Talk:Steve Jobs/Archive 2

message: Didn't he throw a chair at someone who worked for Yahoo! once? Or am I confusing him for someone else? 24.189.90.68 (talk) 03:16, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: You are probably thinking of Steve Ballmer#Lucovsky/Google. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:26, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I'm getting my Steves mixed up, thanks. 24.189.90.68 (talk) 04:22, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fallout with a Yahoo! executive 

message: IN THE FIRST PARAGRAPH PAST SUMMARY THERE IS A "Job's", FIX IT!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.16.224.17 (talk) 18:55, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: fixed. BashBrannigan (talk) 21:50, 20 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Job's 

message: Replace "Jobs' birth parents, Joanne Simpson and Abdulfattah Jandali—a Syrian Muslim[24]" with "Jobs' birth parents, Joanne Simpson and Abdulfattah Jandali—a..." 
For encyclopedic reasons, it would seem that this is irrelevant information. Why is there no mention of Joanne Simpson's religion or nationality? Are these not important, or is there a reason why the Syrian/Muslim background of Job's father is considered more relevant than the background of his mother? 
Kmajor31986 (talk) 00:00, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Tim Pierce (talk) 01:24, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from Kmajor31986, 6 June 2010 

message: In all the articles about billionaires, there are informations about how much they have donated to charity and their foundations. Where are the informations about how much Steve Jobs has donated? --Onesbrief (talk) 19:13, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: As far as I'm aware, although I could  be wrong, Jobs has kept any charity he may have done private. Or, at least not made it a public issue as Gates has done. BashBrannigan (talk) 21:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is there nothing about his "philanthropy" ? 

message: It is not needed because the very next "counter culture" quote relays the same information (taken from the same source).  Can I put every verifiable quote I want pertaining to Steve Jobs here?  I am not arguing the quote's truth but it's necessity and even destructiveness.  The names and ages of the kids (which I found easily) are likely not on the bio for the same reason and I won't be the one to change that.  I understand Wikipedia is not about censorship, so how about not censoring me in removing this quote?  I guess if this request is removed, I will start looking for valuable Steve Jobs info. to place before this quote.  Will you censor my additions...maybe some philanthropic editions?
166.183.178.85 (talk) 21:05, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, that quote is both verified and quite notable pertaining to Jobs; it's staying and such a quote is allowed as per Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. GB86 21:12, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Given the context, I would agree that the information appears to belong in the article. Taroaldo (talk) 00:06, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please Take Out the LSD Sentence 

message: Are we sure this is correct? Is "Muslim" a nationality?MrMontag (talk) 18:16, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Nationality: Muslim?" 

message: That picture under Health Concerns reportedly showing Steve Jobs at the 2008 WWDC is incorrect. That picture was not taken at the 2008 event. He was even thinner at the 2008 event. Find a correct picture from that day.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danm7799 (talk • contribs) 23:46, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: First you start new comments at the bottom. Second, please sign your comments with four tilds. And finally, is your only reason for saying the photo is wrong is because to you he doesn't look sick enough? To me, the photo looks comparable to many of the other photos of that event. BashBrannigan (talk) 01:05, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Health concerns photo 

message: I came to this page to learn a bit about the controversy surrounding Mr. Jobs' liver transplant.  Coming from a bioethics background, I expected to see something, but strangely the article is silent on the issue.  I don't think there needs to be much--and it needn't be a vicious notation--but at least one sentence related to the topic seems appropriate, in my opinion.  There's a nice article on the American Medical Association's web site that quotes noted bioethicist Art Caplan on the issue.  Here's the link: http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2009/07/27/prsa0727.htm. April.13.1743 (talk) 23:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Liver transplant controversy 

message: It has been stated that his salary is  this should be removed or corrected, because he clearly does not get paid a $1 salary.
Ronnies1312 (talk) 20:27, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 80.192.5.123, 28 September 2010 

message: Consider reversing 'inventor' in first sentence in favor of 'technologist', as the present term may not properly reflect Jobs' role within Apple. 
 </span></small> 
222.153.64.27 (talk) 05:50, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: What you're expressing is personal opinion. Wikipedia can only use whatever is from reliable sources: newspapers, magazines, reputable websites, etc. There are numerous that refer to Jobs as an inventor. 02:05, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Perhaps, but this doesn't mean we can change Wikipedia policy to adapt wording for one specific article. Regardless of what information is, Wikipedia has a strict policy on biographies of living persons that any statements that are likely to be controversial must be backed up by reliable sources. Numerous sources state that he is an inventor, and while I'd be inclined to agree with you on the use of the word "technologist" instead, there isn't any published material that refers to him as such. elektrikSHOOS 16:32, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

text: The article notes (with reference lists of patents, sourced to the US Patent Office) that: "Jobs is listed as either primary inventor or co-inventor in over 230 awarded patents or patent applications" -- Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 00:25, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from 222.153.64.27, 19 October 2010 

message: Why are the wikileak documents not added to the article stating that he had been tested positive for HIV in the year Sep,2004  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.179.58.36 (talk) 13:22, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikileaks concluded those photos were not legitimate: http://mirror.wikileaks.info/wiki/Correction_of_DPA_article_in_respect_to_WikiLeaks_and_Steve_Jobs_HIV_test/index.html Tweisbach (talk) 15:12, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.179.58.36 (talk) 17:26, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steven Paul Jobs supposedly tested positive for HIV-1 

message: the article currently says that the reality distortion field is particularly evident in his keynote addresses. But the reality distortion field link says that the term was coined to describe his persuasiveness with developers working at Apple. So at a minimum, it should say "also evident" not "particularly evident", though since the whole thing is unsourced and is opinion it would probably be better to stick with facts such as he is considered to be a good salesman and pursuasive to developers, etc. 96.224.167.176 (talk) 05:31, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Salesmanship & reality distortion field 

message: I was confused by "Jobs might have married Baez", at first thinking the writer is unsure if Jobs and Baez wed.  If the phrase were changed to "Jobs might otherwise have married Baez" I'd be less confused.  :)
I was also confused by the reference to Bill Clinton.  I think Jobs lent the motorcycle to Bill Clinton, but he might have lent the house to Clinton.  
Sorry to be a pain.  You guys do a great job.  Thanks.   Theresavalek (talk) 13:12, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguous wording - just needs a couple simple changes 

message: "In 1982, Jobs bought an apartment in The San Remo, an apartment building in New York City with a politically progressive reputation, where Demi Moore, Steven Spielberg, Steve Martin, and Princess Yasmin Aga Khan, daughter of Rita Hayworth, also had apartments. With the help of I.M. Pei, Jobs spent years renovating his apartment in the top two floors of the building's north tower, only to sell it almost two decades later to U2 frontman Bono. Jobs had never moved in.[78][79]"
:I'm not sure why this was included except that it is odd. This seems like a common buddhist practice of making a work of art, then destroying it to show how 'unattached' you are. If any columnist or reporter mentioned this connection, I think it would be valuable to add to the article. Better than leaving the reader wondering why he did it, or assuming he's just fickle. Four tildes.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheThomas (talk • contribs) 10:00, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oddity 

message: So, should we add anything about the Enquirer's images of him? (They're on Gizmodo..)
:First, please sign your posts with 4 tildes. Second... Are you kidding? No. National Enquirer is not a reliable source. BashBrannigan (talk) 02:03, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Shouldn't you say something along the lines of "The Enquirer Has Reported That Steve Jobs Has Six Weeks To Live"?
Oversizedguitar (talk) 03:54, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No. HereToHelp (talk to me) 04:06, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent health issues 

