![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
Ugh... I promise guys, I'm really trying to make this page look good. It's difficult finding objective information on cellular companies sometimes. :( lilewyn 02:22, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
"Another way to define a stub is an article so incomplete that an editor who knows little or nothing about the topic could improve its content after a superficial Internet search or a few minutes in a reference library. An article that can be improved by only a rather knowledgeable editor, or after significant research, may not be a stub." - WP:Stub
So, since it can't be improved in content after a "superficial internet search or a few minutes in a reference library" does that mean it's not a stub anymore, or does it still qualify? I'd like to remove stub cellular companies and convert them into "real" articles.
Kylu t 01:54, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
I think I'd like to ask this user to cite sources stating Revol's BBB complaints versus other carriers before saying that they've got one of the worst records. While I'm not a fan of Revol (actually, they're a competitor of my own company) I'm interested in making sure that wireless company entries on wikipedia are firmly NPOV where these edits do not appear to be so.
From the BBB report that this user linked to:
I'd like an opinion from watchlisters on reverting the changes, rephrasing them, and/or issuing advice to User talk:70.39.229.200 about the changes. If that user wishes to reply here about said changes, I'd appreciate the chance for discussion.
Kylu t 02:38, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
i don't think this should be on the article. if we put on every company's page every person that sued them we would have a lot more work on our hands. is this relevant to the history of revol and what their business is? would it be in an encyclopedia? i dont think so. RCNARANJA 17:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Comparing the BBB link on Revol I had posted plus the 70.*'s link, I notice they are the _exact same page_.
Not similar. Not close. Identical. There's no point in having two links pointing to the same place on one page.
Anyway, I'm keeping 70's category name (more descriptive) and putting it on my link (shorter) to remove redundancy.
If you want to compare:
My link:
http://www.cleveland.bbb.org/reports/newsearch2.asp?ID=1&ComID=0312000027001942
70's link:
http://www.cleveland.bbb.org/reports/newsearch2.asp?ID=1&strBCode=03120000&ComID=0312000027001942&ComName=Northcoast+PCS
Thanks! ♥ ~Kylu (
u|
t)
23:55, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
i work at revol and they have since changed their name from "revol" to "revol wireless" i think that should be reflected here RCNARANJA 17:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
moved revol (company) to revol wireless (company) RCNARANJA 17:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
it says in the features section and the payment section that revol can use CDMA phones. should we take it out of one of these sections or make a new one?? RCNARANJA 17:28, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||
|
Ugh... I promise guys, I'm really trying to make this page look good. It's difficult finding objective information on cellular companies sometimes. :( lilewyn 02:22, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
"Another way to define a stub is an article so incomplete that an editor who knows little or nothing about the topic could improve its content after a superficial Internet search or a few minutes in a reference library. An article that can be improved by only a rather knowledgeable editor, or after significant research, may not be a stub." - WP:Stub
So, since it can't be improved in content after a "superficial internet search or a few minutes in a reference library" does that mean it's not a stub anymore, or does it still qualify? I'd like to remove stub cellular companies and convert them into "real" articles.
Kylu t 01:54, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
I think I'd like to ask this user to cite sources stating Revol's BBB complaints versus other carriers before saying that they've got one of the worst records. While I'm not a fan of Revol (actually, they're a competitor of my own company) I'm interested in making sure that wireless company entries on wikipedia are firmly NPOV where these edits do not appear to be so.
From the BBB report that this user linked to:
I'd like an opinion from watchlisters on reverting the changes, rephrasing them, and/or issuing advice to User talk:70.39.229.200 about the changes. If that user wishes to reply here about said changes, I'd appreciate the chance for discussion.
Kylu t 02:38, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
i don't think this should be on the article. if we put on every company's page every person that sued them we would have a lot more work on our hands. is this relevant to the history of revol and what their business is? would it be in an encyclopedia? i dont think so. RCNARANJA 17:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Comparing the BBB link on Revol I had posted plus the 70.*'s link, I notice they are the _exact same page_.
Not similar. Not close. Identical. There's no point in having two links pointing to the same place on one page.
Anyway, I'm keeping 70's category name (more descriptive) and putting it on my link (shorter) to remove redundancy.
If you want to compare:
My link:
http://www.cleveland.bbb.org/reports/newsearch2.asp?ID=1&ComID=0312000027001942
70's link:
http://www.cleveland.bbb.org/reports/newsearch2.asp?ID=1&strBCode=03120000&ComID=0312000027001942&ComName=Northcoast+PCS
Thanks! ♥ ~Kylu (
u|
t)
23:55, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
i work at revol and they have since changed their name from "revol" to "revol wireless" i think that should be reflected here RCNARANJA 17:29, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
moved revol (company) to revol wireless (company) RCNARANJA 17:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
it says in the features section and the payment section that revol can use CDMA phones. should we take it out of one of these sections or make a new one?? RCNARANJA 17:28, 29 March 2009 (UTC)