Talk:DRM

message: How common are the different uses of this acronym?  I ask because I personally feel digital rights management is the primary use and so this should redirect there, with a link to this disambiguation page. Am I right or wrong in this judgement? Discuss.
:I think a redirect to the digital restrictions makes sense.  Generic69 04:48, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree.  In the distributed computing space, DRM is a well-accepted term for Distributed Resource Manager and probably even predates Digitial Rights Management. Search google for "LSF DRM" for examples of usage in that context. Bovineone 18:42, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  ? 

message: I deleted the remark about Digital Rights Management. While I agree it's an appropriate name for the technology it's not what the acronym means, and I don't think you can say it's a common description. Propaganda is not in the scope of Wikipedia. Let people read the article and decide for themselves. /Fabjan 10:01, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've re-added it with different wording.  'Digital Restrictions Management' is a reactionary phrase, of course, but it is a noteworthy term and any complete encyclopedia should make mention of it.  There is some discussion going on in Talk:Digital Rights Management that points to the need to define both variations of the term.   -/- Warren 17:11, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That belongs in the article itself. Anyone familiar with the more derogatory version will be familiar with its true meaning. I've removed the reference for now. Timbatron 06:06, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Of course it is what the acronym means.  There's no supreme authority that mandates what each acronym should be expanded to;  there's valid usage of the Digital Restriction Management expression, and it's even the wording that adheres most closely to reality.  Don't confuse it with propaganda!  If you like restrictions or not, that's all up to you.  Playing word games to pretend a restriction is something else is the actual propaganda.  Besides, the use of alternate expansions for acronyms is already well stablished (think of backronyms).  I think both should be mentioned. 62.57.142.73 16:48, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see this discussion: Talk:Digital Rights Management#NPOV_Digital_Restrictions_Management.2FDigital_Rights_Management and pretty much the rest of the talkpage (sigh). Shinobu 01:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm going to re-add it, because it is sourced at the Free Software Foundation (which is where I found the source):  http://www.fsf.org/campaigns/drm.html.  It's also discussed on the page Digital Rights Management.  If you still want to remove it now that you know it's sourced, feel free to talk or revert or whatever.  ~a (user • talk • contribs) 04:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm reremoving it. Motivation: it is already mentioned in the Digital Rights Management where it is more suitable but still not really fitting. The point is even though we dislike this technology we shouldn't try to push our opinions on other people, wikipedia should be seen as a neutral point to get information from. Adding this line is about as much NPOV as if we in the description of meat said: "Meat, also called by its critics for Murder". Or (using someone elses analogy here) if the democratic party suddenly decided to call George Bush for Gorgy Bananas and adding it to his page as: "George W. Bush, also known by critics as Gorgy Bananas" etc. etc. The Digital Restrictions Management deserves a small mention in the Digital Rights Management article, but not in this disambiguation page. I don't want to start an edit war here. So please continue this discussion if you believe it should stay. Lyml 08:40, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, even though I went through the trouble to find a source, I'm changing my mind.  I agree with you.  It doesn't belong here.  I'll go as far as to say it probably doesn't belong in the summary of Digital Rights Management either.  It probably belongs buried somewhere in a subsection of Digital Rights Management.  ~a (user • talk • contribs) 22:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, this impressed me. Because of your commentary I read the preceding comment with extra caution. But I didn't convince me. Meat is meat ─ formally known as mete, also known as flesh. There are no other synonyms I'm aware of. George Walker Bush is the name his parents gave him. DRM is different. There is no authority which has the power to define what it refers to. Someone who attended a protest against DRM and has never heard before of it could want to look up the term in Wikipedia. He will know DRM only as an abbreviation for “Digital Restrictions Management”. Wikipedia should serve these users. Including this term isn't POV-pushing because it is a frequently-used term. Otherwise it would be POV-pushing to have an article about “Digital Rights Management” at all. --mms 15:57, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

text: As someone else has reverted the article I'm rereremoving it. The prefered expansion of people who are opposing the concept of digital rights management is not notable enough to be mentioned on the disambiguation page and especially since so few people are aware of the term (Digital Restrictions Management) who are not aware of the original term Digital Rights Management. Please continue the discussion in here instead of reverting it without talking it through. Lyml 18:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

text: It's actually important that it remain on the page in some form, since some subset of readers will be looking for it.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  15:03, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Digital Restrictions Management 

message: It's "Digital Rights Managment".  Just because one group has a nickname for it doesn't mean it's an official acronym.  The "MicroShaft" example is a perfect one.  I am removing "Digital Restrictions Management" from the disambig page.  Especially considering it does nothing more than a redirect.  Take the protests to where they belong, not here. -- TRTX T / C 18:01, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's actually important that it remain on the page in some form, since some subset of readers will be looking for it.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  15:03, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Again, reverting

message: Well, there has been some disagreement between how entries on this list should be ordered; apparently Warren and Ripe would prefer an alphabetical order, however, WP:MOSDAB states "In most cases, place the items in order of usage, with the most-used meanings appearing at the top and less common meanings below."
Even though the MoS rules may be ignored in some cases, I cannot see how this disambiguation page is in any way exceptional.
Warren's edit comment said: "don't conflate the importance of digital rights management just because you're a computing enthusiast."</br>
However, I previously only touched the "Information technology" section where all the meanings are related to computing, and I contend that Digital Rights Management is the most important meaning in this field. I would have no problems with refactoring the sections, but that doesn't change the importance of Digital Rights Management over other computing-related entries. -- intgr 15:55, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ordering of entries

message: We might need to link this page to Dream in some fashion. 142.59.172.187 20:21, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Go ahead and be bold. If you do something wrong, people will correct you. If you want to read more about disambiguation pages, see WP:MOSDAB -- intgr #%@! 21:01, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dream 

message: In “Other uses”, I can't find a source for “Reichsmark (ISO 4027 code)”. First of all, that standard seems to be something about screws. It should probably say ISO 4217, but even then it's not in the official list. So at least the ISO reference should be removed. Does someone know a better source? --188.192.41.219 (talk) 20:04, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reichsmark