message: The wealth section of the article states that Apple does not partake in any philanthropic activity. Surely the company's contributions to (Product)RED render this point a falsity. What do others think? 203.122.198.214 (talk) 11:49, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually I think the entire section is a hack piece. It's entitled "wealth", but discusses little about Jobs wealth. It's mostly a one-sided attack on Jobs and titling it "Jobs' greed" would be more accurate. First, while it mentions Jobs may donate privately, it does so dismissively. Some people consider it immoral to discuss their charitable acts publicly or to use them to improve their image. Second, it appears to be taken for granted that companies must give to charity. It' s not so cut and dried. There are many who argue that companies are better to reinvest their earnings in products and employment and leave charity to shareholders. The section should be removed. BashBrannigan (talk) 23:55, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Most of this section is undue weight given to a non-NPOV, with the underlying assumption that someone who has money must give to charity. And OR that sounds more like someone has spent quite some time to "dig up these facts". That he has been criticized for not giving as much as Bill Gates etc. is the maximum that the section can sustain, if that. To what extent this criticism is notable in terms of reliable sources is another question (i. e. did notable e.g. newspaper or magazine articles discuss the issue?). I came to this talk page after having been struck by the jolting break in continuity (of encyclopaedic style) of the article, which I had started to read for the first time. And I was going to start a discussion myself if I hadn't found it to be already taking place. So I whole-heartedly agree, and given that no contrary opinion has surfaced so far I will likely cut down the section. -- Nczempin (talk) 23:50, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I cut it down to contain more facts and less interpretation. The last sentence about cutting down Apple's charity expenses is still somewhat questionable, as it is close to OR-synthesis: "SJ's charity is not on Gates' level, he also cut down Apple's donations, hence ...". That information more properly belongs to the Apple article; putting it here in SJ's article is tendentious. But the section is now not as bad as it was when I first looked at it. -- Nczempin (talk) 00:20, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be noted that Bill Gates is giving away a (small) portion of his *personal* wealth, not money belonging to Microsoft. Many people rightfully feel that publicly traded companies should not donate to charity, because that money belongs to the shareholders, not all of whom are wealthy, and that it is up to wealthy shareholders to donate a portion of their dividends themselves. Also some shareholders might object to the specific charities that are chosen. (PS: I'm no fan of Steve Jobs, just trying to be fair.) Bostoner (talk) 02:52, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wealth 

message: In the documentary Triumph of the Nerds, Steve Jobs talks about his first computing experience, programming in BASIC at the age of ten (circa 1965). BASIC was developed at Dartmouth in 1964 and was probably not widespread by 1965. I'm curious as how Steve Jobs had access to such a computer at such an early age. If anybody here has the right resources, it would be nice to shed some light on that point in his life. 166.250.33.113 (talk) 23:17, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early years 

message: What is the justification for including his signature in an encyclopaedia article about him??? -- Nczempin (talk) 17:39, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not? It is related to him. Use some common sense, man (/woman)!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.51.252 (talk) 15:02, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot of things are related to him but are not in the article, for example his social security number. So why the signature? I could remotely see how that may be interesting for someone like Picasso, but for a WP:BLP? -- Nczempin (talk) 21:32, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK! You have a point. But no one would want his social security number to go public. :-)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.8.225 (talk) 17:52, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Many people are interested in signatures; they are like personal art.  If you check out the signature of Elizabeth I of England on her Wiki page, you will see what I'm talking about.  They can be very interesting.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.244.54.2 (talk) 18:41, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  signature?? 

message: Please editors help gather information regarding the impact of Steve Jobs stepping down as it will have a huge impact on Apple shares. --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 23:08, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have removed the section again. As Electrik Shoos says, there's no impact right now. Once there are reliable third-party sources reporting on the impact, feel free to add it in. Shubinator (talk) 23:12, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

text: See above. His resignation was announced less than half an hour ago. There has been no time whatsoever for analysis, and certainly none for any long-term effects. Let sources be written, then add it, not the other way around. elektrikSHOOS (talk) 23:14, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There are plenty of articles that allow that placeholder so it can be easily expanded. Besides, I believe the impact of his resignation will be huge and very noticeable within the next hours and tomorrow where it will probably be reflected on Apple's shares. (Of course, that falls within WP:Crystal and I am not implying we should add anything yet) but I think is ok to shepherd new additions towards that important aspect. --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 23:18, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no need for a placeholder here. How large the impact will be is speculation at this point; let's wait and see. Shubinator (talk) 23:24, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Impact of resignation

message: With Steve Jobs retirement in the media at the moment, out of curiosity I looked him up on Wiki. I am surprised that it is not mentioned in the "In popular culture" section that Jobs was parodied in an episode of the Simpsons. While no actual names or Apple trademarks were used, it is clear that much of the humour is lampooning Jobs and Apple Inc in the episode Mypods and Boomsticks. IMO it's worth adding.  Codymr (talk) 09:09, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed.  There are other Simpsons and South Park parodies of Steve Jobs, Apple and the 'i-devices', which, through irony, make significant social comments on the Apple / Jobs culture.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.181.174.7 (talk) 22:56, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simpsons S20E07 

message: The single quotation about Jobs in this section is both a little bland and not even credited to a person.  Let's remove this section until/unless we can get a good selection of quotes about/by him.  --96.233.85.176 (talk) 06:58, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotations 

message: In the infobox it says that he earns $1 in salary per year. However, as far as I can tell, this only refers to his work at Apple Computer. Note that he also is a board member of The Walt Disney Company, for which he probably also earns money. Is there any US service similar to Ratsit which can be used for checking this? (Stefan2 (talk) 20:15, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  There are already four references for this. Note also that this is "salary" and it's likely his other earnings aren't from a salary. BashBrannigan (talk) 01:09, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Note that all four references explicitly refer to salary from Apple (e.g. "Apple again pays Jobs $1 salary"). Thus, they don't tell us anything about salary from other companies, so he may receive any amount of salary from any other company. In particular, he is presumably paid salary from Disney. (Stefan2 (talk) 21:17, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's all assumption on your part that he's paid a salary from someone besides Apple. Find a source for this, then feel free to add it to the article. BashBrannigan (talk) 23:45, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Salary 

message: In "external links" this link: "Thoughts on Music" by Steve Jobs, February 6, 2007. is broken. The link after it, "Thoughts on Flash", follows the same pattern but goes to the correct place. I tried adding hyphens to the music link but it isn't there either. I did find what I think is meant to be linked to at http://www.apple.com/fr/hotnews/thoughtsonmusic/, but even though that page is in English, the address is to the French apple site. Eagleclaw6 03:13, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken link: "Thoughts on Music" 

message: Have some information
Atyrau-mosquito (talk) 10:47, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You haven't actually said what edit you want. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:18, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 5 October 2011 

message: I stumbled upon a blog.
“Everyone knows the true reason why Steve Jobs resigned. Apple cannot compete with dedicated handheld gaming devices. What Apple fans are not familiar with is that Steve Jobs was an employee of Atari and received his business training from Atari’s main investor. The Apple II was designed around the video game ‘Break-Out’ which Wozniak essentially designed. Video games created the personal computer, not the other way around. In the same way, handheld video games created the handheld computers, not the other way around. And despite Steve Jobs’s origins in gaming, his success in media only comes from old media such as movies (Pixar) to music (iPod). Steve Jobs has had the same exact effect on video games as Bill Gates: none. Aside from providing computer hardware that can also play video games, the nature of video games has been unchanged and uninfluenced by Jobs.
“It is wise for Steve Jobs to exit his role in the company now when it is clear that he has failed for the second time  (the first time was in home game consoles, the second was handheld game consoles) to take over gaming. Steve Jobs has failed to surpass his original employer, Nolan Bushnell, in influence over video games.
I don't know whether if this true or not. What is the relation between Steve Jobs and gaming? Komitsuki (talk) 15:21, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steve Jobs and gaming 

message: MSNBC is now reporting breaking news that he died. 69.245.8.234 (talk) 23:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  died? 

