Talk:Global Cloud Xchange

London Low‑importance

	London portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Telecommunications Low‑importance

	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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Categories

Moved from User talk:Jpatokal Company name has changed to Global Cloud Xchange

I would appreciate it if you do not remove the telco categories from Vanco again. I work for the company in question, and I reside in the US. It is not 'just a UK company', we have affiliates located in all of the countries in question. Rarelibra 13:00, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Companies should be categorized based on where they are headquartered, not where they have operations -- otherwise the Toyotas and Nestles of this world would clutter up hundreds of categories. But you can, of course, list the affiliate offices in the article itself. Jpatokal 13:38, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the Wiki rule that is stating this? If you cannot support it, you cannot make such changes. Rarelibra 13:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My friend, this is not your article any more than it is mine -- I can make any change I like, and so can you. So you'll have to convince me I'm wrong, or I'll have to convince you you're wrong. I've solicited some third opinions here — Wikipedia talk:Categorization#Categorization of companies — so chip in. For startes, you could explain how Vanco differs from Toyota and Nestle, or do you think Toyota and Nestle should also be categorized in every single country in the world? Jpatokal 04:41, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also be advised that the company history and article do not read any more different than histories for many other companies listed on Wikipedia. So the 'advert' label does not stand. And as for trying to claim 'tautologies' - I think not. Rarelibra 13:58, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But the prose is horrible. "This vision gives Vanco renewed focus"? "Vanco gains the opportunity and intellectual advantage"!? This is not encyclopedic, this is buzzwordy highly POV marketing bafflegab. Jpatokal 04:41, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Then we'll work on improving the prose, if need be. But I won't waste time going around to all kinds of company pages pointing out similar (and accepted) phrasing. Rarelibra 12:59, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arguing that other articles suck more is generally not very productive. Yes, people like to hype the companies they work for, but hype is not encyclopedic. Jpatokal 18:44, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And singling out an article for your focus without improvement is generally not very productive either. Tell me, what is your interest in this article? If simply to harrass me and make unproductive input, then your input is not needed here. Trust me, part of this is to improve articles, not to harrass and degrade articles or members. Your choice of words thus far ("prose is horrible", "buzzwordy POV", "marketing bafflegab", and "hyping" the company one works for) is offensive, to say the least. The article has been reworded correctly and the history is as per the company - look at the pages for Atari and see if it is any different. I think not. Rarelibra 23:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First, I repeat, it's not "your" article. This originally caught my eye because I was searching for a list of Indian operators and you'd categorized Vanco as one, but now it's on my watchlist and I'll stick around until I'm happy with it.

Second, the Atari article could hardly be more different! The history is told in full paragraphs instead of bullet points, listing both good things and bad things, covering the major people involved and with peeks behind the scenes. The Vanco stuff, on the other hand, is as you yourself say "as per the company" and doesn't contain a single dissenting or unflattering comment. (Incidentally, have Vanco's PR flacks given you permission to relicense great big slabs of [1] as GFDL?)

And rest assured, if I was being mean, I'd create an article on gay porn star Ludomir Vanco just so I could add a disambig to the front of this article :P Jpatokal 04:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am done dealing with you - especially with such phrases as "PR flacks", and "I'll stick around until I'm happy with it." I really don't care if you're happy or not, but you will respect progress with an article rather than the moves you keep doing. Rarelibra 14:04, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you wish. The "History of Vanco" section is now listed on Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Jpatokal 14:46, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And deleting it from there is not very good form. I repeat: do you have Vanco's permission to relicense their content as GFDL? If you wish to rewrite the history in your own words, great, but that should be done on the temporary page so the infringing history of the original page can be deleted by an admin. Jpatokal 16:03, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mean to burst your bubble, but parts have been properly sourced and rewritten. Other parts that are fact can be taken from public sources for quoting history. Rarelibra 16:18, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This company has just gone bust I think, shouldnt the article reflect this? The CEO was just fired. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.18.227.182 (talk) 22:34, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The company didn't "go bust"... yes, the CEO stepped down. Be careful how you attempt to phrase things. Rarelibra (talk) 01:55, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Technically you are correct Vanco has not gone "bust". However its shares have been suspended on teh stock market pending a review of its assets, financial profictability and accounting standards. Vanco have stated that they will not be able to produce audited accounts for their financial year ended 31 January 2008 by the legally required deadline of 31 May 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.42.121 (talk) 02:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cisco became more standard in around 97-98 - not as ealrier as 95 that you state. in 95, IP routing was not as prevalent, so much was IPX routing, X.25, SNA, Decnet etc, Vanco typically used Satelcom devices for this. Cisco became more common when IP became more common for businesses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.66.204.12 (talk) 12:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Article title

Is this article about Vanco, as it appears to be, or the seemingly unconnected Global Cloud Exchange? It either needs to be moved (subject to notability criteria) or the connection between the two made clear. Philg88 ^♦talk 22:13, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Global Cloud Xchange. 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, 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) 03:48, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 14 external links on Global Cloud Xchange. 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, 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) 21:40, 11 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]