Talk:Google

Proposed merge of Google AI into Google

A division of Google. Article has little content, is more like a stub. We don't normally have separate articles on company divisions unless these divisions enjoy notability independent from the parent, which is obviously not the case here. — kashmīrī ^TALK 12:40, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Google AI is an integral division of Google, and will likely continue to grow in size and importance in the coming years, as the company continues to place greater emphasis on AI. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:18, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

  Irrespective of their size, I will argue that company divisions are inherently non-notable as, barring rare exceptions, they normally fail WP:INHERITORG. — kashmīrī ^TALK 14:16, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

  Google AI is likely going to expand in the future with the recent release of technology such as PaLM 2. For “future proofing” purposes, I argue leaving the article as-is is better. KnowledgeSeek23 (talk) 04:13, 26 September 2023 (UTC)

• Weak Support, but ideally wait. I'm viewing this as WP:TOOSOON, but it also may be "too soon to merge". InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 18:39, 16 May 2023 (UTC)
• Decent Support I believe that generally, having less pages on Wikipedia makes it less confusing for people, especially when they are stubs/start-class articles that would belong better in a section of another article. Maybe in the future, it will have a more significant impact, but for now, I believe that it should be merged. It's a branch of a company that is related enough to the main company to warrant a merge. The Troutinator 🐟 - Slap me | What I've slapped 05:19, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
• Support for now, it can always be split into its own article in the future. Persent101 (talk) 02:45, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
• On current content I lean towards a merge without prejudice to expansion, but not sure where it would be merged to. There is no individual coverage of divisions here. CMD (talk) 04:46, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
• Comment Listen, folks. A merge doesn't make sense. Even if the article has few sources, this is clearly a {{Sources exist}} situation. And as Chipmunkdavis noted, where would be a good merge target? The term "Google AI" isn't even mentioned on this article. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:13, 26 September 2023 (UTC)
• Support. No need for a separate stub specifically for Google's ai r&d wing. Cfls (talk) 19:15, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 May 2023

In the history>early years section, David Cheriton invested "change $250,000 to ($100,000 - 200,000)"

Reference - https://www.benzinga.com/news/23/05/32475257/the-professor-who-made-10-billion-by-cutting-google-its-first-startup-check 114.130.156.201 (talk) 20:03, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Callmemirela 🍁 21:38, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Lead section

Hi, I was wondering if it would be best to change the part of the lead section mentioning Google's products into a list format, as the prose looks very confusing and difficult to read. Thanks, The Troutinator 🐟 - Slap me | What I've slapped 04:54, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

It is generally preferred to write in prose rather than lists. Furthermore, the lead section only highlights the most notable and important products. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:03, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

"Google." listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Google. has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 6 § Google. until a consensus is reached. Gonnym (talk) 12:16, 6 November 2023 (UTC)