message: Preemptively creating this section for editorial discussion of this event. How it should be covered, worded, etc. Might as well get it started now. --mboverload@ 23:42, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh no! —stay (sic)! 23:49, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

text: I don't think we need a mention in the intro since that's already covered though the info template and death date. Other thoughts? --mboverload@ 23:50, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

text: I agree, it is redundant and this isn't intended to be a news source. Pkok3 (talk) 23:57, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

text: Also, should we remove the statement that he died of pancreatic cancer? While that is the most probable cause of death, there haven't been any news sources that state that was the exact cause. --Pvvni (talk) 00:05, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: We must remove it until it's 100% confirmed. I'm leaving the computer now, if someone could do that that would be good. --mboverload@ 00:08, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

text: I second removing the cause of death as pancreatic cancer until it's officially confirmed. --Skeven (talk) 00:07, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur. It's the most likely cause given the published medical info, but we don't have a reliable source providing a definitive statement. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln)  (talk) 00:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly my thoughts Grnberet2b (talk) 00:13, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed. Once the cause of death is announced by a reliable source, it can be included. Meanwhile, remember that Wikipedia is not a newspaper. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln)  (talk) 00:15, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia's Main Page has pancreatic cancer as his cause of death, I think that should be removed as well. - SudoGhost 00:16, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Nevermind, it was removed right after I hit save page. - SudoGhost 00:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steve Jobs dead, 10/5/11 

message: http://twitter.com/#!/CBSNews
-Chris L  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.67.123.86 (talk) 23:46, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  CBS reports Steve Jobs has died 

message: Please add as main citation to "Steven Paul "Steve" Jobs (February 24, 1955 – October 5, 2011)". Confirmed with letter from Apple http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/10/05Apple-Media-Advisory.html Rtfmoz (talk) 00:38, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not necessary, IMO. HurricaneFan25 00:57, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steve Jobs - Additional Citations 

message: This article should not be speedy deleted as lacking sufficient context to identify its subject, because it does not meet the criterion cited for speedy deletion, namely insufficient information to identify the person discussed therein.
Even a cursory reading of the article reveals that such speedy deletion claim is astonishingly ludicrous on its face.  --Trujaman (talk) 01:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see the topic above yours. It was just a goof. −Digital Jedi Master (talk) 01:08, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for clarifying. Cheers. --Trujaman (talk) 04:15, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contested deletion 

message: There seems to be a lot of recentism in the death section. It needs to be about one third as long. The article is not a newspaper. Long quotes not needed. All seems a product of over-excitement. Less is more. Span (talk) 02:36, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree but if there was to more quotes added to the page perhaps consider starting a new article. YuMaNuMa (talk) 03:42, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recentism 

message: Don't want to mess things up, but we don't need so may citations for the DOD. 1 would be sufficient, but ideally they should be all moved to the body. (the lead reflects the body of the article) – Connormah (talk) 04:01, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead 

message: Update Steve Jobs invention
Steve Jobs possess 510 patents worldwide
http://www.directoryinventor.com/people/sQf1Z8t/steven-jobs.html#patents
Michaellinli (talk) 04:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sorry, but I think we will need to have a more reliable source for this information before it can be added. I am going to decline this request pending further confirmatory sourcing. It would be useful information to include, however, if someone can find other reliable sources.  Risker (talk) 04:59, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't have an opportunity to work this into an appropriate edit, but the NYT has a discussion of Jobs' patents here. There are 317, but these are just the ones related to Apple; he no doubt has more, given the period when he wasn't working at Apple. Risker (talk) 13:47, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 6 October 2011 - number of patents held 

message: Page has been vandalized. Needs immediate correction of first paragraph
66.185.45.100 (talk) 04:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Done by User:Jasper Deng. - SudoGhost 04:16, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 6 October 2011 

message: I think Jobs' regrettable death, while probably related, should be distinguished from his illness in a separate section - especially for people who might only look for info on his passing.
I will effect such a separation. If you disagree, please discuss here. Thanks --Trujaman (talk) 04:20, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The main article could be improved if it specified how he died.   I looked all over the place.   Unless I missed it, it isn't mentioned.  Note that posting a link to a supposed source, is not how the main page of this article is improved.   Just say 'cancer' and a real world source.   (Not a link to a place I can't get to.)   Remember, not all webbrowsers are as efficient or reliable as yours.   216.99.201.134 (talk) 10:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illness and death => Illness, Death 

message: While Jobs was a visionary and innovator, there wasn't much rules or restrictions in him bringing about the latest technology gadget or gizmo into the market.  Here we have Wikipedia and its over zealous administrators restricting the flow of information in nearly all their articles.  In most articles you see a semi-protection tag or edit tag, over minor issues like recent-ism, etc etc etc. Some editors have to asked permission in the discussion pages to edit the articles.  How ridiculous and innovative is that?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.217.154.242 (talk) 04:43, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  That is because when a significant story becomes headlines, there is often a large inflow of unregistered users showing up to a wiki article on the topic and they start vandalizing it en mass. By restricting edits to registered users, this adds stability to the article, particularly by preventing many vandalisms by anonymous users. Nothing ridiculous about that. — al-Shimoni (talk) 04:51, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Unless, of course, the person complaining about the restriction intends ill toward the article. To them, it's ridiculous. To most of the rest of us, vandalism is ridiculous. Who's right? (For anyone just wandering by, that last was rhetorical and needs no response.) --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln)  (talk) 04:53, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

text: The page protection is to stop IP vandalism. Page protection is enforced due to a high amount of vandalism that the page received before or is foreseeable to receive. It is better for 1 or 2 IP editors to as to edit an article rather than dozens of IP vandals destroying the article. Those IP editors who really do wish to edit an article can always make themselves a Wikipedia account and edit even with page protection enforced. Administrators don't restrict the flow of information, regular non-admin editors make 90%+ of all edits you see on Wikipedia. Administrators are just here to enforce the rules and make decisive judgement if an issue was to arise. If you read one the 5 pillars of Wikipedia, you would understand that Wikipedia does not censor and welcomes new information to all of its articles as long as it is verifiable and properly referenced. YuMaNuMa (talk) 04:58, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Then what is the point of having the watchlist function at the top right corner of the article page? Vandalism can be removed real quickly, its just that people in Wikipedia have gotten lazy and paranoid over vandalism. And I like to point out the famous words in the main page of the article - Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.   Isn't that an oxymoron?  Mr Wales, care to comment?  Was it your intention to have hundreds or volunteer policemen aka administrators restricting the flow of information when you created Wikipedia?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.217.154.242 (talk) 05:05, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Wikipedia editors have better things to do than just vandalism reversions. Laziness isn't a valid argument when you consider that registered editors must take out time to respond to such requests.Jasper Deng (talk) 05:08, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Anon138, here's the interesting thing. Instead of complaining about the page being semi-protected, you could (a) register an account, make a measly 10 edits and then edit the page, (b) suggest an edit here and one of us will get to it really darn quickly, or (c) stop complaining in a way where others may misconstrue what you are saying as trolling. You know about watchlists and such, why not log in instead of posting here anonymously? Just a thought... ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 05:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

text: And yeah, everyone can edit Wikipedia and its the same in society where people often claim that their country is meant to be a free country. It's a free country when you oblige the laws and formality but when you don't there are punishments. If everyone sped in a school zone then the law enforcers will have to think of a new tactic to tackle this problem which hence would be speed bumps. Same situation here, if there is a large amount of vandalism then page protection would be imposed. Get my analogies? YuMaNuMa (talk) 05:22, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I hate to be the wet blanket, but the talk page is better reserved for discussion of the article itself, not general wiki policies or random trolling (OP). Let's close this down, shall we?204.65.34.206 (talk) 14:12, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jobs and Wikipedia 

