![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
I have removed some material that is basically advertising, but this needs more work to make it neutral. I'm particularly concerned about this diff, which seems to bias the article heavily in favor of the CTIA, notably replacing "industry consortium" with "non-profit organization" which to me gives a false impression of charity. I'm not averse to just reverting all those changes but there's probably a better way to do it. -- TexasDex ★ 19:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
>> Removed sentence containing profanities from
There's this too...
"Despite the evidence from these well-respected and highly credible organizations, some critics such as the Environmental Working Group (EWG) choose to ignore the decades of research. Instead, they state that “there is sufficient research that shows higher risk for brain and salivary gland tumors among heavy cell phone users. EWG encouraged consumers to look up their cell phone's radiation level, and to wear a headset when talking on the phone to limit their exposure."
Phrases such as "well-respected", "highly credible", and "ignore the decades of research" don't belong in a neutral document. As the WHO is in the media for announcing that there is more evidence of a link between cell phone use and brain cancer, to which CTIA has reiterated their position, "It does not mean cell phones cause cancer."
CTIA is an industry trade group that represents the interests of the industry (ie: profits and shareholders) and would not be representing those interests well if it were to agree with those statements, or at least deny it. -- Toquinha ( talk) 18:56, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I feel like this article in its current state deserves the Advert template: /info/en/?search=Template:Advert TheForgottenKing ( talk) 21:45, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
CTIA originally meant "Cellular telephone Industries Association" and although the CTIA website now uses "CTIA - The Wireless Association" [1], they make no mention of having anything to do with the Internet and there is ample evidence available [2] of their original name. The name of this encyclopedia article seems to be a well intentioned guess on the part of the original author. -- Rydra Wong ( talk) 23:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I have expanded and updated this article, removing the Improve Article tag in the process. I have modeled the structure of the article after other industry trade group articles, and welcome any feedback or suggestions for improvement. CTIAAmy ( talk) 15:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Your "edits" still make the article into a policy position paper, not simply a description of your organization. Wikipedia is not your personal PAC. This edit kills fascists. -Notthatanonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.131.210.10 ( talk) 04:20, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
The section on net neutrality and regulation is awful. Looks like a copied paragraph from one of the booklets of the CTIA. Totally non encyclopedic. I am adding several templates to this article. Thanks -- Camilo Sanchez ( talk) 01:54, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
On February 3, 2011, I made edits to the net neutrality section to add sources and remove note on tone. CTIAAmy ( talk) 15:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
On March 11, 2011, I made edits to remove the vandalism note under the net neutrality section and permanently removed that section from the article. CTIAAmy ( talk) 20:26, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
On March 18, I removed the 2nd vandalism note under the net neutrality section and again removed that section from the article. CTIAAmy ( talk) 14:06, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
A major contributor of this article is a person that works for the CTIA. I have added a COI template. Editor can be reached here -- Camilo Sanchez ( talk) 02:02, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
I have added more details to my user profile. There is a link as well here. Please contact me for any additional feedback or discussion. CTIAAmy ( talk) 15:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
The obvious issue I have is with the use of eupehmism, which is generally not encyclopedic style. This is a lobbying group, so it needs to say that, instead of using buzzwords like "advocate" and "Government Affairs". And of course the long sections of stating its positions need to be rephrased to make it clear that this is what they are lobbying for, not necessarily facts. W Nowicki ( talk) 21:45, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Well two years on and the editor who added all the bias seems to have stopped. So perhaps time to work on making more neutral again? W Nowicki ( talk) 23:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
This article seems to be consistently written in a biased manner by some associated with the CTIA to further their public relations. I recommend locking and cleaning up this article when convenient. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nwillard ( talk • contribs) 07:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Looks like much of the text of this article is a copy from ctia's website, specifically, the text added by User:CTIAAmy. Some comparisons:
Probably all needs to be removed per WP:CV. Forbes72 ( talk) 04:15, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
If CTIAAmy is working for the CTIA as she claims, then her action of copying this text into the article has licensed it. Doodle77 ( talk) 18:47, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hi there. Over the past few months I've been working on a proposed draft for this article to expand on information about the organization's history, leadership, advocacy efforts, and other activities. As a quick disclosure, I do have a financial conflict of interest as I'm here on behalf of CTIA as part of my work at Beutler Ink. Due to my COI, I won't edit the article myself and instead ask for any neutral editors to review my proposed changes and make them if they seem appropriate.
I've published the draft in its entirety at the following link: User:Inkian Jason/CTIA. Here you'll see:
Accepted: * an updated infobox (minus the logo file because fair use images can only be displayed at Wikipedia once). Added by this editor who is quite friendly with infoboxes and sees no reason not to update the infobox. This one has nicely added new parameters with no errors.
