Talk:Telecommunications/Archive 4
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Telecommunications. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 |
Citation overload
Does the first sentence defining telecommunications really need 6 citations? —Salton Finneger (talk) 13:25, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Radio and TV
Radio and TV are not telecommunication as signals only pass one way. These are broadcast systems. Your defn specifies exchange of info.
The word telecommunication was adapted from the French word télécommunication. It is a compound of the Greek prefix tele- (τηλε-), meaning 'far off', and communication, meaning 'exchange of information'.[2]
my bolding --Light current 15:28, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
- The definition you highlighted was that of communication. If your argument was accepted this would make your term "broadcast communication" an oxymoron. I would suggest broadcast communication is a subset of telecommunications as implied in the article. Both broadcast and point-to-point communication are based on similar technical foundations. Cedars 00:29, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I meant broadcast systems. --Light current 00:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- Look changing what you have written to substantiate some argument you are attempting to make is not going to work. The discussion of broadcast communication fits within the telecommunication article. Can you not think of any other suggestions on how to improve the article? Cedars 00:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
"Broadcast communication" an oxymoron--Light current 01:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- Broadcast communication is widely used (see Haykin). There is no need to remove this content. Cedars 01:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Could you give more info on Haykin?--Light current 03:28, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- Haykin, Simon (2001). Communication Systems (4th edition ed.). John Wiley & Sons. pp. pp 1—3. ISBN 0-471-17869-1.
{{cite book}}:|edition=has extra text (help);|pages=has extra text (help)
Sorry, does anyone think the description of television is first scientific (technology description), and then reads like someone trying to sell you a television. The second description is borderline calling it magical. The statement can also be true for radio, or the internet. Let's just stick with the facts. It's a technology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.122.80.74 (talk) 17:01, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
So sorry, but this part needs to be removed: "Television, however, is not solely a technology, limited to its basic and practical application. It functions both as an appliance, and also as a means for social story telling and message dissemination. It is a cultural tool that provides a communal experience of receiving information and experiencing fantasy. It acts as a “window to the world” by bridging audiences from all over through programming of stories, triumphs, and tragedies that are outside of personal experiences.[28]"
This not only applies to radio and other means of technology, but it horribly unscientific. It sounds almost metaphysical and is clearly an opinion. I asked for this to be removed before, but it was denied. How can anyone read this and it not come off like it's coming from a television salesman? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.122.80.74 (talk) 06:34, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Is Raisting used for telecommunications
This article is headlined with a picture of a dish from the Raisting Satellite Earth Station. But is this station really used for telecommunications, or is it used for communication with interplanetary space probes? Although that would fit a literal meaning of tele- (far-) communication, it's really not what is normally meant by the word, and it's not what this article is about. I would think that real telecommunication dishes would always be fixed, not gimballed like the Raisting dish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.230.39.68 (talk) 22:42, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
Is there such a thing as "pre-modern" telecommunication
I changed some of the material in the introduction to avoid saying that smoke signals, semaphores, etc., are "telecommunications." The word wasn't even used in English prior to 1923 (if Google Ngrams can be trusted). Also, the definition of telecommunication says:
- communication over a distance by cable, telegraph, telephone, or broadcasting.
- (telecommunications) [ treated as sing. ] the branch of technology concerned with telecommunication.
- formal a message sent by telecommunication.
So it seems to specifically exclude that type of communication.
