Talk:Bolt (web browser)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bolt (web browser) 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

Computing: Software

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software.

Conflict of Interest. Suggestions?

Not quite sure what to say here. Most of the content for this huge article was written by a PR Firm. 20 of the references are to Bitstream press releases. And the text reads exactly like you would expect. "BOLT is attracting more than 45,000 downloads every day" "It’s been fascinating to see the similarities in how BOLT is being used by people all over the world" "BOLT features unrivaled speed" "BOLT is optimized for resource constrained devices, thus providing a very fast browsing experience compared to native browsers" "BOLT uses Patent pending technology to render complex Indic languages text" "The cloud-based servers compress the data reaching the device by as much as 24 times, resulting in speeding up page load times by two to three times compared to other browsers". Any comments? ~a (user • talk • contribs) 07:01, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. There is no harm in having a changelog but any "making it clearly the best", "unrivalled in", "the superior choice" type stuff where the cite is to Bitstream themselves should all be removed. Anything that seems advertising but can be cited to a third-party I see no harm in keeping. 86.145.210.31 (talk) 06:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

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

The result of the move request was: moved to Bolt (web browser). Clear consensus that the capitalization had to go. I chose to follow Jafeluv's suggestion, except that "web browser" appears to be the common disambiguator, e.g. Opera (web browser). Favonian (talk) 16:36, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Bolt Browser → BOLT Browser – Much more appropriate and correct name, per the capitalization of the browser name itself. LikeLakers2 (talk | Sign my guestbook!) 05:00, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. See MOS:TM. Bolt does not appear to be an acronym and is not each letter is not pronounced, so it should not be capitalised. Jenks24 (talk) 05:46, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – They call it the BOLT mobile browsing platform; BOLT is the trademark, and we don't set trademarks in all caps. If we want to call lit a browser, as is pretty common, we don't need to capitalize that, either; it's just as generic as mobile browsing platform is. Let's move it to Bolt browser. Dicklyon (talk) 06:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I agree with Dicklyon, although I'd prefer Bolt (browser) to make clear that the article is not about a generic concept called "bolt browser" but a specific browser called "Bolt". Jafeluv (talk) 13:18, 20 December 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Inappropriate link in Notes section

Resolved

The link in note 1 appears to lead to a private space of a user account on a website unrelated to the subject matter. I feel this is inappropriate, and the link should be altered or removed accordingly.

31.109.177.18 (talk) 22:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reporting. I searched a bit in the history and it was added by an IP without any further comment, so I removed it. (see this change). mabdul 01:09, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Bolt (web browser). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 04:57, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Promotional material and information from biased first-party source

Large portions of the article resemble promotional material and include unsubstantiated (or claims without a source). I'll try to find sources for un-sourced information and remove all promotional content. I'd appreciate any help with this.109.252.91.122 (talk) 11:16, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]