Talk:HTTP cookie

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Former featured articleHTTP cookie is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 8, 2006.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 16, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
January 28, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
April 7, 2009Featured article reviewDemoted
June 6, 2011Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former featured article

"Alternatives to cookies" should be split out into a separate article[edit]

The section "Alternatives to cookies" list various identifiers and cache records stored by the client (and metadata like IP). These things can be used for tracking (one application of cookies), but they don't actually substitute cookies in general. Also, this list is missing a few entries, like:

- favicon cache:
https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2021/02/new-browser-tracking-hack-works-even-when-you-flush-caches-or-go-incognito/
- HSTS tracking, see
https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2015/02/02/anatomy-of-a-browser-dilemma-how-hsts-supercookies-make-you-choose-between-privacy-or-security/
https://webkit.org/blog/8146/protecting-against-hsts-abuse/
- redirect tracking, see
https://digiday.com/marketing/wtf-what-is-redirect-tracking/

Also see: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Privacy/Redirect_tracking_protection#what_data_is_cleared

Invention of the tracking cookie in 1995[edit]

It's not my place to edit this into the HTTP cookie page, so I'm leaving a note here. My name is Gary Robinson, and I'm the original inventor of the tracking cookie, and the coiner of that term. (The tracking cookie was independently invented a few months later at DoubleClick.) I am the sole inventor listed for patent 5,918,014 with priority date Dec 27, 1995.[1]

The term "tracking cookie" is coined in that patent at column 10, line 9. The technical mechanism is described starting at column 9, line 38.

Google eventually came to own the patent, which has now expired. It also describes mechanisms for privacy and user control of their data. I do already have a wikipedia page,[2] and it seems like the tracking cookie section of the HTTP Cookie page should link to it. But I leave that for other people to decide about and do, if it is judged to be appropriate.

In any case my suggestion is to edit the Tracking part of the Uses section to refer to the patent and to me. I'd do it myself, but my understanding is that it would be inappropriate for me to edit something about me.


[1] https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/c3/d4/40/239073914fa7fc/US5918014.pdf [2] Gary Robinson Garyrob (talk) 14:06, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 16 October 2023[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Per consensus, not primary topic. (closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky (talk) 23:02, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


