Talk:WiMAX
This page was proposed for deletion by ElectronicsForDogs (talk · contribs) on 23 June 2024 with the comment: This article is misleading, failing to mention that this is obsolete technology that ultimately lost a format war to 4G and 5G networks. It's haphazardly structured, reads like an advertisement in places, and more concerningly, has had update templates saying it's overly jargon-heavy since 2010 (14 years!!) and needs update since 2019 (5 years ago). Many of the sources are from the 2000s and it's full of references to future deployments which almost certainly don't exist. It could be a candidate for rewriting rather than deletion, but frankly, I suspect it's so much work it'd be faster to start again from scratch. It was contested by Graham87 (talk · contribs) on 2024-06-24 with the comment: That's not what proposed deletion is for ... it has 55 interwiki links! |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Comparison
[edit]Wi-Fi uses the 2.4 GHz, 3 GHz, 5 GHz, and 60 GHz radio frequency bands to provide access to a local network. OK, please also mention what WiMAX uses. Jidanni (talk) 11:11, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Comparison - 3 GHz
[edit]Can I source be added for Wi-Fi's use of 3 Ghz? I found a reference to Wireless_Gigabit_Alliance which mentions using 60 GHz but I cannot find a reason for 3 GHz to be mentioned as part of Wi-Fi. If one cannot be found I suggest it is removed as an error. 15:58, 29 December 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TafThorne (talk • contribs)
Proposed deletion
[edit]This article is misleading, failing to mention that this is obsolete technology that ultimately lost a format war to 4G and 5G networks. It's haphazardly structured, reads like an advertisement in places, and more concerningly, has had update templates saying it's overly jargon-heavy since 2010 (14 years!!) and needs update since 2019 (5 years ago). Many of the sources are from the 2000s and it's full of references to future deployments which almost certainly don't exist. It could be a candidate for rewriting rather than deletion, but frankly, I suspect it's so much work it'd be faster to start again from scratch. ElectronicsForDogs (talk) 23:41, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- I've contested the proposed deletion. I know nothing about the subject, but it's not for articles that need a rewrite; I'm here from the notification at User talk:Conversion script, because this page's first edit used to be attributed to that user. Graham87 (talk) 15:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- C-Class Telecommunications articles
- Low-importance Telecommunications articles
- C-Class Computing articles
- Low-importance Computing articles
- C-Class Computer networking articles
- Low-importance Computer networking articles
- C-Class Computer networking articles of Low-importance
- All Computer networking articles
- All Computing articles