Talk:IRC subculture

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the IRC subculture article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article has been bastardized by a submoron. I'm going to delete the crap about #philosophy, but he'll most likely return and ass it up some more in order to spam us with it.

I'm not sure where the above came from... I feel that this article does not represent the "IRC subculture" from a global perspective. The author has only applied his experiences from one or two IRC networks, which is definitely not an accurate representation of IRC as a whole. TNLTRPB 11:24, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article needs an overhaul. As stated above, it doesn't represent a worldwide view (perhaps it represents the IRC subculture of that user's country) - Anon

IRC operator

Many people, especially on smaller IRC networks, sometimes try to become very friend with IRC operator, in order for themselves to become IRC operator. Because it is status.

Status

Being a channel op (+o) or voice (+v) or on some networks a halfop (+h) can be seen as a status symbol.

Can I have a crack at it?

Maybe I should try my hand at cleaning this up a bit and try to provide a broader view on the social side of IRC. As an IRCop, I do see people do some things mentioned here, but is more in the minority than what our friend states. If I'm stepping on anybody's toes here, please let me know here or on my talk page. Thanx --Brenton Scott 17:05, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Globalize?

This article had a section with a globalize tag. I removed it because it didn't seem regional to me; but if people see something that is too parochial or regional then please restore it and comment here. RJFJR (talk) 15:36, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rooms

"Users on IRC usually refer to a channel as a 'room' and users 'saying' something (instead of posting it) to reflect the similarity with face-to-face communication." I've been around IRC a quite a bit and feel this part is inaccurate, people refer to channels as channels and those who refer to them as rooms are regarded as aol noobs —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.130.140 (talk) 17:11, 12 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Common Themes is useless

Common Themes section is totally useless. Disapproving of noobs and xX_name_Xx is a global internet and offline thing: nothing to do with IRC. 77.98.244.155 (talk) 19:21, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

irc formatting

The section on 'formatting' giving examples such as %b for bold, seems rather outdated. For the most part irc formatting standardized behind the mirc format/colour code system, and support for this is prevalent across pretty much every main stream irc client. 185.24.123.199 (talk) 05:21, 1 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 June 2017

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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. No opposition, and seems reasonable. For future reference, when proposing multiple related RMs, it's better to do it as a multi-move, per WP:RM#Requesting multiple page moves. — Amakuru (talk) 11:22, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Internet Relay Chat subculture → IRC subculture – Unnecessary expansion of "IRC". See ex. TCP congestion control, IRC Bot. 104.228.101.152 (talk) 10:51, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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