Talk:Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution

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

‹ The template below (Merged-from) is being considered for merging with Copied. See templates for discussion to help reach a consensus. ›

Archives: 1

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Enhanced Data Rates for GSM Evolution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080414072112/http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/imt-2000/MiscDocuments/IMT-Deployments-Rev3.pdf to http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/imt-2000/MiscDocuments/IMT-Deployments-Rev3.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:18, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Enhanced Data Rates for GSM Evolution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090306095648/http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/imt-2000/DocumentsIMT2000/IMT-2000.pdf to http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/imt-2000/DocumentsIMT2000/IMT-2000.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:24, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Enhanced Data Rates for GSM Evolution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:05, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Enhanced Data Rates for GSM Evolution. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091007091901/http://developer.att.com/devcentral/tools_technologies/network/docs/DataCapabilities_GPRS__to_HSDPA.pdf to http://developer.att.com/devcentral/tools_technologies/network/docs/DataCapabilities_GPRS__to_HSDPA.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.3gamericas.org/English/About_3G_Americas/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.visantstrategies.com/market_research/edge_evolution_egprs_evolved.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:06, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 26 February 2025

It has been proposed in this section that Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution be renamed and moved to EDGE.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution → EDGE – Per WP:COMMONNAME, virtually exclusively known and recognized under the abbreviated name EDGE, similar to LTE, GSM and SMS to name a few examples in this field. The page "EDGE" already is a redirect to this article as a primary topic. Skeeegt (talk) 02:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Per discussion below, I am also proposing the alternative target title EDGE (telecommunication) if EDGE doesn't cut it. --Skeeegt (talk) 20:43, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Skeptical~~: LTE, GSM and SMS are very familiar terms to many people; this EDGE is not. EDGE also spells a word and those others do not, and EDGE has other meanings evident at Edge (disambiguation). Also, EDGE is something that is presumably fading in prominence, as it has been displaced by newer technologies. Moreover, all-caps is a common styling for words and brand names. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:04, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
EDGE in caps is already a redirect so suggests it is established as primary. Since you're skeptical, you might prefer the title EDGE (telecommunication)? That also matches LTE (telecommunication). Either way, the current long title is absolutely not a COMMONNAME, and I would be happy with EDGE (telecommunication) as an alternative if agreed upon here. Skeeegt (talk) 19:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't noticed that LTE was a piped link to LTE (telecommunications). I also see there was prior discussion at Talk:Enhanced Data rates for GSM Evolution/Archive 1#Requested move, which included the suggestion of EDGE (GSM). My skepticism is about the validity of the primary topic status, and I note there was some back-and-forth about that in 2012. EDGE Group, a company whose logo is just "EDGE", may be the main competitor. It gets more pageviews than this topic does, and it seems to have some telecom products. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 20:34, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The full title makes it worse as it doesn't immediately tell that it refers to the 'EDGE' topic. I think EDGE (GSM) would just unnecessarily make it complicated. I am happy to change my proposal to EDGE (telecommunication) bearing in mind the company you mention (since that is 'EDGE Group', I think it is a valid enough differentiation from this 'EDGE'). Skeeegt (talk) 20:41, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure the all-caps is really justified for EDGE Group. I think that is just promotional styling, and I submitted an RM for it, although it is presumably sometimes referred to as EDGE. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:05, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Now that you mention it yes that seems to be promotional styling indeed. In that case, the topic of this GSM EDGE article I think should count as primary and being the abbreviation all on its own. Skeeegt (talk) 13:21, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, EDGE (telecommunication) sounds like the best solution here. Certainly better than the full title, but not as ambiguous as EDGE would be. EDGE would probably have to stay as a redirect to the aforementioned telecommunications page as it is probably the most common meaning of the acronym. 109.54.201.9 (talk) 13:56, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we disambiguate as EDGE (telecommunication), then EDGE is not allowed to be a primary redirect as it would be considered unnecessary parenthetical disambiguation (which is only allowed in special cases like WP:MUSICSERIES). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I still think there is a case of moving it to just EDGE. According to Pageview Analysis, this article absolutely trumps the other entries with all caps 'EDGE' (EDGE of Existence programme and EDGE Foundation, both of which have 'EDGE' as acronyms like this). EDGE Group doesn't count as BarrelProof rightfully spotted it is promotional styling and it isn't an acronym but just the word 'Edge' and 'Group'. - 109.54.201.9 mentions ambiguity but I think pageview analysis proves this article as PRIMARYTOPIC of 'EDGE' as an all caps acronym. (either way, any solution is still an improvement over the current title). Skeeegt (talk) 04:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that EDGE Group, EDGE of Existence programme, and EDGE Foundation do not seem to displace this topic as primary, so maybe EDGE would be OK for this. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:18, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This chain has gone for far too long so if you have a change of opinion about the move it'd be best to place it below in bold so it's clear in the context. Skeeegt (talk) 01:23, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I never actually expressed opposition – just skepticism, but I haven't found a good argument against the move, so I struck out my skepticism. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 02:15, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]