Talk:5G: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 22:39, 28 June 2011

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Telecommunications Start‑class High‑importance

	Telecommunication portal 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.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add {{WikiProject banner shell}} to this page and add the quality rating to that template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Computing: Networking Start‑class Mid‑importance

	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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force.

This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past.

Deletion of the article?

In 13 June a deletion proposal template was added to the article, with the motivation "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Also, citation needed." The article may be deleted if the message remains in place for seven days. What is your vote?

Keep the article. Since the prod template, five published sources have been added to the article. A search in Google scholar and Google books shows more scientific publications on the topic exist. However, the article should be improved by footnotes, from those sources as well as from published news magazines. I don't have time to fix that. Mange01 (talk) 17:39, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the article. Where did the template go? This article is pure speculation, and just because a very few papers refer speculatively to what might be after 4G and call it 5G, doesn't mean we should have an encyclopedic article. Perhaps a short section on 4G deficiencies would be warranted in the 4G article. It is utterly ridiculous to have a 5G article when the marketing departments of the mobile providers are still arguing with the ITU what is 4G. If the former win, it is possible that LTE/HSPA+/802.16e will be designated as 4G by the ITU and LTEA/802.16m will be the 5G. This article wild speculation and original research, and should be tagged as such as well as tagged for deletion. Jpgs (talk) 22:36, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Incomprehensible reference of "5G the Nanocore" paper removed

I deleted the following text:

"5G The NanoCore:The incorporated technologies are. 1. Nanotechnology.2. Cloud Computing.3. All IP Network.4. Flat IP Architecture.Explain how Nanotechnology & Cloud computing can work collectively to figure a single entity the NanoCore."

Reasons:

The cited article is not a peer-reviewed research paper, and does not provide citations or calculations as support of the suggested technologies. Wikipedia is not the place for original research.
The last sentence is incomprehensible.
All-IP is already provided by 4G.
After reading the cited article, I still don't understand the connection between 5G and nanotechnology, or between 5G and cloud computing.

A few weeks ago the same user added duplicated and incomprehensible citation of the same source, trying to promote his "Nanocore" concept, coined by himself. Mange01 (talk) 14:10, 10 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm going to remove it again. It is not peer-reviewed, and I agree it is incomprehensible techno-babble. Jpgs (talk) 22:39, 28 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reverse copy-violation

The 5G section of that article quotes the 18 June 2010 version of this Wikipedia article.

Article needs a lot of clean up

The article starts off with some garbage, and is vague in the rest.

184.151.127.131 (talk) 22:06, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 20: / Line 20: @@
 A few weeks ago the same user added [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=5G&action=historysubmit&diff=417915443&oldid=413211542 duplicated and incomprehensible] citation of the same source, trying to promote his "Nanocore" concept, coined by himself.  [[User:Mange01|Mange01]] ([[User talk:Mange01|talk]]) 14:10, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
+And I'm going to remove it again.  It is not peer-reviewed, and I agree it is incomprehensible techno-babble. [[User:Jpgs|Jpgs]] ([[User talk:Jpgs|talk]]) 22:39, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
 == Reverse copy-violation ==