message: Why have a section with "statements on his death"? That doesn't sound neutral at all, it reads more like "The Steve Jobs Cult Corner".
D0nj03 (talk) 05:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: How would you word it? What aspect to you perceive as non-neutral? Best, ROBERTMFROMLI | TK/CN 05:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd use statements from obituaries only. Parrot of Doom 06:54, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There's plenty of rubbish in obituaries too.. why not simply drop things from this section that noone will care about in twenty, ten, even five years, and just leave the statements by Gates, Murdoch, and the Woz? Nevard (talk) 09:55, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I suggest to simplify the section "Statements on Jobs' death". Otherwise, to represent the European condolence, there are also the words of the President of the European Commission Barroso (link). --Enok (talk) 11:48, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. The statements are complete garbage. Might as well write statements made by Leopold Infeld, Nathan Rosen and Peter Bergmann on Albert Einstein's death. This is an encyclopedia not a forum for statements on his death. elemented9 11:54, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think this section should be included at all; it's not common practice for other celebrities on Wikipedia, it shouldn't be here.  Write the facts and move on. 97.64.237.173 (talk) 15:55, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not persuaded anything but the briefest excerpts from the statements is warranted, and I'm not even persuaded they are. This section is bloated and unencyclopedic. A single sentence in the section about his death with a handful of prominent names would suffice. This is Wikipedia, not Kensington Palace. See Mourning sickness. -- Rrburke (talk) 17:36, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: You're probably right, but I know from experience with Apple events on Wikipedia that the best course of action is to wait a week, see what the community built before losing interest, and then try to make an encyclopedia out of it. Much of what gets created will be valuable on WIkiquote.  HereToHelp (talk to me) 17:45, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The nightmare continues. This tide needs to be turned back. It's become mawkish and maudlin. I have a sensation like I'm drowning in honey. -- Rrburke (talk) 18:16, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm with you Rrburke, this thing will probably be a eulogy instead of an encyclopedia for the next couple of days.  It needs to be taken back as soon as things chill out a bit.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.23.136.33 (talk) 01:47, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statements on his Death 

message: Please Update Steve Jobs portrait with the below one.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Steven_Paul_Jobs.png
Amar007sv (talk) 05:59, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This image has been deleted from the Wikimedia Commons as a copyright violation per Wikimedia Commons' licensing policy. There was no indication that this specific photo was in fact released under a Creative Commons license, which it was originally tagged by the uploader. The source provided for the image only said "apple.com". This web site is "Copyright © 2011 Apple Inc. All rights reserved.". Unless it is specifically stated that this image is free content, such images instead should be uploaded here locally on Wikipedia, provided that it complies with the non-free content policies. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 6 October 2011 

message: This article is covered by WikiProject Syria? 71.146.8.5 (talk) 06:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: His biological parents were Syrian. –MuZemike 06:11, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: One was. -- Rrburke (talk) 17:43, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

text:  75.6.243.251 (talk) 23:55, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  75.6.243.251 (talk) 23:55, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  ? 

message: The thumbnail for the screenshot of the Apple.com homepage's tribute to Steve Jobs is wrong! Please change it, thanks.
137.132.250.13 (talk) 07:00, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's possible that the servers might not have caught up yet with that vandalism upload, which was reverted and deleted. At least I tried purging, bypassing the cache, and making an edit, and it's still there, so that's the only explanation I can give. Hopefully, it should revert back on its own shortly. –MuZemike 07:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  – I just needed to purge the cache of :File:Applecom homepage after death of Steve Jobs.png, and it went back to its normal self. –MuZemike 07:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 6 October 2011 

message: Maybe we could put Sergey Brin and Larry Page (Google founders) statements about Jobs death:
https://plus.google.com/109813896768294978296/posts/dwmWyNSoXTh
https://plus.google.com/106189723444098348646/posts/4wkYwTCCgAc
I don't know exactly how to do it in the right way.
Analton (200.4.69.153 (talk) 07:18, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 6 October 2011 

message: Steve Job's respect comes through in DJ KRΦSS's recent Steve Jobs Tribute track
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=texBm4kKQfE 
Aqua91264387 (talk) 08:19, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done. Although the sentiment is heartwarming, DJ KRΦSS does not appear to be a notable musical artist. --Bongwarrior (talk) 08:32, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 6 October 2011 

message: Under paragraph "Next Computer"
It says "going to revolutionise [sic] human communications and groupwork".  The word revolutionise is spelled TOTALLY correctly and does not deserve the SIC comment!
Smartdave (talk) 09:57, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: Sic refers to a text or phrase copied exactly from the source. It has nothing to do with the spelling of a word. — Abhishek  Talk  10:04, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: That doesn't answer the request.  Why is [sic] in there at all? Tim (Xevious) (talk) 10:30, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 6 October 2011 

message: The "Illness and death" and "Statements on Jobs' death" sections appear grossly out of proportion for the rest of the article, partly, one would imagine, due to the recency of his death and the fevered speculation about his health that preceded it.  Certainly, there's no reason to invest far more writing in covering his battle with cancer than his role in the founding of Apple. As to the memorials section, not even the entry for Winston Churchill, a far more extensively memorialized individual, has this sort of extensive block-quoting.  Do we really need separate, detailed statements from the Prime Minister of Australia and the CEO of Nokia?  Ultimately, I would imagine, this will transform into a "Legacy" or "Technological and Cultural Influence" section.  For now, though, any objection to finding a proper weight to the overall article?  ThtrWrtr (talk) 12:00, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Short summaries here, split into illness and death sections, and perhaps a dedicated article for the Death of Steve Jobs. Agree? Shencypeter (talk) 12:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't think the death section will warrant its own article but splitting death and illness sounds like a fine idea as Steve was ill for quite a while. YuMaNuMa (talk) 12:24, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done, looks more balanced now..Shencypeter (talk) 12:44, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illness and death & Memorials sections far too lengthy 

message: Ref 98 about diet is near the sentence about his car. Klisanor (talk) 12:56, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal life 

message: google page has link to steve jobs.212.143.49.98 (talk) 13:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  google page has link to steve jobs 

message: Statements from Larry Page:{{cite web|author=Larry Page |url=https://plus.google.com/106189723444098348646/posts/4wkYwTCCgAc
I am very, very sad to hear the news about Steve. He was a great man with incredible achievements and amazing brilliance. He always seemed to be able to say in very few words what you actually should have been thinking before you thought it. His focus on the user experience above all else has always been an inspiration to me. He was very kind to reach out to me as I became CEO of Google and spend time offering his advice and knowledge even though he was not at all well. My thoughts and Google's are with his family and the whole Apple family.
Statements from Sergey Brin:{{cite web|author=Sergey Brin |url=https://plus.google.com/109813896768294978296/posts/dwmWyNSoXTh
From the earliest days of Google, whenever Larry and I sought inspiration for vision and leadership, we needed to look no farther than Cupertino. Steve, your passion for excellence is felt by anyone who has ever touched an Apple product (including the macbook I am writing this on right now). And I have witnessed it in person the few times we have met.
On behalf of all of us at Google and more broadly in technology, you will be missed very much. My condolences to family, friends, and colleagues at Apple.
108.73.129.26 (talk) 13:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. — Bility (talk) 17:37, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 6 October 2011 

