Talk:W3C Markup Validation Service
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the W3C Markup Validation Service article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
Merger with World Wide Web Consortium
editHi. I could not find an article about the W3C HTML Validator when searching and have since created my own (W3C's HTML Validator). I think it seems only sensible to merge these articles but I do not know how to add the tag on the article page. Any suggestions for merging (I can't delete articles - I'm not an administrator)? Should we merge the articles? --Jatkins 14:25, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- Given the extremely long time over which this debate has run (since April 2007) and the lack of agreement to merge the articles, I will go ahead and remove the merger tags. The complete merger discussion is located on the talk page of the W3C article. I have also expanded this article, added some logos and a reference to it. Please feel free to help out and add more text and references! - Ahunt (talk) 19:33, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Userbox
editI have created a userbox for any users who validate their web pages using the W3C's validators!
| Code | Result | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| |{{User:Ahunt/Validator}} |
|
Usage |
W3C Validation service down?
editIt's been that way quite a while. Anyone have any information regarding this?Ldfifty (talk) 10:17, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
- I used it yesterday and just checked it a few seconds ago - it is working fine. - Ahunt (talk) 11:59, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
List of markup validation for common websites
editAm I the only one to find that section useless? --Chealer (talk) 21:48, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
- No, me too. In any case, it is original research, which should not be here. I will remove it. Drkirkby (talk) 15:37, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
Introduction edits regarding SEO
editHello:
As a courtesy I wanted to take the discussion here if any editors have issues with my recent edits. The statement that W3C compliance has 100% zero effect on SEO is untrue and the sources given were not credible or stating anything that was supporting the statement. One reference I removed was a company selling their services, SEO optimizers. The other source was the Search Engine Journal, which is OK but they are not really journalists and are clearly selling services as well.
Code compliance is not a guarantee as far as SEO, but it can hurt a page's rank for a variety of reasons. I softened the statement and I think the whole assertion should be revisited. A. Ward (talk) 05:45, 25 July 2012 (UTC)