many people come to Wikipedia to check up on something, and I don't think they should believe that the name of Live Search is Windows Live Search, because Wikipedia is mistaken.

Hence, I'd like to present some of my sources and references for the real names of the services. I'd like to ask every reader to compare the amounts of references pro and con, and chime in with a comment if they'd like to.

Table 2

--Szajd 14:44, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

I think you are missing the point of what Swanny92 and I have said. We acknowledge the fact that the NEW "official" name is "Live Search" or whatever you mentioned in the table above. But if you have been following Microsoft and Windows Live since the very beginning, then you would've known that all of the above names were and still are acceptable names for these products. I don't really see the fuss about correcting "Safety Scanner" to lower case or adding an extra "for" in between "Windows Live for TV" or "Windows Live Messenger for Mobile". The fact that they all have "Windows Live" in their name is because they ARE part of "Windows Live" services.

I'll give you an example where Wikipedia doesn't always follow the "official name" all the time (and correct me if I'm wrong). Take the article North West railway line, Sydney for example, the fact is that the "official name" has always been "North West Rail Link" as mentioned at the official site - the officials have never EVER called it "North West railway line" (and for the sake of the argument, at least Microsoft's employee did at least once named those products by the names above, eg. Windows Live Search). The article is named this way such that it would be consistent with all the other railway lines in Sydney, Australia. The fact is, it doesn't loose the article's meaning and I don't think it would mislead the readers coming to Wikipedia. Pikablu0530 10:01, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I can see your problem with the "for mobile" examples. And I do know that sometimes Wikipedia doesn't use official names (most notably with famous people; the article title for Che Guevara is not Ernesto Guevara de la Serna).

Mind you, I've been following MSN for a long time, and Windows Live since day 1 (November 2005), so I do believe I know something about it.

About these names being still acceptable: well, yeah, they're "acceptable". But I simply can't agree, that Live Search should be at Windows Live Search just because of "consistency". That isn't Microsoft's intention with these names. (BTW, there would be enough consistency within Live Search subsites.) Live Search was only called Windows Live Search when it was in beta. It's gone through a name change -- albeit a pretty minor one. With your logic, the Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 articles might still be at Windows Codename "Longhorn" and Windows Server Codename "Longhorn", as they were and still are acceptable names for these products.

But if you have been following Microsoft and Windows Live since the very beginning, then you would know the identity problems around Windows Live, and MSN. What I want to say with this is
1) this explains why some (maybe even "lots" or even "most") Microsofties call it Windows Live Search. Some Windows Live services has been renamed lots and lots of times, especially Live Search Maps (just top off my head: MSN Virtual Earth --> Windows Live Local --> Live Search Maps).
2) I do believe that Wikipedia using inaccurate titles only amplifies this effect of misperception around Windows Live.

So, just for the argument, I somewhat agree: the names are still "acceptable". But they are incorrect, or at most: secondary. Live Search is not "Windows Live Search also known as Live Search". It is more like "Live Search (previously known as MSN Search and later Windows Live Search)".

But I do feel happy about you coming up with real arguments. :)

--Szajd 21:53, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if anyone noticed this (seeing as no one mentioned it except A Cornish Pasty who posted it, but this article here seems to explain what Szajd's point is, and why most of those name changes would be relevant. If you don't want to bother reading it, it just says that Live Search and the sub-services of it has "severed" from Windows Live due to the technology that is used, and has become part of Microsoft adCenter (I think that's right). That I presume explains why it isn't called "Windows Live Search", and obviously the name change and reason wasn't explained to the users. So that I believe clears up matters for most of those services. That's my NEW say. Swanny92 05:48, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I have noticed the separation of Live Search team from Windows Live. Since this is the case, I would say it is reasonable to move the "Windows Live Search" articles to "Live Search". And I agree with you Szajd that Live Search Academic, Live Search Books, Live Product Search and Live Search Videos should be merged with Live Search article. I'd prefer that Live Search Books Publisher Program and Live Product Upload to remain separate articles though because they serve a different purpose than a vertical search engine. And for obvious reason, Live QnA and Live Search Maps deserves their own separate articles.

As for adding the word "for" or making the use of lower-case for "Safety Scanner", I still stand my view of seeing it as unnecessary. The word "for" can be used in the article itself, perhaps in the first line in bold.

And due to the official clarification by the Live Clipboard team, Windows Live Clipboard should be redirected to Live Clipboard.

And as a result of this proposed change, I'd suggest that for the main Windows Live article that we separate the Live Search services from the main table and create it's own table with the heading "Live Search". Similarly I'd suggest that Template:Windows Live to have a new category for "Live Search" and move these services into that category (with the exception of Live QnA, see question below)

For a final question, is Live QnA part of the Live Search services/team or still part of Windows Live team?

P.S. I have edited the table above.

--Pikablu0530 07:10, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.