Talk:RRoD

RFV discussion.
diff

Does this meet WT:CFI? Conrad.Irwin 22:28, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Deleted. &#x200b;—  msh210  ℠  17:53, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

RFV discussion: October 2022–February 2023
I feel like this will probably pass RFV easily but I don't have the time or inclination to cite it myself right now. I am mainly tagging it because it was deleted, with no discussion, after being RFV'd in 2008 and has only recently been recreated. User: The Ice Mage talk to meh 21:09, 7 October 2022 (UTC) look
 * I added four cites, one from a paper version of a website, three from online news sources (Forbes, Engaget, PCWorld) which I consider reasonably reputable, there are many others. I think this one is reasonably widely used, but may not meet the CFI for the venues of cites. I would suggest that this is a case where the spirit of the law is met even if the letter is not. - TheDaveRoss  14:22, 25 October 2022 (UTC)


 * @TheDaveRoss I was about to call this cited, but part of the problem is that there are only 2 cites with the spelling RRoD cited, the others have RROD, which is a different entry. Not sure what the policy is on verifying alternative forms though. AG202 (talk) 17:24, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Alternate letter-case is a funny grey area, since almost every word can be written correctly in alternate letter-case (start of sentence, YELLING, etc.), and every word is sometimes written (correctly or incorrectly) in alternate letter-case. I wouldn't advocate for having two entries, and this form (little-o) seems to be more common among "published" usage. If the verdict is to move it to "big-O" I wouldn't object. I don't think the two are distinct terms. - TheDaveRoss  17:57, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree. Just as how BSOD can be spelled BSoD but there is no difference in meaning. — Soap — 14:26, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

RFV Passed Ioaxxere (talk) 03:20, 10 February 2023 (UTC)