Talk:X (social network)

Requested move 18 April 2026

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: Procedural close. Per above, temporary account is spamming RMs, and this one was closed in the other direction recently so absent serious new evidence there's nothing to discuss.  — Amakuru (talk) 13:52, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

---

X (social network) → TwitterTwitter – The article should be moved from “X (social network)” to “Twitter” because “Twitter” remains the overwhelmingly predominant name used in reliable, independent sources and by the general public. Per Wikipedia’s WP policy, article titles should reflect the name most commonly used in English-language reliable sources, not necessarily the official or most recent branding. Although the platform was officially rebranded to “X” by its owner, many high-quality sources (news outlets, academic publications, and general usage) continue to refer to the platform as “Twitter,” often either exclusively or alongside “X (formerly Twitter).” Additionally, “X” is highly ambiguous and does not clearly identify the subject without disambiguation, whereas “Twitter” is immediately recognizable and unambiguous. Until there is clear and sustained evidence that “X” has become the dominant name in reliable sources, retaining “Twitter” as the article title better aligns with Wikipedia’s naming conventions regarding recognizability, naturalness, and precision. ~2026-23794-05 (talk) 13:36, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

it has been changed to X???!?!! Fuck this bastardization of wikipedia. Tweets to x posts so fucking idiotic!. Yunuoooy (talk) 13:47, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

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.

Primary topic

See Talk:X (disambiguation)#Requested move 18 April 2026. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:11, 18 April 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 May 2026

Change the second sentence under the "Trending topics" sub-section under the "Appearance and Features" section from "Because a relatively small number of users can affect trending topics through a concerted campaign, the feature has been the targeted of concerted manipulation campaigns." to "Because a relatively small number of users can affect trending topics through a concerted campaign, the feature has been the target of concerted manipulation campaigns.". Coolhatboy (talk) 07:04, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done, but come on, common sense here. It's way easier to point out the sentence, and then say "change 'targeted' to 'target'". –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:09, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Wow thanks, this is my 4th edit ever. Most Efficient Ways to word an edit request is not something I would regard as common sense. Additionally, the prompt for the edit request specifically says to be as specific as possible. Coolhatboy (talk) 21:25, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

The point is that it is not a simple matter to parse two longish quotes looking for an unspecified difference. You could have bolded the word in question, or written somethig like 'Change the word "targeted" to "target" in the following sentence: "Because a relatively small number of users can affect trending topics through a concerted campaign, the feature has been the targeted of concerted manipulation campaigns." ' Either would have saved user:Deacon Vorbis some effort. Meters (talk) 23:51, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

> The point is that it is not a simple matter

It took me five seconds to select text at random from the first quote and then Ctrl + F for it OmegaAOLtalk? 02:10, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

"formerly known as"

It's very evidently still known as Twitter, regardless of the official name. Some more nuance is required in the phrasing here. ~2026-29570-91 (talk) 01:49, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Do you have proof? ~2026-29379-29 (talk) 16:16, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Do *you* have proof? ~2026-34036-10 (talk) 01:49, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

The burden of proof falls on anyone who wants to change it back, I think. OmegaAOLtalk? 02:08, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

People in the UK still refer to TGJones locations as WHSmith and Morrisons Daily locations as McColl's. The respective articles do not describe them as "also known as", referring to the discontinued brands in the past tense - they don't even bold the former names as this article does. UltrasonicMadness (talk) 21:16, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

That said, those former names do have their own articles. UltrasonicMadness (talk) 21:18, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Twitter has; just not in English Wikipedia currently. Dudzcar (talk) 23:34, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

"Homepage visited while logged out"

This image seems really useless to be honest. ~2026-39179-05 (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

I get your point - but due to the nature of algorithm-based platforms, it is non-trivial to present an image that is likely to actually be representative of the website's content to a significant proportion of prospective users.

You are, of course, more than welcome to replace the image if you can think of a better option. ···sardonism · t · c 21:21, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

How to refer to X/Twitter

Is there a consensus for how to refer to X/Twitter from other articles that link here? "Bob has amassed 5 million followers on X (formerly Twitter)". "Bob has amassed 5 million followers on X". "Bob has amassed 5 million followers on Twitter". Something else? B (talk) 12:56, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

At this point, if we are talking a current metric, "X" is correct. There are probably unique cases where one should use Twitter if all associated activity was before the buyout, a good example would be Etika, a deceased influencer. Masem (t) 12:58, 19 July 2026 (UTC)