Talk:Direct inward dial

I vote for them to be merged. --ORBIT 21:26, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Done.--Bookandcoffee 01:24, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Category:Authentication methods

Why is this page under Category:Authentication methods?--agr 23:33, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

sellers

Should all SELLERS be removed, or allowed to remain as information relating to the article.

If no seller information is to be permitted, then the sub for SELLERS should be deleted also. 84.69.232.177 (talk) 18:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

You are confusing "information" with "external links". External links to sites that provide no information, but only aim to sell a product or service, should not be added, as explained in the external links policy. It is perfectly possible to provide information about what kind of company sells the product, as well as Wikilinks (that is, links to Wikipedia articles as opposed to external links) to companies. The heading "Sellers" should perhaps be changed to something else, the information should perhaps be expanded or removed, Wikilinks to other companies should perhaps be provided, and the existing Wikilinks may or may not be relevant - but the inappropriate links should not be re-introduced. This is not specific to this particular article, it's a general guideline that applies throughout Wikipedia. --Bonadea (talk) 19:14, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

SELLERS

It is also agreed here that the seller information should either be completely removed from the article OR the seller links should remain, as after looking at each of the listed sellers here, all the sites have information relating to Direct Inward Dialling so therefore is both informative and relevant to this article.

It is also in my opinion that due to the activity over the past 3 or 4 days relating to Direct Inward Dialling, the links should remain AND that the article is locked to prevent changes until a final decision is reached in order to prevent the changes to be undone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.69.239.238 (talk) 14:40, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I've removed all of the internal 'example' links, and the complete list of commercial external links. The links you have been continually adding are pure and simple spam, with no intent other than commercial promotion. Please reference the material that Bonadea has patiently provided you in the above section. Kuru ^talk 14:50, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

The links you removed may or may not be promotional in the slightest, but since I have no direct connection to these promotional links it can not be seen as promotional there if this is the case, how many other pages have links to external websites for promotional purpose? 84.69.239.238 (talk) 16:01, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

It seems that some users do not want this article and are hellbent on removing any usefull infomation from it 84.69.232.177 (talk) 16:49, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Indeed it is so, and refuse to accept a debate on if the links should or should not be listed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.69.239.238 (talk) 16:51, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, I really can't tell if you're kidding or not. You've added links to the commercial front page of five different companies, whose sole purpose is to promote a product. Why in the world would you feel they are not promotional in nature? There is nothing in those links that adds to the understanding of the article's topic; just cheesy product pitches. You seem to simply be trying to create a directory of external links; if you disagree with our guidelines, please feel free to restart the discussions at WP:EL. Kuru ^talk 21:50, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Notability

I don't why the notability of this entry is being questioned. The subject is central to VOIP, and VOIP is a big deal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.235.20.125 (talk) 06:03, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

That link is a information about a type of service, not an advertisment

Solbadguyakira (talk) 03:05, 15 March 2008 (UTC)solbadguyakira

The link that I have add is a short description of the definition, not an advertisment, because I consider that a lot of information about the topic is guessed by the carrier's of the service's or like Avaya and AltiGen Communications.

You should consider to link the article further articles E1 and T1 articles, here in Wikipedia, that information care about each other with PBX and related topic.

Finally I consider that topic is belongs to the category Telecommunications, because that tecnology is used in based software or hardware communications, belongs to call center structures, telephony services, etc.

Thanks!!!

No thank you. You've inserted a link to a very short paragraph in one vendor's faq; the Spanish version of it at that. Please focus on adding content to the article or providing reliable cites to the existing material instead. Kuru ^talk 13:26, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. And there isn't a link to a Spanish language version of this article, where such a link might be more welcome. My Spanish lets me read technical articles to some extent, but is entirely inadequate for writing. Also Category:Telecommunications is large and of little use for finding similar articles, which is the main purpose of a category. Category:Telephone exchanges or perhaps Category:Telephony signals would serve this purpose better, seems to me. Jim.henderson (talk) 03:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Possible Plagarism

The content of this article is identical to an article from Answers.com. http://www.answers.com/topic/direct-inward-dialing Dlm8751 (talk) 09:24, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

It is not plagiarism; the content of Wikipedia is "freely distributable and reproducible" under the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). See Wikipedia:Copyrights for more info  Nuβiατεch ^Talk/_contrib 15:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

8027745266 my new Opay so I'll like you to reach me

This is hammed 105.112.168.26 (talk) 08:07, 25 May 2022 (UTC)