Talk:Area codes 781 and 339

United States: Massachusetts 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Massachusetts portal This article is supported by WikiProject Massachusetts (assessed as Low-importance).

Telecommunications Low‑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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Several entries on this page are incorrect. Many cities listed are not even in the area code 781. --Xcrunner90 03:14, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many locations that were on the chart before it was edited are indeed not really in the area code but do have exchanges in this area code for cellular use. Strange but true. Ed (talk) 14:14, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the list of Major Cities, it doesn't even list the largest city in the 781 area code, which is Lynn. --thebody64

list of exchanges

Without a source, it screams WP:OR. Zurqoxn (talk) 17:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not original research because it is easily accessible online or anywhere for that matter. Only things that can or are disputed need a source. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 20:45, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If it's easily accessible elsewhere, why does it need to be re-produced on Wikipedia? Why not just link to it? Zurqoxn (talk) 19:06, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well this is an encyclopedia, not a collection of links. You could say that for any subject: why have article on that, we can just link to this news article instead, and so on. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 19:26, 13 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, maybe replacing it with a link would be a little too much. How about keeping the list, and adding a link to a source in the "External Links" secton. Zurqoxn (talk) 01:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That would be fine, as long as the table stays I am happy. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 04:14, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]