Talk:Cellular router
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Mayor Problems with this article
[edit]However anytime any changes get applied to the page their is a BOT and checks every 1min or so and uploads the older version , so it seems someone does not know the wiki policy that it is a public doc and not a version control, I have already put 5 version tonight just to check a minute later to get the same old version back, so Wiki either delete this or find some what to prevent these bot from getting control over this or any data
Applying Wikipedia Policies
[edit]This article has a number of problems because it:
- does not conform to the neutral point-of-view, specifically there is a commercial bias in the details,
- provides an incomplete list commercial cellular routers which is an ongoing maintenance problem,
- appears to have a U.S. focus, although a particular country is not inherent in the subject matter.
Initially I had thought to propose this article for deletion because once the commercial material is removed, the article would be better suited in the Wiktionary.
Alternately, I propose to keep the article but:
- remove the obvious marketing material associated with the product list,
- update the list of commercial cellular routers, limited to make, model, and web links in tabular form,
- remove the references to the U.S., mention cellular routers from the world over.
Whiterocker 18:42, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and removed the marketing info. The legal issues section has also been removed as it is very US focused. If this info is required later the original ver is here [1]. --Breno talk 07:14, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
The section is becoming a monster. These types of lists grow into uncontollable things because new editors find that it's an easy way to contribute. This type of material is completely contrary to WP:SOAP.
I'm thinking about removing the section altogether. It looks as another user has had the same ideas regarding the section before. Wikipedia policy is not being applied here. What are your thoughts? E_dog95' Hi ' 23:14, 28 July 2008 (UTC)