Fylbecatulous
talk
00:09, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Accepted * a simple but helpful lead displaying former names No problems; well stated with just updated facts. Thanks,
Fylbecatulous
talk
14:52, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Accepted * an organizational overview (Section entitled 'Description'): Updated existing section with needed information; supported by sources provided; added two wikilinks for laymen (especially 'spectrum') and one added to lead (first occurance). Thanks,
Fylbecatulous
talk
12:28, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Accepted * a brief history (including name changes and leadership changes) Added information important for expansion of article; factual list with no promotional aspects; citations verified and one repaired, with updated access dates. Thanks
Fylbecatulous
talk
12:10, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Accepted * a neutral summary of CTIA's advocacy efforts Entirely implemented. All sections added with two minor changes: accidental duplicate phrase deleted; add for laymen parenthetical explanation for Title II; image of CEO placed in article; history before her tenure at CTIA, so amended caption a bit. Thanks,
Fylbecatulous
talk
21:12, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Accepted * a short section about its trade shows Added: reads factually and supported by provided sources. Will add category now that is supported by text. Thanks
Fylbecatulous
talk
23:08, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Accepted * a section about the CTIA Wireless Foundation. Added after review of citations. Supported by sources and provides content for the advcacy efforts, which is a valuable facit of a good company. It also provides human interest to our readers. Thanks,
Fylbecatulous
talk
00:19, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Done
Inkian Jason, I am closing this request now as answered. It has been in the queue since January's end. If there is something either you or I have lacking, ping me here on this talk page, or please feel free to request of me on my talk page. (anytime). Thank you; this has been rewarding. All the best as always Fylbecatulous talk 21:12, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
The current article's sourcing is far from ideal. Actually, most of the sources are CTIA links, so I've worked to minimize primary sourcing as much as possible. I've tried my best to make the article neutral and non-promotional, and hope someone can help by reviewing the draft and copying the provided markup over to the main space. I am happy to answer any questions and address any concerns. Inkian Jason ( talk) 17:44, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to CTIA (organization) per discussion. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 21:19, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
CTIA – The Wireless Association → CTIA – The organization is simply known as "CTIA" now, and has dropped "– The Wireless Association” from its name. On behalf of the organization, I propose moving this article to CTIA, to override the disambiguation page, per Wikipedia:PRIMARYTOPIC. However, if other editors disagree with replacing the disambiguation page, CTIA (organization) may be a second option. Inkian Jason ( talk) 15:20, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
CTIA-The Wireless Association® and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 15#CTIA-The Wireless Association® until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
BD2412
T
04:45, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | The
Wikimedia Foundation's
Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see
WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see
WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
I have removed some material that is basically advertising, but this needs more work to make it neutral. I'm particularly concerned about this diff, which seems to bias the article heavily in favor of the CTIA, notably replacing "industry consortium" with "non-profit organization" which to me gives a false impression of charity. I'm not averse to just reverting all those changes but there's probably a better way to do it. -- TexasDex ★ 19:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
>> Removed sentence containing profanities from
There's this too...
"Despite the evidence from these well-respected and highly credible organizations, some critics such as the Environmental Working Group (EWG) choose to ignore the decades of research. Instead, they state that “there is sufficient research that shows higher risk for brain and salivary gland tumors among heavy cell phone users. EWG encouraged consumers to look up their cell phone's radiation level, and to wear a headset when talking on the phone to limit their exposure."
Phrases such as "well-respected", "highly credible", and "ignore the decades of research" don't belong in a neutral document. As the WHO is in the media for announcing that there is more evidence of a link between cell phone use and brain cancer, to which CTIA has reiterated their position, "It does not mean cell phones cause cancer."
CTIA is an industry trade group that represents the interests of the industry (ie: profits and shareholders) and would not be representing those interests well if it were to agree with those statements, or at least deny it. -- Toquinha ( talk) 18:56, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
I feel like this article in its current state deserves the Advert template: /info/en/?search=Template:Advert TheForgottenKing ( talk) 21:45, 16 February 2021 (UTC)
CTIA originally meant "Cellular telephone Industries Association" and although the CTIA website now uses "CTIA - The Wireless Association" [1], they make no mention of having anything to do with the Internet and there is ample evidence available [2] of their original name. The name of this encyclopedia article seems to be a well intentioned guess on the part of the original author. -- Rydra Wong ( talk) 23:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I have expanded and updated this article, removing the Improve Article tag in the process. I have modeled the structure of the article after other industry trade group articles, and welcome any feedback or suggestions for improvement. CTIAAmy ( talk) 15:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Your "edits" still make the article into a policy position paper, not simply a description of your organization. Wikipedia is not your personal PAC. This edit kills fascists. -Notthatanonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.131.210.10 ( talk) 04:20, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
The section on net neutrality and regulation is awful. Looks like a copied paragraph from one of the booklets of the CTIA. Totally non encyclopedic. I am adding several templates to this article. Thanks -- Camilo Sanchez ( talk) 01:54, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
