Talk:Ethernet in the first mile

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Computing / Networking (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by Networking task force (marked as Mid-importance).
 
WikiProject Telecommunications (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
 

Title caps[edit]

The article is titled as though Ethernet in the first mile is a proper noun. I doubt this.Any objection to lower case first mile as per WP:CAPS? --Kvng (talk) 14:44, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Merge in 2BASE-TL and 10PASS-TS?[edit]

Yes, I agree to make this an article on the concept in general instead of on one set of standards or another. That is why I am proposing a merge, although it may take a while since may of the other articles are not sourced very well. W Nowicki (talk) 23:58, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Is that the merger of the articles about particular EFM PHY layers into this article? If so, then if this article is about the concept in general, not about particular standards, wouldn't that suggest that the particular PHYs have their own pages (as at least some other PHYs do), especially given that the various EFM PHYs are somewhat different (copper and different flavors of glass)? Guy Harris (talk) 21:44, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
I agree that any particular PHY could have its own page. But I am of the opinion that if there is not much to say about some particular topic, even though it otherwise qualifies for a page of its own, then we might as well merge the few words about that specific topic into a more general article.
If it later turns out there is a lot more to say about 2BASE-TL and 10PASS-TS, then I hope it will be easy to undo my merge and split them back out (Wikipedia:Summary style) into their own independent articles. --DavidCary (talk) 03:04, 17 April 2014 (UTC)