message: The following line has a typo, 
Abdulfattah John Jandali, an Syrian Muslim immigrant to the U.S 
Should instead say,
Abdulfattah John Jandali, a Syrian Muslim immigrant to the U.S 
69.171.160.35 (talk) 14:05, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Typo needs correction 

message: There is no evidence that he died on the 5th of October (there is no concrete date in the official statement on the Apple site and in his family statement).
He could died in September when the rumor was being circulated (moreover, CBS twitted about his death).  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.167.127.54 (talk) 16:00, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: October 5 statements from Apple and Jobs' family both say he died "today". -- Rrburke (talk) 16:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date of the death 

message: Not wanting to be too blunt (I think it's a great loss too as I always enjoyed his keynotes, even though they never caused me to buy Apple products) but does Jobs' death allow historical images of him (like him presenting the first Mac) to be used in this article? SpeakFree (talk) 16:44, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because such use fails WP:NFCC 1: where free alternatives exist (or could be created), fair-use can't be asserted. The images in this article, for example, are free, so free alternatives exist. An exception would be if the image itself were historic. -- Rrburke (talk) 17:07, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: OK thanks for clearing that up. SpeakFree (talk) 17:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Using historical images of Jobs under fair use provision 

message: I don't know what the guidelines are for this, but considering Steve is no longer around surely his occupation in the infobox should list all his notable occupations in life (ie. CEO and Chairman of Apple with years), or if only one prefer CEO as undoubtedly his most well-known and significant role. U-Mos (talk) 17:32, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Seconded. Let me see if deceased people get occupations at all before I change it.  HereToHelp (talk to me) 17:47, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Occupation 

message: "In 2011 Jobs was voted Best Business Entrepreneur On Earth." I feel like this is simply a shameless plug capitalizing on Steve Jobs' death to direct traffic to someone's website, and it should be removed.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cvggrrl (talk • contribs) 17:59, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Best Business Entrepreneur on Earth? 

message: Through Jobs' death he leaves a legacy of revolutionizing communication in a world marked by flattening and globalization. From the micro-level of the sport of tennis, the Apple product has revolutionized the way people talk about, learn, watch, and interact with tennis. American Tennis star and 27-time Grand-Slam Champion, Serena Williams said, “Steve Jobs the Thomas Edison of our day. You will be missed but your Legend will Live forever.” http://www.tennisnow.com/Blogs/Tennis-Gets-Me-Giddy!/October-2011/Steve-Jobs--Impact-On-Tennis-And-Player-Responses.aspx
75.148.230.89 (talk) 18:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This section is already hideously overblown and should be substantially reduced rather than expanded. -- Rrburke (talk) 18:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 6 October 2011 

message: Is it OK that we put in some automatic bot-archiving of this talk page, as it is getting quite large as-is? I was thinking of 48 or 72 hours should keep the page accessible and help drown out the noise given by stale discussions. –MuZemike 22:07, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: No argument from me...in fact, I'm a bit surprised it wasn't already set up. Maybe that should become part of the routine for high-profile articles, or articles that become high-profile some time after creation. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln)  (talk) 22:21, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archiving bot? 

message: Scott Adams, of Dilbert Comic Fame wrote: "I once thought his success was mostly a matter of luck. Anyone can be at the right place at the right time. 
But then he did it again. 
And again.
And again.
And again.
He was my only hero."  
He wrote this as his blog on 10/6/2011
I think it's another great "statement on Jobs' life" but I can't add it to that section  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.3.138.124 (talk) 22:39, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: What we should really do it let this topic undulate for a few days/weeks and then come back and do Steve the honour of fixing the article up nicely. fr33kman 22:57, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Additional Statements of Steve's death 

message: I was reading with some sadness today about the death of Steve. As I read this article I came across the ===Statements on Jobs' death=== and noticed the order in which they had been placed; the US president, a man who's personally known Steve for decades, and then a person who has worked with Steve for years. I hate to say this but it seems to me that this order is (unintentionally) US hierarchy biased. I'd suggest that the order would be first Bill Gates, then Disney and then the US president. I know it seems trivial but it really struck me that Barack Obama's statement had been placed first when he likely knew Steve very little and probably [IMHO] doesn't even know what and Apple I is. To me, that seems to be giving undue bias to a political leader rather than the people who know him. Would we place Woz's words below the Presidents? Any thoughts? fr33kman 22:51, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Um, yes: none of it has any place in an encyclopedia article. -- Rrburke (talk) 23:51, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Statements on Jobs' death 

message: Has anyone else considered to post about Pixar's statement regarding Steve Job's death. He was one of the biggest people involved with Pixar for the longest time, until he sold it to Disney. They create a page for him on their homepage and I feel that it would be appropriate to incorporate their statement as well as Apple's since he bought Pixar after he left Apple during the 80s. --SpaceChase123 (talk) 00:25, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pixar's Statement About His Death 

message: Should we consider making a Death of Steve Jobs aritcle? It could better place info on his passing at a greater extend. And he was a pretty high-top guy. Rusted AutoParts (talk) 0:29 7 October 2011 (UTC)
:God no. -- Rrburke (talk) 00:52, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: AgainstJeancey (talk) 00:58, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

text: Holy crap no.  The intro already has too much about his death.  We are all really sad to see him go, but this isn't a eulogy... I'm guessing it will stay for a few months because people are probably visiting this page right now looking for something like a eulogy, but it really needs to be pared out.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.23.136.33 (talk) 01:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Straw Poll 

message: I suggest adding a section called "Cultural Influence" (or similar).  Jobs arguably had a significant influence in world culture.  I don't propose that my initial version of the text for this section is adequate, but it could be used as a starting point.
Steve Jobs influenced the way the world perceives what it means to live in the computer age.  He was an icon for the personal computer during the period in which it was first introduced to the world at large.  For many, Jobs put a human face on the experience of living with the computer as a human tool.  He helped carry the transformation of the computer age into human life in a way that gave it meaning.
Daniel347x (talk) 00:35, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Decline. I don't see any content here, and I don't think the article needs a trivia section chronicling how many times he was mentioned on the Simpsons. -- Rrburke (talk) 02:29, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 7 October 2011 

message: Some of the material in the "Early years" section should probably be put in the "Personal life" section, esp. the material about his later relations with his family, including his sister, whom he didnt know in his early life. The flow here is wrong. I am not up to tackling this right now, and also want some consensus on whether to do this and how. I'm surprised that Mona's article is so short, as she is a major writer. her novel "A Regular Guy" got some attention as being possibly a thinly veiled sketch of Steve. That could possibly go in this article.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 03:04, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early years and Personal life sections 

message: The article demonstrates considerable bias in favour of Jobs, which one would think has no place in an encyclopedia. Most of the additions pertaining to his death should be assessed and rewritten not to glorify him beyond what is encyclopedic knowledge. "Some say he was a genius" is not a fact... I'm sorry. 174.7.82.244 (talk) 04:11, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias 

message: Category should be reinstated because he was not solely a computer designer. E.g., see: Steve Jobs: Designer First, C.E.O. Second. By NICK BILTON. October 6, 2011. New York Times. http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/06/steve-jobs-designer-first-c-e-o-second/  Metta3001 (talk) 02:53, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Category: Designers 

message: I'm requesting that the citations in the end of the lead be cleaned up, many are there multiple times, and the amount of breaks created in the text make it, as I find, unreadable. Could the citations be moved to the end of sentences, to facilitate readability and reduce redundancy. Thanks. --99.241.29.3 (talk) 05:01, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit Request October 7, 2011 

message: The website linked in the infobox is apple's website not Steve Job's. I am fixing the aforementioned issue.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mihir.khatwani (talk • contribs) 05:36, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox Website 

