Talk:JavaScript

maybe better to move this to 'Forced JavaScript on websites' and narrow the scope or something?

This article currently reads as an opinionated article about how bad a programming language is. Whether it's valid or not is beyond me, but I'm not sure it really fits the wiki, especially as it's a bit of a stretch to call it a 'product'. An incident/theme page on javascript being forced for tracking etc. could make ore sense instead? Keith (talk) 08:12, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

I agree, it's not a product, it's a web-tech, like cookies. I think that if there's an article about cookies, there should be one about JS Rudxain (talk) 08:28, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

yeah, it's more of a general theme article regarding how it's used that we'd want i guess, rather than an article discussing the language itself (though obviously things about the language would be brought up). Keith (talk) 08:47, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Agreed, if we need an explainer article for JS, we should just link to Wikipedia. Any incidents/themes explicitly involving JS should have their own dedicated articles JamesTDG (talk) 08:52, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

I forgot to mention that there are some cases in which the mere existence of JS (as a standard) can negatively impact users, even when it's optional. One of the External-Links contains a source for that, so please give me some time to complete the article :( Rudxain (talk) 09:16, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Wait, isn't JS too specific to be a theme? I think a proper theme would be "Forced software" (similarly to FADL). It makes sense, because many of the bad things about JS are shared/in-common with anything that executes code ("dynamic/active content") Rudxain (talk) 11:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)