Talk:CTIA (organization)

United States: District of Columbia Stub‑class Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Washington, D.C. portal This article is supported by WikiProject District of Columbia (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled

needs larger article. Needs mention of conference happening next week in LA. http://www.ctia.org/conventions_events/wirelessIT/index.cfm http://www.wirelessit.com/ Mathiastck 18:59, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Direct Copy of http://www.ctia.org/aboutCTIA/overview/index.cfm

Neutrality

I have removed some material that is basically advertising, but this needs more work to make it neutral. I'm particularly concerned about this diff, which seems to bias the article heavily in favor of the CTIA, notably replacing "industry consortium" with "non-profit organization" which to me gives a false impression of charity. I'm not averse to just reverting all those changes but there's probably a better way to do it. --TexasDex ★ 19:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The neutrality section says nothing about the CTIA, but instead reads like fucking ad copy! This needs serious neutrality fixin'. -NotThatAnonymous

There's this too...

"Despite the evidence from these well-respected and highly credible organizations, some critics such as the Environmental Working Group (EWG) choose to ignore the decades of research. Instead, they state that “there is sufficient research that shows higher risk for brain and salivary gland tumors among heavy cell phone users. EWG encouraged consumers to look up their cell phone's radiation level, and to wear a headset when talking on the phone to limit their exposure."

Phrases such as "well-respected", "highly credible", and "ignore the decades of research" don't belong in a neutral document. As the WHO is in the media for announcing that there is more evidence of a link between cell phone use and brain cancer, to which CTIA has reiterated their position, "It does not mean cell phones cause cancer."

CTIA is an industry trade group that represents the interests of the industry (ie: profits and shareholders) and would not be representing those interests well if it were to agree with those statements, or at least deny it. --Toquinha (talk) 18:56, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs to be renamed/moved; Title is incorrect

CTIA originally meant "Cellular telephone Industries Association" and although the CTIA website now uses "CTIA - The Wireless Association" [1], they make no mention of having anything to do with the Internet and there is ample evidence available [2] of their original name. The name of this encyclopedia article seems to be a well intentioned guess on the part of the original author. -- Rydra Wong (talk) 23:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After receiving no feedback to my proposed correction of the name in the intervening four months I have moved the page and provided individual citations regarding the original name of the industry group. -- Rydra Wong (talk) 04:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Expanded article with new content

I have expanded and updated this article, removing the Improve Article tag in the process. I have modeled the structure of the article after other industry trade group articles, and welcome any feedback or suggestions for improvement. CTIAAmy (talk) 15:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your "edits" still make the article into a policy position paper, not simply a description of your organization. Wikipedia is not your personal PAC. This edit kills fascists. -Notthatanonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.131.210.10 (talk) 04:20, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Net Neutrality Section

The section on net neutrality and regulation is awful. Looks like a copied paragraph from one of the booklets of the CTIA. Totally non encyclopedic. I am adding several templates to this article. Thanks --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 01:54, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On February 3, 2011, I made edits to the net neutrality section to add sources and remove note on tone.CTIAAmy (talk) 15:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On March 11, 2011, I made edits to remove the vandalism note under the net neutrality section and permanently removed that section from the article. CTIAAmy (talk) 20:26, 11 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

On March 18, I removed the 2nd vandalism note under the net neutrality section and again removed that section from the article. CTIAAmy (talk) 14:06, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

A major contributor of this article is a person that works for the CTIA. I have added a COI template. Editor can be reached here --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 02:02, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have added more details to my user profile. There is a link as well here. Please contact me for any additional feedback or discussion. CTIAAmy (talk) 15:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect I understand you might not want to be biased, but I believe it's important for other editors to also work in this article. Also, the article has a problem on the way information is given. I assume your good faith though. Thanks --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 06:36, 10 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]