Talk:Communications in Afghanistan

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was no consensus either way. Aervanath (talk) 17:32, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Communications in Afghanistan → Telecommunications in Afghanistan — As they currently stand, "Communications by country" articles and "Media by country" articles are largely redundant. The only countries in the world which have national communications articles are those which do not have a national telecommunications article, and vice versa. The vast majority of countries have a national telecommunications article and a national media article, and not a national communications article. An article about communications in a particular country and an article about media of a particular country would essentially discuss the same subject. My recommendation is that the few remaining "Communications by country" articles be moved to "Telecommunications by country" articles, and that the information which does not pertain to telecommunications on those articles (namely post and press information) be transferred to the corresponding "Media by country" articles which are already (for the most part) in existence. — Neelix (talk) 17:17, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.


 * Oppose. I just think it is too fine a distinction. Almost all communication, other than face to face, is electronic today, so using what used to be, and was when the term was created, a novel and unusual form of communication, is no longer necessary. 199.125.109.126 (talk) 20:13, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Is your suggestion to make the opposite move (ie. rename the "Telecommunications by country" articles as "Communications by country")? Neelix (talk) 00:23, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * My suggestion is that if the article is about telecommunications leave it where it is, but it seems more practical to have an article about communications and have it cover all forms of communications. 199.125.109.126 (talk) 02:40, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The difficulty with leaving some countries with telecommunications articles and some with communications articles is that any telecommunications article, if sufficiently developped, will become a communications article instead. No country currently has both a telecommunications article and a communications article, and indeed none should, for the two articles would be nearly identical. Neelix (talk) 17:48, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That seems to be an argument for changing all the telecommunications articles to communications, with the expectation that they simply are not "sufficiently developed" yet. There are still many countries with no postal service, is that correct? 199.125.109.126 (talk) 16:13, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This image indicates the member states of the Universal Postal Union: File:UPU.png. That's nearly all the countries in the world, although admittedly, not all. Still, holding out a special title format for a handful of articles for which a more universal title format would work just as well does not seem to be a good option to me. Neelix (talk) 22:14, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * When you are dealing with countries, there are such vast cultural differences that there is rarely a one size fits all solution. Just having a postal union does not mean that you can put a stamp on a letter and it will get to any of the Earth's 6 billion inhabitants. I don't see why you are holding out for a special title format for telecommunications, when the more general format is communications. I really see no need for any action. If an article named communications is better suited at telecommunications, propose that, and if one at telecommunications is better suited at communications, likewise, but making them all the same does not seem necessary. 199.125.109.126 (talk) 19:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Having a postal union means that post in the country is notable, therefore it should be addressed on a communications article (or media article, depending on how this discussion unfolds). You have said that "there is rarely a one size fits all solution"; certainly there isn't always one, but I believe there to be one in this case. Doesn't what I have outlined work for all countries? Surely the best option is to be consistent wherever possible. Being consistent looks quite possible in this situation. Neelix (talk) 21:47, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Slightly Oppose. There are some overlap and redundancy. But I am not sure this really solves anything. Sharpening the definition of what goes in Communication will just cause some items to go under Media that don't seem to intuitively belong there. We could just document what should go under Communication and what goes under Media to solve the problem. Also, I would broaden this discussion outside of the Afghanistan article (if you haven't already done so) since this should be consistant across countries.--MarsRover (talk) 22:25, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The discussion includes all 26 countries which currently have national communications articles. They are listed on Requested moves, and each article links to this discussion. The difficulty with the current situation is that it implies that all countries should have a telecommunications article, a communications article, and a media article, however the communications articles are 80% telecommunications information (which is proportionate) and the communications articles are 90% mass media information (which is also proportionate). The terms are too closely related to allow their article contents to develop distinctly. By removing the intermediate step (communications), we have a telecommunications article which develops as an individual section within its corresponding media article, rather than a telecommunications article which is almost the entirety of its corresponding communications article. Neelix (talk) 00:21, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:


 * Where would "Postal Service" information go. It is not telecommunication nor media? -MarsRover (talk) 19:52, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Postal Service" information would go in media. The media article states that media is "a single medium used to communicate any data for any purpose", therefore post is a form of media. Neelix (talk) 20:16, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yikes, by that definition SMS and Telephone are both media. Postal service is normally treated in a separate article from media. I was thinking more of newspapers and magazines when media came up. 199.125.109.126 (talk) 00:49, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Following is a list of articles currently being discussed. There appear to be 172 pages and 229 categories in the category Category:Communications by country. An example is Zimbabwe which has the category Communications in Zimbabwe and the subcategories, Zimbabwean media and Telecommunications in Zimbabwe. The article, Telecommunications in Zimbabwe, is in the main category, Communications by country, and not in a subcategory. 199.125.109.126 (talk) 00:16, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Communications in Afghanistan → Telecommunications in Afghanistan
 * Communications in Argentina → Telecommunications in Argentina
 * Communications in Colombia → Telecommunications in Colombia
 * Communications in Egypt → Telecommunications in Egypt
 * Communications in Gibraltar → Telecommunications in Gibraltar
 * Communications in Greece → Telecommunications in Greece
 * Communications in Guam → Telecommunications in Guam
 * Communications in Hong Kong → Telecommunications in Hong Kong
 * Communications in Indonesia → Telecommunications in Indonesia
 * Communications in Iran → Telecommunications in Iran
 * Communications in Iraq → Telecommunications in Iraq
 * Communications in Israel → Telecommunications in Israel
 * Communications in Japan → Telecommunications in Japan
 * Communications in Liberia → Telecommunications in Liberia
 * Communications in Libya → Telecommunications in Libya
 * Communications in Moldova → Telecommunications in Moldova
 * Communications in Niue → Telecommunications in Niue
 * Communications in Papua New Guinea → Telecommunications in Papua New Guinea
 * Communications in Somalia → Telecommunications in Somalia
 * Communications in Sri Lanka → Telecommunications in Sri Lanka
 * Communications in Taiwan → Telecommunications in Taiwan
 * Communications in the Marshall Islands → Telecommunications in the Marshall Islands
 * Communications in the Netherlands → Telecommunications in the Netherlands
 * Communications in the United States → Telecommunications in the United States
 * Communications in Turkmenistan → Telecommunications in Turkmenistan
 * Communications in Uganda → Telecommunications in Uganda
 * The U.S. article appears to be typical of the boilerplate used in creating these articles:
 * 1) Press
 * 2) Mail
 * 3) Landline telephony
 * 4) Radio
 * 5) Television
 * 6) Cellular communication
 * 7) Internet
 * It seems to make sense to retain a toplevel article for each country that includes all forms of communication. I guess Ham radio doesn't count as communication, nor Fedex. 199.125.109.126 (talk) 00:46, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that telecommunications involves telephony and not many of these other things--which should not be in a telecommunictions article. Between Communications and Telecommunications, Communications is more general and its article should concentrate on the non-communications areas and leave the telephony areas for the telecommunications article and its subcategory.  Hmains (talk) 03:08, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you may have a misconception about what telecommunication means. Telecommunication includes almost everything that would exist on a communications article: landline telephony, radio, television, cellular communication, and internet. The only two areas that would not be covered on a telecommunications article which would on a communications article are press and mail. Telecommunications articles cannot simply be a subcategory of communications articles; the subcategory would take up nearly the entire article. Neelix (talk) 10:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

telephone service in Afghanistan
Now in Afghanistan 95% people has facility to telephone service, and I can say surly that in every city there are high standard facility for telephone service, Now in Afghanistan every person can connect to the world easily with their compatible telephone Around 24 provinces, the ministry of information and technology has provided complete service of telephone, accordingly to mobile service of Kabul city, now the citizens of Kabul are capable of every telephone service in Afghanistan. Not only in Kabul but even in other provinces, people are very happy and delighted of this service in Afghanistan.. (talk) 07:10, 13 February 2015 (UTC) ]]

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Communications in Afghanistan. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070609000529/http://www.areeba.com.af/Index.aspx to http://www.areeba.com.af/Index.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110528161747/http://www.altaiconsulting.com/docs/media/ to http://www.altaiconsulting.com/docs/media/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:25, 11 August 2017 (UTC)