message: The section:
At the time of his resignation, and again after his death, he was widely described as a visionary,[21] pioneer[22] and genius[21][23][24]—perhaps one of the foremost[25][26]—in the field of business,[26][25][27] innovation,[20] and product design,[28] and a man who had "profoundly"[29] changed the face of the modern world,[20][23][22] revolutionized at least six different industries,[21][20] and an "exemplar for all chief executives".[21][26][27] His death was widely mourned[30][31] and considered a loss to the world by commentators across the globe.[24]
Content itself it written fine, however, the large amount of citations after every clause really breaks up the reading of this. Could some of these not be removed to make it easier to read?
le Dan (talk) 09:24, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Also; there is info there that is not mentioned in the main text. We should move the detail to that section and summarise the lead with reduced cites. --Errant (chat!) 11:22, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Opening readability 

message: PERSONAL LIFE… Kobun Chino Otogawa.[101]  The couple have a son and two daughters.[102] Reed Paul Jobs (born 1991); Erin Sienna Jobs (born 1995): Eve Jobs (born 1998)
Source: CNET article - Apple co-founder, Chairman Steve Jobs dies; OCTOBER 5, 2011 4:41 PM PDT
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20116336-37/apple-co-founder-chairman-steve-jobs-dies/
Pdonoso (talk) 14:39, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 7 October 2011 

message: Steve Jobs died on 5 October 2011 at the age of 56. 
Vodaben (talk) 00:24, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is already in the article. - SudoGhost 00:25, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: "Being the richest man in the cemetery doesn’t matter to me … Going to bed at night saying we’ve done something wonderful… that’s what matters to me.” Steve Jobs -[The Wall Street Journal, May 25, 1993]>  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aking174 (talk • contribs) 03:39, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

text: You do know Jobs was more then the that Apple guy right? See Steve Jobs#Pixar and Disney. Iger is the CEO of Disney a company of which Jobs was the largest shareholder of and a member of the board of directors. Iger was also the person who patched up the relationship between Disney and Pixar/Jobs the problems of which lead to the ousting of the previous CEO, and managed to convince Jobs to let Disney buy out Pixar. In fact, if we ignore the deaths section there seems to be more discussion of Iger then of Gates. Nil Einne (talk) 11:05, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Iger should be in. Zuckerberg should be out. --Joseph123454321 (talk) 21:41, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Why remove Zuckerberg? His statement regarding Jobs' death is neither more nor less notable than Iger's. Or, for that matter, that of Russian President Medvyedev. The text of the statement doesn't need to appear in the article (and, last I looked, didn't), but I see no issue with mentioning its existence. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln)  (talk) 21:47, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: We need to limit who we list. We can't list Zuckerberg, and Sugar, and Medvedev, and the man who lives across the street from me. We only list people who worked closely and/or are associated directly with Jobs. Jobs was on Disney's board and was the largest shareholder in the company. Gates was considered to be one of Job's archrivas. Zuckerberg and Sugar have only one thing in common with Jobs: they're all billionaires. --Joseph123454321 (talk) 22:06, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  They're also notable in their own right, unlike the man who lives across the street from you. I recognize the association between Zuckerberg and Jobs as both being high-visibility persons in the technology industry. With that said, I agree that there should be a finite and small number of mentions, but I see no reason to prune below what's there now...just as I see no pressing need to graft additional names into the paragraph. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln)  (talk) 23:42, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Medvedev and Sugar are also notable, but don't belong on the list. The only argument at contention here is whether or not Zuckerberg is sufficiently linked to Jobs. The "technology business" is too broad, and I'm pretty sure every single notable technology executive has been quoted as saying something about Jobs' passing. I see no reason why Zuckerberg should be added, just like you see no reason why Zuckerberg should be removed. I'm afraid we're at a deadlock. Rocks, paper, scissors? ;) --Joseph123454321 (talk) 00:14, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually, as it stands, it's 2 users for removing Zuck, and 1 user for keeping Zuck. If this thread goes silent, I'll assume consensus is on the side of removal. --Joseph123454321 (talk) 00:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Make that three for removing Zuckerberg. They were not contemporaries, nor does Zuckerberg say anything significant about Jobs. Sunray (talk) 01:40, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think this is a Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon competition. However, if WP:CONSENSUS is to remove them, so be it. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln)  (talk) 02:28, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Steve Jobs Dead 

message: According to WP stats, Steve Jobs was viewed by some 7.4M readers yesterday October 6 - a new record? --Bruzaholm (talk) 15:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Could be. Beat out Michael Jackson (after his death) by a bit. –MuZemike 15:50, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: you could say he Beat It...oh, never mind  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.9.194.7 (talk) 21:38, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Most viewed article? 

message: Jobs has 3 children from his wife. Do we have any idea of their ages or names? Green Cardamom (talk) 18:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In the article, under Death. "Jobs is survived by his wife, Laurene, to whom he was married for 20 years; their three children, Reed (born 1991), Erin (born 1995), and Eve (born 1998); and by Lisa Brennan-Jobs, his daughter from a previous relationship.[152]" Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 19:02, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no need to list their names; we usually don't do so for non-notable children. See WP:BLPNAME --Errant (chat!) 12:42, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Children 

message: Steve Jobs was raised with Patty Jobs, his sister- also adopted. She works at De Anza College.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.77.89 (talk) 20:05, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal Life 

message: please change "Steve Jobs" to "Jobs" (where appropriate).
many unneeded instances of "Steve Jobs" (vs. "Jobs") sprinkled throughout prose (not talking about any quoted matter).   thanks.--96.232.126.111 (talk) 21:13, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln)  (talk) 21:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request from , 7 October 2011 

message: An image used in this article, , has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 05:02, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  File:SJAPPLEDEDICATE.png Nominated for speedy Deletion 

message: please change some instances of "jobs" to "he".
almost every mention of the subject is by his name.   thus, the article reads as if generated by a robot.  please substitute the pronoun "he" appropriately.   thanks.  --96.232.126.111 (talk) 06:25, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: This request is too vague. Please be more specific about what you want changed. — Bility (talk) 18:03, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  edit request - october 8, 2011 

message: why the announcement of Larry and Mark are not mention in this article.
They are also part of the industry.ProgramAngel (talk) 10:26, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  facebook and google announcement 

message: He's a brilliant man and did a lot to advance the personal computer industry, but he is not in the same league as these two people. He inspired others to create, but he didn't invent a single thing. His legacy is motivation, not creativity.108.23.147.17 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 04:59, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steve_Jobs#Inventions Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 07:56, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

text: Additionally, Edison invented few things personally as well, having a large army of workers to do the work.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.53.139.116 (talk) 00:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

text: FWIW, multiple RS state that his name is on 313 patents. I would say he qualifies as in inventor, though not of the stature of Thomas Edison, probably ahead of Henry Ford. Sbowers3 (talk) 03:14, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Honestly, The Edison comparison is apt, though probably not for the intended purpose. Edison was a brilliant marketer of, essentially, other people's technology. He took existing ideas (stole would not be too far off the mark in some cases) and brought them into the public mindset. Jobs didn't invent tablet PCs, computers, mp3 players, etc...he took existing technologies, improved their design and usability, and marketed them brilliantly. He was a product designer at heart, not really an "inventor" in the traditional sense. He invested user experiences, not the tech itself. For better or worse, that matches Edison fairly well. 204.65.34.206 (talk) 14:17, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

text: This is not the place to share your reflections or original research on Jobs' life or accomplishments, unless it's somehow relevant to writing about them on Wikipedia.  There are lots of other places on the net to talk about this. --Saforrest (talk) 15:23, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

text: It doesn't matter what you (or any other editor) thinks. The article simply states what has been said of him, it (and WP) doesn't make any judgments one way or the other. -- Jibal (talk) 03:57, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

text: Personally I think it was his intuition and messages, such as his Stanford Commencement speech that made him a Thomas Edison or whoever else. Sure, maybe he isn't Bill  Gates, but he is Steve Jobs. --xx.xxx.160.51 (talk) 22:41, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: For whatever it is worth, xx.xxx.160.51, putting in the x's doesn't eliminate your ip address from the history records in Wikipedia. But getting a Wikipedia account does eliminate your ip address from the public records, if you care. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 22:53, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Henry Ford or Thomas Edison of his age? I think not! 

message: ====How Steve Jobs Lived====
Below, Steve Jobs dilineates his views on life, death and his philosophy behind them.
Stanford Address Quote
I am honored to be with you today at your commencement from one of the finest universities in the world. I never graduated from college. Truth be told, this is the closest I’ve ever gotten to a college graduation. Today I want to tell you three stories from my life. That’s it. No big deal. Just three stories.
 