I tried to do it in a minimalist way, though, saying that these are earlier methods of communication at a distance. Even so, not sure they belong. Ngriffeth (talk) 19:07, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Definition
"Telecommunication is communication at a distance by technological means" -- no, Telecommunication is communication at a distance, period -- whatever connotations may usually (and not necessarily) accompany it. Wyresider (talk) 23:58, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Telecom — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ekumoha (talk • contribs) 21:17, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Telecommunication. 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://chem.ch.huji.ac.il/~eugeniik/history/meucci.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060822104544/http://www.connected-earth.com/Galleries/Telecommunicationsage/Thetelephone/index.htm to http://www.connected-earth.com/Galleries/Telecommunicationsage/Thetelephone/index.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080302071329/http://www.atis.org/tg2k/ to http://www.atis.org/tg2k/
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080302071329/http://www.atis.org/tg2k/ to http://www.atis.org/tg2k/
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) 21:08, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Telecommunication. 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/20080720110058/http://www.amta.org.au/default.asp?Page=142 to http://www.amta.org.au/default.asp?Page=142
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) 23:25, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Telecommunication. 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/20130514070220/http://www.mztv.com/newframe.asp?content=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mztv.com%2Fpioneers.html to http://www.mztv.com/newframe.asp?content=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mztv.com%2Fpioneers.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120118072720/http://ideas.economist.com/video/giant-sifting-sound-0 to http://ideas.economist.com/video/giant-sifting-sound-0
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100328045302/http://www.plunkettresearch.com/Telecommunications/TelecommunicationsStatistics/tabid/96/Default.aspx to http://www.plunkettresearch.com/Telecommunications/TelecommunicationsStatistics/tabid/96/Default.aspx
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) 14:39, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
analog landlines
@Kbrose: of all the uncited material in this article, the fact that most landlines are analog is probably the most widely known and uncontroversial fact in there. It is beyond me why that in particular has been singled out as needing a citation. More little blue number disease? SpinningSpark 21:06, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
- @LiberatorG: pinging again. Wrong editor pinged first time. SpinningSpark 08:37, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Spinningspark: I was simply restoring the citation needed tag that had gotten removed with no valid citation being added. The claim seems poorly worded, as any phone with a microphone has some part that is analog. I don't know of anyone that is still using purely analog equipment; those that still have landlines use a cordless phone that transmits over the air digitally. Since that isn't really important it would probably be better to just reword it to something like: "Historically, almost all residential telephone equipment was analog. Increasingly, ..." -LiberatorG (talk) 19:27, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
- @LiberatorG: Landline means the line in the land. That is, the local circuit joining the customer's premises to the local exchange. It's got nothing to do with the kind of handset connected to it, wireless or otherwise. Analog landline means the signal on the local circuit is analog. If the customer's equipment chooses to convert that to digital doesn't make a blind bit of difference to the landline – it's still analog. Your suggestion has missed the point entirely. SpinningSpark 20:21, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Spinningspark: The article says "landline telephones"; if it is not intended to be a claim about the actual telephone device then perhaps the sentence needs nothing more than clarification. -LiberatorG (talk) 21:12, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
- I understand, but I've now put in a source that directly verifies the claim. SpinningSpark 21:26, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Spinningspark: The article says "landline telephones"; if it is not intended to be a claim about the actual telephone device then perhaps the sentence needs nothing more than clarification. -LiberatorG (talk) 21:12, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
- @LiberatorG: Landline means the line in the land. That is, the local circuit joining the customer's premises to the local exchange. It's got nothing to do with the kind of handset connected to it, wireless or otherwise. Analog landline means the signal on the local circuit is analog. If the customer's equipment chooses to convert that to digital doesn't make a blind bit of difference to the landline – it's still analog. Your suggestion has missed the point entirely. SpinningSpark 20:21, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
- @Spinningspark: I was simply restoring the citation needed tag that had gotten removed with no valid citation being added. The claim seems poorly worded, as any phone with a microphone has some part that is analog. I don't know of anyone that is still using purely analog equipment; those that still have landlines use a cordless phone that transmits over the air digitally. Since that isn't really important it would probably be better to just reword it to something like: "Historically, almost all residential telephone equipment was analog. Increasingly, ..." -LiberatorG (talk) 19:27, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
Modern media -> Radio & television-> 4th paragraph
Seems a bit outdated. Tusinoittain (talk) 19:38, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
definition is deficient
The definition no longer appears to have the key component of being "at a distance". This should be corrected. 192.35.35.36 (talk) 14:54, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
The very first words are wrong: it says "exchange", and that is not necessarily the case. A broadcast does not involve an exchange of information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donn300 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
Please change image size
Hi. The article image is in full blown size. Unfortunately I don't know how to change it
- Someone added an image of the sun to the very top of the article - and it was massive. I have undone this edit as vandalism. Picard's Facepalm (talk) 14:36, 24 August 2021 (UTC)