Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Telecommunications/Archive 4

ATSC-M/H article review
The article is now in a better status. Please help me to review. It is now in our list "New and rewritten pages to be reviewed" Gueni (talk) 10:29, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Broken template
Tel Project appears to be broken; when the class= parameter is present in the template, that does not result in the class being displayed. See for example Talk:300-page iPhone bill. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 00:31, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Our project template has never supported class parameters. Feel free to add it, and to classify each article. Mange01 (talk) 16:41, 7 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Okay, I've posted a request at Requested templates. -- John Broughton  (♫♫) 14:50, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

VoIP Re-Design?
VoIP is in an interesting state. I feel that the article contains much material that is either misleading, slanted to a commercial/home view, or just generally reads like an advertisement instead of an overview of technologies used for transmitting Voice over IP-based networks. I'm trying to get some feedback on re-engineering this article to be more useful to people looking to learn about all aspects of VoIP. I'd like to start some conversation on how best to approach this topic. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this issue? I posted a proposed outline on the VoIP talk page. In addition, I'm going to start working on this project in my userspace, please let me know if you all have any ideas or comments. QuackCD (talk) 22:02, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I did a lot of work on the VoIP page. Please see the Talk page for details.

SimonInns (talk) 18:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

NXDN
Greetings. NXDN, an article about a newer telecom protocol, was recently created. The article isn't too bad and I've done some general reformatting, but I wanted to be sure it received attention from people far more versed in the subject than myself. Thank you for your time. -- Finngall  talk  17:19, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

GAR for Optical fiber
Optical fiber has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Articles are typically reviewed for one week. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. --A. di M. (talk) 17:52, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Request for comment
Would the redirect cellphone be better off targeting cell phone instead of mobile phone? I chose not to make this change since it may be "controversial" (someone once moved mobile phone to cellphone in July 2007). Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 23:19, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I replied at Talk:Mobile phone. Mange01 (talk) 23:00, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi there, I posted an article on Kordia's KorKor Digital Radio Technology. It was taken down and I was advised to ask for help / feedback here before reposting it to KorKor. Any feedback / edits would be much-appreciated. I've put it on my user page for the moment, as instructed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Salhew/KorKor

Salhew (talk) 23:59, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Need Assistance Re: Merging Blackberry and Research in Motion
Hello, I flagged the pages to be merged but someone else took it down. The problem is that there is a significant amount of overlap between the articles (since BB is RIM's only brand). Thoughts? --JoshK48 (talk) 07:57, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group
Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. &mdash; Delievered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  on behalf of the WikiProject coordinators' working group at 06:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts
This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the  parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {{{sup|ταλκ}}κοντριβς – WP Physics} 09:45, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

Telecommunications by country
Your input is requested at a move discussion here. Neelix (talk) 20:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

AFD for Hata Model for Urban Areas
Open at Articles for deletion/Hata Model for Urban Areas. Regards, NVO (talk) 06:35, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Request for people who have copies of any of the following publications.

 * Abbate, Janet. Inventing the Internet. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1999.
 * Campbell-Kelly, Martin; Aspray, William. Computer: A History of the Information Machine. New York: BasicBooks, 1996.
 * Graham, Ian S. The HTML Sourcebook: The Complete Guide to HTML. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1995.
 * Krol, Ed. Hitchhiker's Guide to the Internet, 1987.
 * Krol, Ed. Whole Internet User's Guide and Catalog. O'Reilly & Associates, 1992.
 * Scientific American Special Issue on Communications, Computers, and Networks, September, 1991.

These texts were used as references in the creation of the History of the Internet article. However, they were added to the article at a time when there was no accepted system of inline citation, and there is no link between the references and what they are cited to support. This leaves some parts of the article apparently uncited, but supposedly supported by these texts.

Can someone with these texts please read over the article, and identify the sections and statements that are supported by these texts.

Thanks in advance. --Barberio (talk) 20:45, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Consensus Please
In the article Physics of the Impossible a single editor removed material that I believe, very much enhanced this article. The other editor’s view is that the removed material was off topic. My view is that it is very much on topic.