[...]
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/steve-jobs-2005-stanford-commencement-address-20111006-1lami.html#ixzz1a1j24dK4
165.196.0.12 (talk) 18:21, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not suitable. The text is copyrighted and unless released into a free license by the Jobs estate will only become PD after 70 years, so it could only be added on October 5, 2081. SpeakFree (talk) 18:25, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

text: Consider rewording it. 123.24.82.152 (talk) 07:10, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edit request *How Steve Jobs Lived* - Philosophy on Life, 6 October 2011 

message: Below, Steve Jobs dilineates his views on life, death and his philosophy behind them.
Stanford Address Quote
I am honored to be with you today at your commencement from one of the finest universities in the world. I never graduated from college. Truth be told, this is the closest I’ve ever gotten to a college graduation. Today I want to tell you three stories from my life. That’s it. No big deal. Just three stories.
 
[...]
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/technology/steve-jobs-2005-stanford-commencement-address-20111006-1lami.html#ixzz1a1j24dK4
165.196.0.12 (talk) 18:21, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not suitable. The text is copyrighted and unless released into a free license by the Jobs estate will only become PD after 70 years, so it could only be added on October 5, 2081. SpeakFree (talk) 18:25, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

text: Consider rewording it. 123.24.82.152 (talk) 07:10, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: How Steve Jobs Lived

message: I was asked by friends if he was a significant philanthropist and what his philanthropic activites or philosophy was. I have no idea but do believe this is an important dimension of his life worth addressing. Thanks! --Lbeaumont (talk) 23:54, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks sorry to have missed that. I see now why it is addressed under "business" I was looking for it under "personal".--Lbeaumont (talk) 01:45, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philanthropy? 

message: I think we need to decide if this is staying, I think it should, because it was on 2 days ago, off yesterday, so I put it back on, then somebody removed it and now its back on again. He has recently died so I think it should stay for about 1-2 weeks --Thanks, Hadseys 11:19, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: it's a no-longer-needed template for this article.  you may wish to read the prose provided at template:recent death which explains the template's intended usage.--96.232.126.111 (talk) 22:18, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed it again per the template documentation. The editing rate has fallen off well below the threshold where it might be called for. --Alan the Roving Ambassador (User:N5iln)  (talk) 22:37, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recently died article banner 

message: There is a discrepancy in the timeline of the article. It states that Jobs joined the Homebrew Computer Club and took a job at Atari in 1974, so that he could make enough money to go to India. It then mentions which guru he met with in India. Unfortunately, said guru died in 1973. Somebody needs to remedy this.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.250.107.103 (talk) 03:55, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Visit to India 

message: According to the listing in his high school yearbook, his actual name was "Stephen" (not to mention Mr. Wozniak). Suggest the name be changed from "Steven." Pic here http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Slideshows/_production/ss-111004-steve-jobs/ss-111005-steve-jobs-high-school.ss_full.jpg 75.109.136.234 (talk) 10:41, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: I think a high school yearbook is far less reliable than the variety of other sources listing him "Steven". — Bility (talk) 20:01, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Actual name 

message: Since Jobs death date has more views on wikipedia page view statistics (7 million) than at the deaths of Osama bin Laden and Michael Jacvkson which reportedly jammed wikipedia, is there a similar occurence for the death of Steve Jobs? If so, any sources? Pass a Method talk 12:54, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: 2 years is a long time in computing terms so what may have been a problem in the past may not be anymore (upgraded servers, improved software/code). More importantly, where are you getting more than MJ statistic? The MJ article had 8.68 million page views in the first 24 hours after his death  so if your 7 million is for the first 24 hours it's obviously less. More importantly the big issue with MJ was seemingly the 1+ million hits in the first hour   if the SJ views were more spread out this would likely have been less of a problem. Also the nature of MJ's death likely lead to a greater level of editing, even with protection, and editing tends to me much more server intensive then page views (although lots of people viewing a heavily edited article doesn't help I believe). Nil Einne (talk) 14:02, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thats untrue, MJ had 5 million page views, so this 7 million mark could be a new record. Pass a Method talk 19:40, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Not it's not untrue. MJ had 8.68 million in the first 24 hours according to the person who does most of the wikimedia statistics and uses the raw data, who is a far more reliable source then some generic stats page, particularly when poorly intepreted. The blog post has a decent explaination of the MJ stats. See also Talk:Main Page#Most viewed_article? (permanent link). Do note there's an obvious difference between 'UTC day' and 'first 24 hours' and how time of death will make a difference to these. Nil Einne (talk) 17:37, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  His death 

message: It is not clear that Jandali was a "professor" at UNR though he is loosely referred to as such in some of the British cites, the weakest of which is the Financial Times blog [blogs.ft.com/the-world/2011/10/the-wrong-syrian-died/]. The short FT blog piece is long on hype and short on facts. 
This article from the Reno paper, probably more accurately, mentions that Jandali taught political science at UNR. If he had been a professor, he would have had tenure. Clearly he did not and he does not mention that period of his life on LinkedIn  except to mention his education at University of Wisconsin, Madison.
So I say take out the professor part because it is probably wrong and note that he goes by the name John now.
According to this article, which appears here  and is no longer accessible at the Green Bay news source, Schiebel and Jandali married in December 1955, four months after her father's death and ten months after giving up their baby boy. Their daughter, Mona Simpson, was born in 1957; Schiebel and Jandali divorced in 1962, according to the Green Bay newspaper, which checked court records. 
I'd insert this myself but this article is busy today. Skywriter (talk) 20:02, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biological parents 

message: I feel like the introduction should be more chronological.  Currently, it jumps around time out of order.
Cosprings (talk) 16:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: . Thanks for spotting that omission. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 18:27, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction quality 

message: The last name has been variously pronounced to rhyme with "nobs", or to rhyme with "lobes".  Can anybody find a definitive reference for the correct pronunciation, and place it at the beginning of the article? Reify-tech (talk) 03:50, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good suggestion. Darrell_Greenwood (talk) 19:14, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pronunciation 

message: Looks like Steve Jobs Article was viewed more on the day he died than The Michael Jackson Article was on the day that he died.
:1. Are there stats kept on the most viewed pages in a single day?
:2. Is this a new article record, minus the main page?
:3. Is this notable for the article?
Just posing some questions to give us something to think about, and to create some discussion on the matter. Still a whole heck of a lot of views for one day though.--JOJ Hutton 20:22, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Woah, hard to believe. On the Michael Jackson article, it says "The Wikimedia Foundation reported nearly a million visitors to Jackson's biography within one hour, probably the most visitors in a one-hour period to any article in Wikipedia's history." I don't know if a million visitors arrived to Jobs' biography within one hour; I guess it's notable that there were 7.4 million different viewers that viewed the article on the day that Jobs passed away. --Bryce Wilson | talk  01:06, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't aware that it was even mentioned in the MJ article. I guess that adds more credence to an addition here.--JOJ Hutton 02:29, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed! --Bryce Wilson | talk  04:47, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: So perhaps like the MJ article,this info could go into the reactions section.--JOJ Hutton 16:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  New single-day article view record??? 