On February 3, 2011, I made edits to the net neutrality section to add sources and remove note on tone. CTIAAmy ( talk) 15:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
On March 11, 2011, I made edits to remove the vandalism note under the net neutrality section and permanently removed that section from the article. CTIAAmy ( talk) 20:26, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
On March 18, I removed the 2nd vandalism note under the net neutrality section and again removed that section from the article. CTIAAmy ( talk) 14:06, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
A major contributor of this article is a person that works for the CTIA. I have added a COI template. Editor can be reached here -- Camilo Sanchez ( talk) 02:02, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
I have added more details to my user profile. There is a link as well here. Please contact me for any additional feedback or discussion. CTIAAmy ( talk) 15:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
The obvious issue I have is with the use of eupehmism, which is generally not encyclopedic style. This is a lobbying group, so it needs to say that, instead of using buzzwords like "advocate" and "Government Affairs". And of course the long sections of stating its positions need to be rephrased to make it clear that this is what they are lobbying for, not necessarily facts. W Nowicki ( talk) 21:45, 18 July 2011 (UTC)
Well two years on and the editor who added all the bias seems to have stopped. So perhaps time to work on making more neutral again? W Nowicki ( talk) 23:49, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
This article seems to be consistently written in a biased manner by some associated with the CTIA to further their public relations. I recommend locking and cleaning up this article when convenient. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nwillard ( talk • contribs) 07:01, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
Looks like much of the text of this article is a copy from ctia's website, specifically, the text added by User:CTIAAmy. Some comparisons:
Probably all needs to be removed per WP:CV. Forbes72 ( talk) 04:15, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
If CTIAAmy is working for the CTIA as she claims, then her action of copying this text into the article has licensed it. Doodle77 ( talk) 18:47, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered. |
Hi there. Over the past few months I've been working on a proposed draft for this article to expand on information about the organization's history, leadership, advocacy efforts, and other activities. As a quick disclosure, I do have a financial conflict of interest as I'm here on behalf of CTIA as part of my work at Beutler Ink. Due to my COI, I won't edit the article myself and instead ask for any neutral editors to review my proposed changes and make them if they seem appropriate.
I've published the draft in its entirety at the following link: User:Inkian Jason/CTIA. Here you'll see:
Accepted: * an updated infobox (minus the logo file because fair use images can only be displayed at Wikipedia once). Added by this editor who is quite friendly with infoboxes and sees no reason not to update the infobox. This one has nicely added new parameters with no errors.
Fylbecatulous
talk
00:09, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Accepted * a simple but helpful lead displaying former names No problems; well stated with just updated facts. Thanks,
Fylbecatulous
talk
14:52, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
Accepted * an organizational overview (Section entitled 'Description'): Updated existing section with needed information; supported by sources provided; added two wikilinks for laymen (especially 'spectrum') and one added to lead (first occurance). Thanks,
Fylbecatulous
talk
12:28, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Accepted * a brief history (including name changes and leadership changes) Added information important for expansion of article; factual list with no promotional aspects; citations verified and one repaired, with updated access dates. Thanks
Fylbecatulous
talk
12:10, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
Accepted * a neutral summary of CTIA's advocacy efforts Entirely implemented. All sections added with two minor changes: accidental duplicate phrase deleted; add for laymen parenthetical explanation for Title II; image of CEO placed in article; history before her tenure at CTIA, so amended caption a bit. Thanks,
Fylbecatulous
talk
21:12, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Accepted * a short section about its trade shows Added: reads factually and supported by provided sources. Will add category now that is supported by text. Thanks
Fylbecatulous
talk
23:08, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Accepted * a section about the CTIA Wireless Foundation. Added after review of citations. Supported by sources and provides content for the advcacy efforts, which is a valuable facit of a good company. It also provides human interest to our readers. Thanks,
Fylbecatulous
talk
00:19, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Done
Inkian Jason, I am closing this request now as answered. It has been in the queue since January's end. If there is something either you or I have lacking, ping me here on this talk page, or please feel free to request of me on my talk page. (anytime). Thank you; this has been rewarding. All the best as always Fylbecatulous talk 21:12, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
The current article's sourcing is far from ideal. Actually, most of the sources are CTIA links, so I've worked to minimize primary sourcing as much as possible. I've tried my best to make the article neutral and non-promotional, and hope someone can help by reviewing the draft and copying the provided markup over to the main space. I am happy to answer any questions and address any concerns. Inkian Jason ( talk) 17:44, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to CTIA (organization) per discussion. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 21:19, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
CTIA – The Wireless Association → CTIA – The organization is simply known as "CTIA" now, and has dropped "– The Wireless Association” from its name. On behalf of the organization, I propose moving this article to CTIA, to override the disambiguation page, per Wikipedia:PRIMARYTOPIC. However, if other editors disagree with replacing the disambiguation page, CTIA (organization) may be a second option. Inkian Jason ( talk) 15:20, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect
CTIA-The Wireless Association® and has thus listed it
for discussion. This discussion will occur at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 15#CTIA-The Wireless Association® until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.
BD2412
T
04:45, 15 April 2022 (UTC)