Talk:List of CDMA2000 networks/Archive 1

Archive 1

Creation of article...

I don't know where to put this, but I definitely don't think it belongs on the CDMA2000 article.... So I'm forking it off similar to EDGE ren0^talk 09:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of CDMA2000 networks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tstt.co.tt/cdma-evdo-discontinuation-service
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.cdg.org/resources/white_papers/files/Universal_Services_10-28-04.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}). Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:03, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Notability

Hi Nightwalker-87, with regard to recent deletions marked WP:NOTE: What makes a CDMA network notable, given that the article is titled List of CDMA networks and not List of selected notable CDMA networks? With CDMA networks being shut down one by one, I think it worthwhile to keep a historical reference of past spectrum usage. Cheers, Drahtlos (talk) 13:15, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi Drahtlos. I haven't found any evidence for the existence of the networks by Ethiotelecom and Powertel. I think it is in general not desireable to list operators that have been declared inactive (-> Nigeria) or of which a license has been revoked as long as this is not of general public interest (e.g. in media) or which have been aquired by other operators (if this would consequently be listed, we would likely end here WP:NOTDIR). I agree on the entry of Rock Wireless which can indeed be retained. Nightwalker-87 (talk) 14:49, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Entry ArgoNET in List of CDMA 2000 networks

Hi Nightwalker, I tried several times to correct the entry of ArgoNET in Austria, however, my changes were undone... We at ArgoNET wanted to state that the question mark behind 2014 can be removed, as our network definitely was launched at that time. Furthermore, the entry 2,5 MHz should say correctly: 2 x 4,44 Mhz. Thank you for your support.--Ryker77 (talk) 10:06, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ryker77,
Please cite an official press release or any public available articles to verify "as our network definitely was launched at that time" and the frequency information. Otherwise your edits remain in conflict with WP:VER, WP:QUALITYCONTROL and WP:PG. Please keep in mind that in first you are responsible to provide verifiablity for the content you add to wikipedia. Deligating this work ('passively') to other editors is not the way we want to go. So against this background I would kindly like to ask you to provide explicit sources and citations, which will likely avoid to have certain edits challenged by whomever. Thanks for your cooperation. ;-) Nightwalker-87 (talk) 20:18, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello Nightwalker, as a reference we can point to RTR , the Austrian Rundfunk und Telekom Regulierungs-GmbH. Please let me know if this is sufficient and how to proceed further to get the changes done. Thanks a lot for your support! --Ryker77 (talk) 07:08, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ryker77. Yes, this appears to be a sufficient source for the mentioned bandwidth. Is there any public information, or stronger indications available regarding the launch date or at least the exact month when services were launched, you can think of? This would cover all efforts for WP:VER that I can see here. Thanks for your help. :-) Nightwalker-87 (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello Nightwalker, Unfortunately, RTR did not publish the launch dates, so, maybe it is sufficient prove if the owner of the frequencies, as we are ourselves, is the source of information. Facts may furthermore be taken from our own website, which is http://argonet.at/de/. I understand that you do a great job verifying all information delivered, however, it would be quite dissappointing to us if known facts could not make it through the verification process. Instead of known wrong information we would in this case prefer removing all the data. Please let me know how we can go on. Thanks a lot! --Ryker77 (talk) 09:56, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi there. As you might have taken note of already, I have updated the entry in the list with what I could find as being verifiable content. I don't see that this part has to be discussed any further, nor that we need to question the now verifiable listing itself. It is also ok to have "2014" there with a question mark in front of it. This does not mean that 2014 is "unverified" (this would be the case if it was behind from my point of view), but is solely a placeholder for the missing month. Maybe the latter can be added later on, if a source is found - this is not a problem in the context mentioned above. As far as I can see from other wiki lists I regularly contribute to, this appears to be common practise. I hope this now adresses all needs. Thanks for your help and support. :-) Nightwalker-87 (talk) 20:22, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Another idea that just came to my mind is to have the state of the cited websites listed at the internet archive "wayback machine" [1]. This would preserve all content in case these websites change over time and make sure that no information is lost. Wikipedia also has automatic bots that detect dead links and automatically replace them with the last saved state from wayback machine. ;-) Nightwalker-87 (talk) 20:32, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of CDMA2000 networks. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151208212939/http://readi.asean.org/readi.asean.org/media/files/12_Nyoman-Adhiarna_READI_ASPF-5_180315.pdf to http://readi.asean.org/readi.asean.org/media/files/12_Nyoman-Adhiarna_READI_ASPF-5_180315.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140726121303/http://telecom.kz/news/single/12211/news?lang=en to http://telecom.kz/news/single/12211/news?lang=en

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:55, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Archive 1