message: The last one arrived six weeks before Mr. Jobs's death, Mr. Jandali said, and said simply, "Thank you." 
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203499704576620911395191694.html
Oppenht (talk) 19:03, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wall Street Journal: Abdulfattah "John" Jandali says Jobs replied to him twice 

message: We now have confirmation that the cause of death was "respiratory arrest and a pancreatic tumor" per death certificate. But no confirmation that the respiratory arrest was a complication or result of the tumor, at this time. Right now for all we have in reliable sources, these could be completely independent and not cause-effect, although obviously the assumption is the respiratory arrest was due to the cancer. So we have to say he died of "A and B", not "A - a complication of B".
Can someone check into this? Thanks,
FT2 (Talk | email) 20:32, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I presume this is settled by the cited Bloomberg story which states that the death certificate lists "metastatic pancreas neuroendocrine tumor" as the "underlying cause" of death. The WHO defines underlying cause of death as "the disease or injury which initiated the train of morbid events leading directly to death". -- Rrburke (talk) 00:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cause of death - cite request for one point 

message: The article currently states that Jobs told his employees of his illness in mid-2004. According to the latest Bloomberg BusinessWeek issue, the entirety of which was devoted to the man, this in fact happened in late 2003. ("1997-2011: The Return," by Brad Stone, pg. 40) Imagine Reason (talk) 05:29, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Bloomberg has published a timeline here (), for those keen on updating. It's true he was diagnosed earlier, but it only became public knowledge in 2004.Shencypeter (talk) 07:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time of discover of cancer incorrect 

message: If pictures of the Apple homesite displaying Steve Jobs's picture is not acceptable for use, would a picture of an iMac displaying that page at the Apple Store, or iPhones and iPads paying tribute with that image, be ok? In other words if an uploader had photographed that picture himself.... Shencypeter (talk) 05:11, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Simply putting a frame around a copyrighted image doesn't mitigate the copyright violation. An image of a bank of screens all displaying an image where the image is incidental and not a principal focus might be different, but I don't see the point of expending effort trying to come up with ingenious ways to smuggle in an image that is pure schmaltz and contributes nothing encyclopedic to the article anyway. Wikipedia is not Kensington Palace. -- Rrburke (talk) 14:12, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merged discussion from below 

message: The fact that Jobs visited a Hare Krishna temple for meals is now included in the article as there is a reference (his Commencement address on June 12, 2005 at Stanford). The same statement was added by someone earlier. Why was it removed? Because there was no reference? Even if authorized editors are allowed to edit, still, strictly speaking what is the guarantee (rigid proof) that authorized authors will write facts? It all boils down to faith. It may be reasonable faith, but still it is faith. Then why are many people against religion. Why can't someone have reasonable faith there too?— Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.51.252 (talk • contribs) 15:00, 14 April 2011‎ (UTC)
:is the fact that he visited a temple for meals really that notable to include in an encyclopedia? LogicalFinance33 (talk) 17:08, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jobs and Hare Krishna 

message: After the initial rush of obituaries praising Jobs as a genius, a notable number of dissenting writeups have been published, criticizing him for:
: 1. Lack of philanthropy as both an individual and head of Apple
: 2. Insulting, rude, tyrannical ways - the term "fascist" has been used frequently
: 3. Apple's illegal and immoral conduct and policies, including:
:: 3.1 Its "Worldwide Loyalty Team," widely characterized as the "Apple Gestapo," known for its:
::: 3.1.1 Censorship of the press
::: 3.1.2 Illegal searches
::: 3.1.3 Legal threats and harassment
::: 3.1.4 Thuggish bullying
::: 3.1.5 Special relationship with police departments
:: 3.2 Censorship of content in the App Store, including:
::: 3.2.1 Pornography, except pornography from large distributors like Playboy
::: 3.2.2 LGBT apps
::: 3.2.3 Political satire and cartoons
::: 3.2.4 News outlets that have published sexual content, e.g. Germany's Stern and Bild
:::: 3.2.4.1 Including attempts to make these sources censor their own publications
::: 3.2.5 Political candidate apps
::: 3.2.6 Numerous controversial apps in multiple categories
::: 3.2.7 Apps not originally written in Appe-approved coding languages
:: 3.3 Media Manipulation, including:
::: 3.3.1 "Controlled Leaks" - intentional leaking of upcoming product information, with an emphasis on making sure not to leave paper trails to avoid scrutiny by the press and the SEC
::: 3.3.2 Forced shutdowns of numerous blogs
::: 3.3.3 Forced retractions from larger news sources
::: 3.3.4 Misinformation, willful deception, and open hostility relating to reports of Jobs' health issues
:: 3.4 Human rights violations, including:
::: 3.4.1 Use of child labor in manufacturing plants
::: 3.4.2 Sweatshop conditions in manufacturing plants
::: 3.4.3 Use of Foxconn as a manufacturer in particular
:: 3.5 Unjustifiable retail markups
:: 3.6 DRM restrictions and engineered limitations of consumer products
:: 3.7 Hindering open source development - Richard Stallman said, "I'm not glad he's dead, but I'm glad he's gone."
: 4. Denying the paternity of his daughter, denying his health complications
These things need addressing. Obviously they shouldn't dominate the article, because that'd be undue weight, but the level of criticism, especially considering that the man just died, is very notable. 24.62.204.224 (talk) 03:14, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Even though many think it's sad that Jobs died – the article cannot be overflowed with just everything good about him. Like you stated, we need to address the criticisms. Let's get started --Bryce Wilson | talk  04:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

text: Just be sure everything is cited by a RS and not just some op-ed piece; also statements will have to be pretty solid to avoid possible legal ramifications. Additionally, it is important to separate Apple Computer from Steve Jobs in the criticisms. HammerFilmFan (talk) 06:16, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

text: * Agree with above, a "criticisms" section is reasonable or better still, merging other significant views into the main text where relevant. But RS are needed and due weight is crucial, as others above had said. But encyclopedic, not due to a POV or an agenda. Endorse if done right. FT2 (Talk | email) 20:35, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

text: Okay. --Bryce Wilson | talk  10:39, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: At present, this is nothing more than a laundry list of kvetches with no sources adduced. There's nothing to debate yet because nothing has been proposed for addition that meets the threshold for inclusion. Note that simply meeting the threshold for inclusion does not mean that something is automatically entitled to be added. Whether something that does meet the threshold for inclusion (that is, Wikipedia:Verifiability) ought actually to be added to the article depends on whether a consensus has been reached to include it, but until the threshold is met, and it hasn't been, there isn't anything to discuss. -- Rrburke (talk) 17:27, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Far too many dissenting obituaries not to include response 

message: I read the section a week or so ago and it didn't reflect well on him and now it.. does (main differences can be seen here) However the sources for the new positives are a google answers page (I've honestly no idea on the reliablity or not of that source, it may be fine) and an interview in Playboy from 1985, well before the elimination of philanthrophic activities at Apple for example - did his attitude change over time? His/Apples work with Product Red seems fine (and presumably any critcism of the project would belong on the projects page anyway), but it looks a little as if his recent death and his popularity amongst sections of the public are leading to a little rose-tintedness. BulbaThor (talk) 13:16, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that his death is most likely the reason for the additions to the section. But if the sources check out and its true, there's no reason to remove it. It's still a pretty small and mild section. LogicalFinance33 (talk) 17:21, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philanthrophy section