This article was nominated for deletion on 25 April 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Exetel article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
G'day. Wikipedia newbie here. Thought I'd put in my 2c worth for this Exetel article. My thoughts upon reading this article, the attributed sources and this discussion page are:
CoreyPlover 14:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying not to edit the Exetel talk page or the Exetel article for a while because of the edit wars but I wanted to comment on some of the things you said.
Essentially there's a lot of merit in what you've suggested and I've taken it on board. I've completely revised the Exetel article correcting links, rewriting text etc and I've incorporated a lot of what you've suggested. You can see my proposal at User:AussieLegend/Exetel/Article. (Ignore the header icons etc. They only exist on my user pages.)
The following are some specific comments.
"The entire "Residential Services" and "Small/Large Business" seem superfluous and I would have thought that the quality of the article would be improved by removing them."
"Corporate Employee ADSL Service includes mention of "lower cost" which may border on advertising / promotion of Exetel"
"Online Gaming Services seems to devote too large of a contribution."
"Traffic shaping 50% of P2P traffic and 40->48Gb offpeak limit seem to be separate policies and could be separated"
"In fact, "off-peak" download limits don't seem to be an "atypical policy of Australian ISPs" at all and could be removed"
"The atypical policy relating to off-peak is the unique shaping protocols in place (i.e. 48Gb to 72Gb = restricted pool, 72Gb and over - charged). So this may require a new subheading under Policies"
"Items 4, 5 and 6 (dealing with Traffic Shaping) to be replaced with the original and official Exetel source of
http://forum.exetel.com.au/viewtopic.php?t=17721. 2 of the 3 cited sources in question each reference the official Exetel source anyway, so why not replace with the original?"
"Removal of items 10, 11 and 13 as they cite blogs"
"In fact, complete removal of the sentence linking to these footnotes: "In June 2007, this policy was reported on after a post was made on Boing Boing.[10] [11] [12] [13]"
"Item 12 is entered as a footnote to "Boing Boing" and should be relocated to be next to [9]"
diffs -- AussieLegend 14:55, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
“ | Material from self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources in articles about themselves, so long as:
|
” |
I've just noticed that 203.213.56.184 removed a category. Justification for this seems to be quite valid under WP:SUBCAT so I've removed it from this version too. No other Aussie ISP has this cat in their articles. -- AussieLegend 18:11, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
This page is now getting a bit long and older conversations (probably everything prior to September) should probably be archived. Does anyone have any objections to this? -- AussieLegend 10:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Since there have been no objections I've archived the page to Talk:Exetel/Archive 1. -- AussieLegend 22:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
John passed away february 1. 2012:
Whilst I do not want to offend anyone here for their wonderful work. this article does appear to be an advertisement for the company it is about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.92.208.17 ( talk) 01:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
This article was nominated for deletion on 25 April 2007. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Exetel article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
G'day. Wikipedia newbie here. Thought I'd put in my 2c worth for this Exetel article. My thoughts upon reading this article, the attributed sources and this discussion page are:
CoreyPlover 14:16, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying not to edit the Exetel talk page or the Exetel article for a while because of the edit wars but I wanted to comment on some of the things you said.
Essentially there's a lot of merit in what you've suggested and I've taken it on board. I've completely revised the Exetel article correcting links, rewriting text etc and I've incorporated a lot of what you've suggested. You can see my proposal at User:AussieLegend/Exetel/Article. (Ignore the header icons etc. They only exist on my user pages.)
The following are some specific comments.
"The entire "Residential Services" and "Small/Large Business" seem superfluous and I would have thought that the quality of the article would be improved by removing them."
"Corporate Employee ADSL Service includes mention of "lower cost" which may border on advertising / promotion of Exetel"
"Online Gaming Services seems to devote too large of a contribution."
"Traffic shaping 50% of P2P traffic and 40->48Gb offpeak limit seem to be separate policies and could be separated"
"In fact, "off-peak" download limits don't seem to be an "atypical policy of Australian ISPs" at all and could be removed"
"The atypical policy relating to off-peak is the unique shaping protocols in place (i.e. 48Gb to 72Gb = restricted pool, 72Gb and over - charged). So this may require a new subheading under Policies"
"Items 4, 5 and 6 (dealing with Traffic Shaping) to be replaced with the original and official Exetel source of
http://forum.exetel.com.au/viewtopic.php?t=17721. 2 of the 3 cited sources in question each reference the official Exetel source anyway, so why not replace with the original?"
"Removal of items 10, 11 and 13 as they cite blogs"
"In fact, complete removal of the sentence linking to these footnotes: "In June 2007, this policy was reported on after a post was made on Boing Boing.[10] [11] [12] [13]"
"Item 12 is entered as a footnote to "Boing Boing" and should be relocated to be next to [9]"
diffs -- AussieLegend 14:55, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
“ | Material from self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources in articles about themselves, so long as:
|
” |
I've just noticed that 203.213.56.184 removed a category. Justification for this seems to be quite valid under WP:SUBCAT so I've removed it from this version too. No other Aussie ISP has this cat in their articles. -- AussieLegend 18:11, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
This page is now getting a bit long and older conversations (probably everything prior to September) should probably be archived. Does anyone have any objections to this? -- AussieLegend 10:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Since there have been no objections I've archived the page to Talk:Exetel/Archive 1. -- AussieLegend 22:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
John passed away february 1. 2012:
Whilst I do not want to offend anyone here for their wonderful work. this article does appear to be an advertisement for the company it is about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.92.208.17 ( talk) 01:57, 26 February 2015 (UTC)