Talk:Pastebin

Computing Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Websites: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is part of WikiProject Websites, an attempt to create and link together articles about the major websites on the web. To participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.WebsitesWikipedia:WikiProject WebsitesTemplate:WikiProject WebsitesWebsites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Low-importance).

ePastebin

It looks like ePastebin just says "coming soon" -- is it worth including it in the main article in that state? -- AlexBischoff 16:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the domain has been lost/sold. I'd say that's a solid "no" on that. --80.101.187.6 (talk) 15:20, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not a link farm.

Please stop turning this page into a link farm, WP:NOT#MIRROR. Killer Hobbits 18:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do I have to ask who decided appon the list of sites that are on there now? --Streaky 12:46, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitarily picking a few is exactly why it keeps turning into a big list. --Streaky 12:48, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed all the but pastebin.com, the original and I've collected them all from history at User:ZacBowling/Pastebins. (Be good to say I run a pastebin at monoport.com that was on the old list before it exploded) --ZacBowling^talk 03:06, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I do believe that other than the original site link, all others should be removed. --the100rabh 12:35, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was also discussion on the List of pastebins article which listed basic criteria to be listed, and the links that were there (prior to PlaneMad's removal) were valid examples of distinct and very popular pastebins, which is why there were included. (Pastebin.com is arguably not the original, either) --Slepp (talk) 20:57, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As the100rabh and PlaneMad said, pastebin can be there. Pastebin.com is the classic pastebin and started the pastebin culture. Old Pastebin.com page says that the inspiration behind pastebin.com is a raw app called 'Paste'. Guess this is a vital info regarding the history. mixdev (talk) 23:59, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Github Desktop —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.33.154.227 (talk) 13:24, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Links to ideone.com and codepad.org are repeated in the reference section.--99.184.92.155 (talk) 05:42, 20 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Which URLs and projects to include?

I think that tinypaste.com should be linked. Its odd that its not already seeing as it is the largest pastebin (in terms of traffic according to alexa and compete.com )online and also is one of the most feature rich. It was covered in techcrunch as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.203.6 (talk) 06:12, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious about paste.biz's listing as a Project, as well as pastecode.com's link and the PHP Web CLI (not a pastebin..) The first two items seem to me as more or less direct clones and minor variations of the pastebin.com code base, and the PHP Web CLI is a separate type of project entirely. --Slepp 01:40, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been going on the basis of pastebins you can find in various searches that show up easily and seem to have a reasonable level of usage.. Or that are open projects available for use and development by others that are mature enough to be easily used and deployed, not nascent ideas. Dunno, pretty arbitrary (and maybe biased), but that's what I figure.. --Slepp 04:13, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are removing Gnopaste again and again... I think it have to be on this page too because it have nothing to do with the existing pastebin. --Mosez 09:00, 03 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You say existing pastebin like there is only one. Neither does pastebin.ca have anything to do with the others. Your link was moved to the List of pastebins, however. The ones that are there used to all be cited in the main article (ZacBowling recently changed the citations), but given the number of times this turns into a huge list of mostly-cloned (but definitely not all) pastebins, adding even one more link without great cause is probably a bad idea. --Slepp 20:15, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it does not have to be on the list of pastebins only. It is full independent from pastebin.com and pastebin.ca, so why is there a link to pastebin.com and pastebin.ca? If gnopaste (nopaste.info) have to be removed remove your pastebin.ca too! --Mosez 09:00, 03 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mosez, I'm leaving that choice to someone else now, such as ZacBowling. However, the point is don't just go adding yourself at this point with all those comments above saying not to. Maybe ask first, or talk about it, which is suggested above in this page. Anyhow, I'm leaving it for now, and someone else that isn't listed can make their choices. --Slepp (talk) 22:54, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

sendmecode and pbin.oogly

Both parties continue adding a link which has not been discussed as per the guidelines laid out in the page. The users continue to remove other links when replacing theirs. A 3rd opinion is requested on this. --Slepp (talk) 01:56, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, the two sites haven't commented, but these two:

sendmecode.com
pbin.oogly.co.uk

Want to be added to the external links section. My thoughts on each, though a third opinion is needed at this point:

sendmecode.com - Too new & unknown to be listed in the main article. Closed source, so can't be considered a full project like nopaste.info was in previous discussions.
pbin.oogly.co.uk - Various DNS problems seem to be limiting global access to this Pastebin. It is also relatively young, and has no references I can find anywhere. Also considered 'private' by the author, vs. the other 3 presently listed which are public.

Both links are being added by their respective owners/authors. I'm open to reasons why either of these sites should be listed, but no reasons have thus far been presented in open discussion.

--05:10, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Haven't heard anything, so removing request for 3rd opinions. --Slepp (talk) 21:07, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citations needed?

