Talk:Nextel Communications

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Article deletion

This article should be Deleted and merged with Sprint Nextel

-Mrsanitazier 4:06 PM ET March 3.2006

  • This had been debated before. I myself no longer have Sprint (Thank heavens) so I no longer really care about the debate outcome on their article. But, one reason why this article *should* be saved is one-day all information about IDEN will probably be erased from the SPRINT article, when that company does away with IDEN. Nextel (The historical company) is one place that information can be repositoried when IDEN eventually gets decommissioned in favor of CDMA by SPRINT.
P.S. This type of thing has also already been debated on Cingular vs. AT&T Wireless merger already (With results of keep). MCI vs. Verizon merger (same result). AT&T vs. SBC (same result.) Etc. CaribDigita 15:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
My $0.02. When companies "merge," it's really a matter of one company buying the other, with the shareholders of the bought-out company getting stock in the purchasing company. That should be our guide. The legally surviving company should get the combined article, while the purchased company should get a shorter article geared towards the legally defunct company's history. oknazevad 20:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Should this article be combined with the Sprint Article

I agree with the previous comment. I think this Nextel article should hold it's one position as it will represent the existence of a stand alone company that once existed once Sprint decides the fully decommission the iDEN portion of their network. I followed the company's progress including its current position after being swallowed by Sprint in the manner in which it was. Leaving this article will provide a form of proof in Nextel's existence.

  • WOW folks sure butchered this article over the last year... The old defunct company info on the left is gone etc. Soon there will be little to no need to keep the article all of the historical parts have been thrown away etc. It has almost been reverted back to a STUB article. CaribDigita 16:44, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Late to the party here, but my view is that Nextel was a very notable and innovative telecommunications company in its own right, and needs an article detailing its history and achievements. Just because a company is acquired by another does not mean it should disappear from the Wiki. As an example, Rambler was a car company that became Nash Motors that was acquired by American Motors that was acquired by Chrysler that was acquired by DaimlerChrysler that spun off again to Chrysler. We do not delete Rambler and Nash and American Motors just because they have been renamed or merged. By the same token, the Nextel article should stand alone on its own merit, at the very least for its innovations in iDEN and PTT technologies. Furthermore, even if companies goes out of business, like Studebaker and Packard, we continue maintain their articles for their notable contributions to history and society, for better or worse. If the Nextel article is merged to Sprint, then that article will become overlarge and pared down on the Nextel side to become "mostly about Sprint"; or Nextel would just be split off again as an even-worse butchered shadow of itself. Keep as independantly notable. --T-dot ( Talk/contribs ) 11:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:NASCAR Nextel Cup Series Logo.svg

Image:NASCAR Nextel Cup Series Logo.svg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)