The current article is here: (current)

The version which I restored is at my sub page here: (restored)

Everything that was removed is related to the book. This is because, as the author writes: “The material in this book ranges over many fields and disciplines, as well as the work of many outstanding scientists.” There is a two and one half page list of the individuals, “who have graciously given their time for lengthy interviews, consultations, and interesting, stimulating conversations.” Most on this list happen to be scientists. I listed only the first 22 individuals and these are scientists. In addition, I linked their names to their biography on Wikipedia. I also listed each scientist’s fields of specialties. Many on the list in the article have more than one field of specialty (view here), and hence this reflects the breadth of knowledge contained in this book. If you look at this section in the restored article you will see what I mean.

In addition, before this material was removed by the one editor, the article was much more interactive. It was also more in line with the intent of Wikipedia that that the readers (as well as the editors) have a satisfying experience with Wikipedia. One aspect of this more satisfying experience is being able to access the knowledge that is available at Wikipedia on the sciences, and, perhaps, the mathematics. So, I linked not only the names on the list, but also many of their scientific disciplines to the respective Wikipedia article. Accessing this knowledge supports the following WikiProjects and their respective portals: (there are more I am sure)
 * WikiProject Astronomy
 * WikiProject Books
 * WikiProject Physics
 * WikiProject Space
 * WikiProject History of Science
 * WikiProject Science
 * WikiProject Mathematics
 * WikiProject Technology
 * WikiProject Computing
 * WikiProject Computer Science
 * WikiProject Engineering

Also, there were graphics that were removed which support the article and the concepts in the book. I believe these should be restored as well. These are on the restored article page, at my sub page. The captions of the graphics show that the book is grounded in real science. If you scroll through the restored article you will see the variety of graphics. I believe these enhance the article aesthetically, as well as help to give a clearer picture of the concepts contained in the book and the article.

Lastly, there were external links that were removed which reflect the concepts in the book. These external links were removed as though they were not relevant. For example, I will list some of the external links, and then the page number in the book, to which each link is related:
 * Solar sails: pp. 152, 158 - 159, 166, 172…
 * Space elevators: pp. 165 – 169
 * Black holes: 156, 232, 235 – 236…
 * Travel at the speed of light: 159 – 161, 163 – 165, 169 – 170…

Unfortunately the external links that were removed are going to have to be restored one at a time, because they cannot be cut and pasted back from the revision history without some distortion. I think these external links should also, be restored to the article.

I think the bottom line is, let common sense decide. Even Wikipedia guidelines say that they are just guidelines, not letter of the law.

I would appreciate a consensus on whether or not to keep the removed material. Please place your comments here: Consensus please. This is on the talk page of Physics of the Impossible.

Thanks for your time Ti-30X (talk) 13:36, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

UMTS and its related technolgies
Please have a look at Talk:Universal_Mobile_Telecommunications_System. Some time ago, I tried to clean up the articles but the edits were reverted. Unfortunately, the discussion stalled and has not attracted any input from a third party. —  3 2 4 7    (talk) 11:03, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Traffic pumping
The new article on Traffic pumping is an obvious Google, Inc. press release rather than an encyclopedia entry. I suggest it be nominated for speedy deletion. DQweny (talk) 11:32, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Have we resolved this concern to your satisfaction per Talk:Traffic pumping? I think it's pretty harsh to dismiss even the initial version of the article as merely "Google PR".  It's mostly factual information, with only a section of Google vs. AT&T.  If it slanted towards Google that was because I could not immediately find any good sources for AT&T's position.  Anyway, I and others have since found and added some. Moxfyre (ǝɹʎℲxoɯ | contrib) 18:44, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm satisfied with the article as it now stands. Thanks for all your hard work. DQweny (talk) 18:48, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Mobile phones
Mobile phones are a form of telecommunication, so should pages of specific mobile phones be added to this project? (ex. Sony Ericsson W800) I already added that to this project, but I just wanted to make sure. Thanks! Krazywrath~ (talk) 02:51, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure. Definitely. Telecom companies may also be included in the project. Mange01 (talk) 02:28, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Data encryption standard FAR
nominated Data Encryption Standard for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Tom B (talk) 22:07, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

"Suggestions are welcome"
Hi all, new to the project. What's the deal with the "Suggestions are welcome - date" lines on the current revision main project page? It's confusing and looks weird to me. If it's supposed to be an invitation, perhaps it should be written out in prose. If it's supposed to be instructive, perhaps it should be replaced with an inline comment like "please place new entries at the bottom of the list and sign with four tildes". -Verdatum (talk) 15:38, 17 December 2009 (UTC)