Talk:Telephony: Difference between revisions

Telecommunications Unassessed

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 ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The section on CTI should be moved to its own page. CTI is a specialised form of telephony technology. There are other much more important and widespread forms.

The initial paragraph seems to imply that telephony only applies to "voice" communication, but that would exclude devices for the deaf/mute which typically transmit braile via telephone.

There was a thing on the article that Digital Telephony should be merged. I agree. Why should there be two seperate articles when sorta the technologies are almost the same thing? Steven312 12:41, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Telephony has evolved from humble beginnings to many and varied modern technologies we see today. Do any of us mere humanoids have a right to shut out anything telephony from at least a mention and link to relevant content??

---

I'd make digital telphony the main ariticle, and relegate analog telephony to another article. I'm most interested in the meaning of the word as used here. http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=253 In the context of a "mobile telephony API" Mathiastck 18:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Telephony is a very broad subject that starts off with the basic concepts of how sounds are converted into electrical signals, transmitted and then converted back to sounds and goes on to include such recent developments at VOIP, cellular and WIFI phones. An authoritative article ought to provide a good overview of the topic and then detailed explanation of each branch technology. I wouldn't care if analog and digital telephone were separate articles. But one ought to be able to start at telephony and find all the related information.Pepperbernhardt 23:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. This is the general article. It doesn't need detailed coverage of analog phones, cellphones, cable phones, satellite phones or other items that have their own articles. What it lacks is links to those other articles and a little synthetic perspective on their relations. Jim.henderson 23:10, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. That was before I looked up "Telephone." That article has it all. So much so, that it makes this one unnecessary. Rather than merge or improve, better to abolish this article and replace it with a redirect. If any portion is worthy of surviving, put it in another article. Jim.henderson 23:16, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the articles fault, Telephony means a completely different thing in different contexts. In my experience, it has been used interchangeably with Advanced Telephony. Still, this article should be merged into something more appropriate. Mathiastck 03:31, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We do need an article for Advanced Telephony I was going to start by fleshign out the article for the J2ME JSR for advanced telephony. Haven't done that yet. Mathiastck 21:09, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Goodnes; I should have abolished this article last month but got too many projects on my plate and forgot. Anyway, why call it advanced? Everything made is advanced over something, so a telephone with a solid instead of liquid transmitter, or with a tone dial, is advanced telephony. So, what would go in the article? You can write it here in the talk page, then others can comment on where it should go. Naturally the article won't be abolished if it's about to receive important improvements. Jim.henderson 00:23, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was still pretty much a newbie to the ways Wikipedia articles are linked back than, and have since come to appreciate this little article. What has happened since then is mainly that it has acquired inline links to more detailed articles, saying only enough about each linked term to put it in context, which as far as I see is the right way to go. Jim.henderson (talk) 15:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan Stubblefield's inductive telephony should be mentioned in the history section. 91.182.235.144 (talk) 12:54, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]