HTTP cookieCookies – First, WP:COMMONNAME. "HTTP cookie" is not a very common name for cookies on the Internet — in fact, I don't think I had heard of them being called that until I found this article. The Google Ngram Viewer shows a dramatic drop in usage after 2005, when it spiked and never recovered. This article is currently buried near the very bottom of Cookie (disambiguation) and took me a while to find because Cookies redirects to Cookie (the food). Per WP:SMALLDETAILS, the plural form should be sufficient to distinguish Internet cookies from edible ones, plus there is clear evidence that Internet cookies are the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term "cookies". HTTP cookie actually dwarfs Cookie in terms of pageviews, but obviously the food is the long-term primary topic for "cookie". For the plural form "cookies", however, this is clearly the one most people are and will be looking for. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:34, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. The baked good should remain the WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT for "cookies". Rreagan007 (talk) 02:16, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Could you please elaborate? Primary redirects are a thing, but WP:PLURALPT permits a plural redirect to redirect to another article if there is a different primary topic for the plural form. For example, Windows vs. Window, Snickers vs. Snicker, Queens vs. Queen, etc. InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:24, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    "Windows is an operating system", "Snickers is a candy bar", "Queens is a county in New York State": these are all singular nouns. "Cookies are stored on your hard drive": plural. Your analogy is invalid. "Cookie" the unit of stored data, just as "cookie" the baked good, is subject to the same rules regarding singular and plural usage in article titles. And how would it be a valid disambiguation? If we had Cookie and Cookies, how wouldn't anyone know in advance which is about the baked good and which is about the computer topic? Largoplazo (talk) 02:38, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, let's play a game (no cheating). 1984 and Nineteen Eighty-Four do not point to the same page. Without clicking or hovering on either article, can you tell in advance which is which? InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:05, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Obviously the latter is Orwell, but that's not really on topic. No one ever uses "Nineteen Eighty-Four" to mean the year, whereas "cookies" is a regularly used plural form of "cookie". O.N.R. (talk) 03:45, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. A cookie can be plural too, and is certainly the primary topic for cookies. 162 etc. (talk) 02:27, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Commment I agree that the current title could be improved upon. I wonder, though, if a better rename would be something like Cookie (HTTP) or Cookie (internet). I'm not necessarily in support of the positions of @Rreagan007 or @162 etc. but the distinction between Cookie and Cookies is not so clear, so people will have to look at the short description to figure out what they want.
    Oblivy (talk) 02:39, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose How is the HTTP cookie (or web cookie) the primary topic for "cookie"? And there is no rhyme or reason to assigning singular to the baked good and plural to the unit of web storage. The baked good is a cookie. The unit of storage is a cookie. Both can be pluralized. Both can be considered individually.
    The only thing the Ngram tells you is that "HTTP cookie(s)" fell in usage by about 50% between 2005 and 2013 (and has risen since then) as a proportion out of all of the literature in those years. It tells us nothing about its frequency relative to references to the baked good at any given time. Largoplazo (talk) 02:47, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) Because cookies on the Internet are rarely referred to in singular form. "This website uses cookies." "Accept all cookies." "Clear cookies." "Block third-party cookies." InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:52, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose move. The primary topic for "cookies", plural, is obviously the baked goods. O.N.R. (talk) 03:45, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Not only is the block of data not the primary meaning of "cookies", but I see no evidence that people only identify such blocks using the plural form. A quick glance at Google shows that reliable sources often say things like, "a cookie is information that a website puts on a user's computer"[1], or "the most common use of a cookie is to store a user ID"[2], or similar singular constructions. ╠╣uw [talk] 10:50, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose not primary for the plural form and may not pass WP:PLURAL anyway but I'm not sure. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:47, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Per everything above, but also, Cookie ([[Cookie]]) and Cookies ([[Cookie]]s) will both lead to the same page, but if this page moves as proposed, Cookies ([[Cookie]]s) and Cookies ([[Cookies]]) won't and that is just bad user experience (and tools such as AWB will obviously not be able to handle it). Gonnym (talk) 19:04, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose this move. I agree that "HTTP cookie" is perhaps a rare term that this sort of natural disambiguation isn't best, perhaps, and something like "Cookie (web)" or "Cookie (Internet)" could be better. I also think that the disambiguation page should have both cookie and HTTP cookie linked from the top of the page in some style, which is done when there are two topics much more common than others (which is true in this case). I may try to do that sometime when I can think exactly how if no one else beats me to it. Skynxnex (talk) 19:43, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    As I indicated above, I agree with @InfiniteNexus the current title is not great.
    Cookie (Internet) would be fine. I suggested Cookie (HTTP). Cookie (Web) is as good or better.
    Since this RFC seems doomed to fail as 100% - nominator oppose, should this be opened as a new RFC to see if a different change is going to be acceptable? If not, what's the next move? Oblivy (talk) 02:38, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let it... Randy Kryn (talk) 03:35, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

RFC - move to Cookie (Internet)[edit]

A previous RFC to move to "cookies" failed (as IMHO it should have, for reasons given above). However, there was some support to change to Cookie (Internet) or similar and I don't think that got serious consideration.

The term "cookie" is deeply embedded in modern parlance, in a way that HTTP Cookie is not, and this would aid searchers without creating confusion about the baked good.

I'd be OK with Cookie (HTTP) or Cookie (Web) as well. Oblivy (talk) 02:04, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've given this nearly a week and no comments. Unless someone raises their hand to object I'll do the page move shortly. Oblivy (talk) 02:59, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That wasn't an RFC, it was a move request, and you ought to post a formal move request too. (FYI, this isn't an RFC either: submitting an RFC involves more than including the letters "RFC" in the title of a discussion.) See the procedure at WP:Requested moves. Largoplazo (talk) 09:37, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]