This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Electrical engineering Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electrical engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electrical engineering on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Electrical engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Electrical engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Electrical engineeringelectrical engineering articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Telecommunications Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

I'll add a few more lines on the companion standards; mentioning their names doesn't tell anything. - HaPi

La page " http://www.kalkitech.com/iec.htm" donnée en lien dans l'article est signalée comme malveillante : http://safebrowsing.clients.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?client=Firefox&hl=fr&site=http://www.kalkitech.com/iec.htm Cependant comme la page " http://www.kalkitech.com/protocolgateways.htm" ne semble pas l'être je ne sais pas s'il s'agit d'un faux positif. -- 80.78.0.137 ( talk) 07:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)K reply

High school French was a generation ago, but that and Google Translate says that the above is telling us about a malicious Web site. -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 20:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC) reply

Instead of a fleet of context-free stubs, let's have one stronger article that actually explains the topic, instead of a bunch of random phrases in standards-ese. How would one explain this to a barmaid, or at least someone who wasn't a lifetime member of mulitple IEC standards committees? -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 17:55, 10 January 2011 (UTC) reply

OK, merged, and it's still no good. Could someone please explain why anybody should care about this without sinking into a mess of acronyms and standards-ese ? -- Wtshymanski ( talk) 20:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC) reply

I have moved the IEC101/103 & 104 to separate single page IEC 60870-5-10x as 60870 also contains details of TASE 1.0 and 2.0. Also provided the link of main articles here. Fahidka ( talk) 13:48, 6 April 2011 (UTC) reply