Some of the things marked as needing a citation are basically impossible to find a citation for. -raylu^T 20:12, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, most of the stuff doesn't even need citation - just look at pastebin.com for verification.--84.176.241.217 (talk) 22:01, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

pastebin wiki

We should add information of the web that implement pastebin using mediawiki? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ans (talk • contribs) 10:03, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikia one linked above isn't really a 'project' or anything, it's just a single page on Wikia that doesn't do much more than create with a template. Wiki's dedicated to Pastebins and code highlighting may be useful (similar to pastewiki.ca), or if the Wikia page is made more advanced. --Slepp (talk) 09:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The Wikia one linked above isn't really a 'project' or anything <-- It is a mini wiki or mini project. Note that, Scratchpad is the place for hosting mini wiki project.
- Wiki's dedicated to Pastebins and code highlighting may be useful (similar to pastewiki.ca) <-- Yes, the pastebin wikia does support syntax hilighting. It has the syntax hilight markup preloaded, when creating new pastebin page on that wikia.
- --Ans (talk) 12:26, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

txtb.in

Txtb.in(http://txtb.in) is a pastebin implementation designed for microblogging (with features like short url, direct posting excerpts to Twitter). Wondering if we can include it. I don't see any Dmoz categories where a list of pastebins are there. Fetchmaster (talk) 16:42, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is included by proxy because of the article used in a citation, but there are also a number of other Twitter targeted Pastebin-like sites, so it comes down to find the differentiators and the ones which are unique or already popular. --Slepp (talk) 03:18, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Seems to be used quite a bit on Twitter, formal reference in a news source. Placed the link as a reference to specialized microblogging applications. --Slepp (talk) 03:07, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I used it quite a lot of time & found it really useful. Indeed, it's the popular pastebin made for micro blogging services like Twitter. I think we should keep this link. --Hnprashanth (talk) 04:33, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

codepad

Codepad probably qualifies to be listed as a unique use of the Pastebin concept to provide compilation, error checking, output reports, etc., vs. most of the static Pastebins which don't do such things. It would make the most sense to provide information in a section about software development features and list it as a reference for that. --Slepp (talk) 16:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ideone

I belive this qualifies to be listed as a unique use user input files to run submitted codes. Moreover, to the best of my knowledge there are only two services which allows to run submitted code: codepad and ideone. And ideone accepts codes in 40 languages, as SPOJ do while, codepad only 13. kuszi (talk) 21:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Comparison_of_pastebins

FYI. Now up for deletion. Ikip 19:15, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...and the result was keep.
-Garrett W. {☎ ✍} 04:05, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the final conclusion made was to keep, why is it gone? This is what happens when bureaucracy takes over. Nestea Zen (talk) 10:46, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Comparison of pastebins (2nd nomination). mabdul 12:09, 21 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of tinypaste?

I previously suggested this but have not hard back. I think that Tinypaste should be included in the list. Its the largest pastebin on the web according to alexa and also has the unique function of paying users to paste. Some articles that mention it are on techcrunch and lifehacker. Simply google "tinypaste" for mentions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.62.202.134 (talk) 00:16, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe just be bold and put it in. The worst that could happen would be for your edits to be reverted.

-Garrett W. {☎ ✍} 02:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I actually was going to, but I am a noob to wikipedia and dont know how to edit a reflist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.174.236.120 (talk) 14:17, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion

Because the original pastebin.com script is now unavailable, I think [1] should be included as a reference of some sort as an alternative or placeholder to the original pastebin script.

I won't add it in myself as people may take it the wrong way, as it is my project. -- EcKstasy ☣ 21:22, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Original source is available at http://pastebin.dixo.net/pastebin.php?help=1 (I was the original author of pastebin.com) I'm not sure it really belongs in the article though. Lordelph (talk) 18:36, 6 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add, the original source is now available on github too https://github.com/lordelph/pastebin Lordelph (talk) 23:44, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

pastebin.com as 'official website'

As it stands, the article confuses the general concept of a pastebin with the specific implementation at www.pastebin.com. This is like confusing 'Wikipedia' with 'wiki'. Is there any sense in which the implementation at Pastebin.com is 'official'? That seems to be similar to saying that WikiWikiWeb is the official wiki, for being first. I think this should be changed. --jftsang 02:04, 17 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jftsang: Agree, which is why I moved the content of that section over to pastebin.com - you could have done so as well btw. --Fixuture (talk) 14:56, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Incomprehensible section

I see in the page's intro some vague codes and statements that are incomprehensible and seems unencyclopedic. Can anyone look into this? I feel confused by this. Bekkadn (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:04, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why is IRC mentioned?

"(e.g. source code snippets for code review via Internet Relay Chat (IRC))" (line 1)

This example makes sense, but is the latter half seems like a completely unnecessary clarification to me. What's a signature? -dumbuz (talk) 01:16, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]