Talk:SaskTel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Canada Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
	Saskatchewan Portal This article is part of the Saskatchewan WikiProject (Discuss/Join).

• There is no question that the article reads like an ad. I cleaned up one sentence; a rewrite is needed IMHO to remove the obvious non-neutrality. The issue is not generally with the info, but with its manner of presentation. Fremte 18:53, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
• The copy in the article looks suspiciously like ad copy to me. So that I avoid raising issues as I did in DVDEmpire.com, could some other users please get back to me on how you feel about this? jglc | t | c 17:14, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Not quite sure I know what you're talking about. This information is from the companies website. I'm new to editing on wikipedia so let me know if something should be changed. Note: I live in Regina saskatchewan so i know that this article is not biased, its factual. wagnj1 11:20, 17 Jun 2005 (CST)
• Ah. I see, now. Thanks for being polite: I understand. I'm not disputing that the article is about a real company. Moreover, I think that the company is notable enough to be included in WP.
• I'm still thinking that we ought to change this, though, because it is very likely a Copyright Problem. If you still think that SaskTel is worth including in Wikipedia, you might want to take the information that they give and re-write it - having the text copied, word for word, is frowned upon (As far as I know.). Thanks for replying quickly and reasonably. jglc | t | c 17:27, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• I sent an email to SaskTel at the same time I created the article, asking if it was ok to use the information from one of their pages. I haven't heard anything back as of yet. I'll let you know when I hear from them. In the email I also included a link to the "About Wikipedia" page so they can see that it is non-profit. I also mentioned that if they have a problem with the page to let me know and I'll fix it up so that they are happy. Normally, I would wait until after getting their permission to make the page, but I thought it would be better to let them see what the page would look like and what info would be on it. We can put this article on hold until I hear back from them if need be. wagnj1 13:32, 17 Jun 2005 (CST)
  • Sounds good to me. I have no issues with that (nor ought anyone else to). Let me know what they say about the entry. jglc | t | c 19:42, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I went through and cleaned up this article...hopefully now you'll find it to be more simlified, neutral, and most importantly no longer a potential copyright problem.

Cheers

--Eric.s 21:56, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Contents 1 24Mbit (DSL) internet? 2 24Mbit (ADSL2) internet 3 Link to itself? 4 Controversies 5 Peacock Terms

[edit] 24Mbit (DSL) internet?

A friend told me that Sasktel was implementing 24mbit DSL anyone know if this is true? It would make sesnse i guess since Sasktel is a leader in Fiber-optics and everything

--Lesty 02:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah It will be happening in the next couple months

[edit] 24Mbit (ADSL2) internet

It is part of the Next Generation Access Infrastructure program, primarily driven by a 'Max' (IPTV) requirement to provide HDTV. It has already started, but will not be completed until 2008, IIRC. --24.72.80.236 22:50, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Link to itself?

Is it really necessary to have "Sasktel Mobility" as a link when it just links to this page? Seems like a waste of Wikipedia's bandwidth to me.

[edit] Controversies

This statement causes me concern: "There are also some concerns that SaskTel has now outsourced a portion of their web hosting services to the US. Even more of a concern is that when asked where where the servers are located the answer has been "In a secure data center" and when asked where that data center is they replied as "that's privileged information". "[1]

Is there a reference for the statement and quote? If not, I believe it should be removed. Shanebratt 05:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I concur that it should be removed. It is not, to my knowledge, true. However, being privy to some inside information and the existence of a conflict of interest makes me hesitant to edit the article. Regardless, it is unsourced and potentially harmful. For all we know, the editor from 70.64.46.232 could be associated with a competing firm. BigNate37_(T) 17:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and removed it. Sentences that claim to quote someone else really should be sourced from the start. Black Falcon ^(Talk) 22:09, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peacock Terms

The Technological and service advances section is marked for using "peacock terms". Please provide specifics or the peacock tag will be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SaskatchewanSenator (talk • contribs) 09:54, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

probably either the title of this section needs to be changed or the section to be removed. It is POV to have a "bragging" section like this. Maybe you want to make the changes? Fremte (talk) 02:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Please provide the peacock terms at issue. For other criticisms of the Technological and service advances section a new talk section should be added.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 08:18, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Editted section per WP:Tone#Avoid_peacock_and_weasel_terms and WP:peacock. The prior language was clearly designed to show off. Fremte (talk) 14:58, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Posted also to SaskatchewanSenator's talk.
You will see from the article history that there have been a series of changes from the original due to it reading like ad copy, written by the company itself. The tone of this section is not quite right for Wikipedia. Claiming to be "first" whether true or not does not appear to be appropriate, particularly when they bought Lucent's technology and did not develop it themselves, the for footnote 7 is not available anymore. It would be appreciated if you discussed the problem prior to simple reverts. I see you have left the peacock banner in place, and this must remain until we settle the issues. Respecfully, Fremte (talk) 21:35, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

First and longest are not peacock terms. They are also what make those uses of technology notable. Simply removing those words removes notable information. If you dispute that they were first or longest please provide some references.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 22:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

It's been a month and there haven't been any peacock terms identified. I'm going to remove the peacock tag.--SaskatchewanSenator (talk) 06:47, 26 May 2008 (UTC)