Talk:Business Process Framework (eTOM)

	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.

untitled

This page and its internal and external links, here and on other pages created recently, all appear to be spam to me but I don't have the expertise to sort it out so I have made a request on WP:RFI that someone look into it. --killing sparrows 21:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this article has been here for nearly three years, and the main link was in it from the beginning. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 21:18, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a notable and important standard. Charles T. Betz 20:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In general, shouldn't international standards organizations like ITU and ISO be considered good sources for these subjects, even though they are primary sources? Mammux (talk) 13:13, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion

I oppose deletion - the fact that the "Business Process Framework has been adopted by ITU-T as a Recommendation and published in the M.3050.x series" surely makes it notable? --Phil Holmes (talk) 14:25, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I also oppose. But this article needs some serious re-writing. Also added NPOV. The opening sentence reads like an ad: The Business Process Framework (eTOM), published by the TM Forum, is a guidebook that defines the most widely used and accepted standard for business processes in the telecommunications industry. 193.202.33.19 (talk) 09:45, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the comment above is incorrect. The opening statement is not an ad. "Most widely used and accepted" is purely a statement of fact. This model is becoming increasingly important in the industry and to even suggest deletion is just bizarre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.143.101 (talk) 10:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto here - deletion makes no sense. Just have a look at the list of member companies. These members have approved TM Forum outcomes including this one. As one can see, it's difficult to find a major telecommunication company or group or an important vendor in this area which would be missing on that list. Also - while "Google statistics" may be misleading, just have a look at the list of results returned by Google search for 'telecommunications "Business Process Framework"' (ca 354000 results) and see what is written there and on which sites. --Tomáš Hajný — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xhajt03 (talk • contribs) 13:41, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]