{| class="messagebox" style="background: AntiqueWhite;" |- |This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot. Any sections older than 30 days are automatically archived to User talk:Infophile/Archive 1. |- |}

"Ours is not to question why, ours is but to report what reliable sources say on the matter." - First said here, but good for a reminder to myself and others.

Hi Infophile, I just realized that you removed the section about "Next-Generation IPTV Services with Wireless and Mobility" I added as you suggested to add more sources for the claim. In fact, all the claims are concluded and summarized from an IEEE paper - "IPTV over WiMAX: Key Success Factors, Challenges, and Solutions", J. She, F. Hou, P.-H. Ho and L.-L. Xie, “IPTV over WiMAX: Key Success Factors, Challenges, and Solutions”, IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 45, no 8, pp.87-93, Aug. 2007

I have added this source as a reference in the section I produced. Whereas, I believe it is very important to included this section to reveal the updated trends and future of IPTV, esp. due to emerging wireless broadband technology, which is also mentioned in the previous section about "Limitation" in the current version of the article of IPTV. I hope you will be ok to keep it or help to polish it.

Iptvwimax (talk) 00:08, 16 March 2008 EST

Hi Infophile, I have addressed the conerns of the crystal ball in the section you raised by reporting the initial industrial deployments for support the claims. What's the reason or concern that the section is being removed? Pls. advise.

Iptvwimax (talk) 14:49, 16 March 2008 EST

(cur) (last) 18:16, 21 April 2008 Infophile (Talk | contribs) (21,711 bytes) (PR Newswire isn't a reliable source. If one can be found, we can include the current use, but not the forecasts.) (undo)

The PR Newswire shows the press release from the company that issued the report. It is just like the previous reference a press release from Gartner for the earlier source for broadband subsribers. The Press Release cites the report from where those numbers came. It is a research report based on official statistics and the forecast is based on what IPTV providers are saying they will have in terms of subscribers in 2010. Again, in the earlier sentence, there is a forecast on the number of broadband subscribers. Also, it seems that if you have an entry on IPTV, one thing readers will want to know is how many users there are around the world. So I urge you to reinstate the entry. Just for some background, I used to head the statistics of the International Telecommunication Union which is responsible for compiling statistics on telecom, mobile and Internet use. Mrminges (talk) 19:41, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Damn, I though that it would be obvious. Well, I reworded and linked to my answer to him. Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Homeopathy/Evidence#Keeps_resorting_to_any_ridiculous_argument_that_would_support_his_position_when_all_good_arguments_were_shot_down_.28Dana.29.

I think I'm finished adding evidence. Do you think it's too long and it may get removed or cut by arbitrators? Actually, do you have any more useful suggerence? :) I'm going offline on a few minutes, but I can mend my evidence later --Enric Naval (talk) 05:11, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict (defined as articles which relate to homeopathy, broadly interpreted) if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project. User DanaUllman (talk · contribs) has been banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 23:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you have edited in related areas within WP, and so thought you might have an interest in this discussion.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 19:35, 4 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]