Talk:Net neutrality

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Net neutrality article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4: 180 days

Business Mid‑importance

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles 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.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet Top‑importance

	Internet portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Internet 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.InternetWikipedia:WikiProject InternetTemplate:WikiProject InternetInternet articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet culture High‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture 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.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles

High

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

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Telecommunications High‑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
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Net neutrality was copied or moved into Quality of service with this edit on 4 December 2008. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization:

Marv Dealy (25 August 2006). "Recent Windows update a real bugger/Byte by Bite". The Union Democrat.

Net neutrality by country source and potential COI

Wikipedia has policies against self-promotion as described at WP:COI. In the edit

special:diff/1071564145/1071652801

new user Thgarrett added a new academic article as a citation to an unsourced statement. This is that users first and only edit. The lead author of that paper is Thiago Garrett, which is likely that same user. Experienced article reviewer MrOllie reverted the edit at

special:diff/1071652801/1071653370

because of self-promotion.

I get the fear, because in 999 out of 1000 cases, people who cite their own articles are doing so to spam citations in places where they do not fit. In this case it seems to fit. I do not regret MrOllie's revert because we have so few academic editors, but I think we are good here. I am reverting the revert pending discussion.

The citation works in this case, right? Thgarrett it would be helpful if you cite your own articles in the future if you added a bit of description about yourself to your userpage. Wikipedia is under constant attack and misconduct and briefly identifying your editing interests helps. Bluerasberry (talk) 18:57, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I'm the first author of that paper. I apologize for the inconvenient, I'll pay attention to the rules next time. About the citation, I planned on adding a paragraph (and the reference to the paper) to the page Net_neutrality_by_country, since I believe it is highly relevant for that particular page. However, I'm not sure this would adhere with the COI rules. I would appreciate any feedback. Thgarrett (talk) 20:28, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The recommended practice is to propose the change on the article's talk page instead of making it yourself when you have a COI. If it is a low traffic page, you can draw attention by using the {{requestedit}} template (click on the link for instructions). - MrOllie (talk) 20:38, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Ambassador Program course assignment

This article is the subject of an educational assignment at Michigan State University supported by WikiProject United States Public Policy and the Wikipedia Ambassador Program during the 2011 Spring term. Further details are available on the course page.

The above message was substituted from {{WAP assignment}} by PrimeBOT (talk) on 15:56, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

is "poor people" really an appropriate term to describe people who may not be able to afford internet access??

Currently in the first section of the article it says "Opponents of net neutrality argue that it reduces investment, deters competition, increases taxes, imposes unnecessary regulations, prevents the Internet from being accessible to poor people, prevents Internet traffic from being allocated to the most needed users, that large Internet providers already have a performance advantage over smaller providers, and that there is already significant competition among Internet providers with few competitive issues."

Is "poor people" an appropriate term. Should there be any changes to the article to make it sound less offensive to some people? Blindroses (talk) 18:54, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

European Union missing in content

The Open Internet Regulations in EU are highly relevant for this page and should be described and referred to. [1]https://www.berec.europa.eu/en/open-internet/all-you-need-to-know-about-the-open-internet-rules-in-the-eu 192.176.1.79 (talk) 12:51, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Major cleanup of article

Will be summarizing a lot of content (putting some context in the citations) and deleting unreliable sources. Any help/commentary welcome

Superb Owl (talk) 01:47, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The section on "Supporter argue vs. critics argue" is weak and doesn't have citations. It reads more like "here's what I think its supporters argue vs. critics argue." There are plenty of good sources in which people advocate for and against net neutrality and I think those could be cited here. Isafic (talk) 02:44, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have so far worked this article through Net neutrality § End-to-end principle as part of my User:Kvng/RTH project. I started 15 May 2023‎ so, slow going. Help would be appreciated as long as your idea of cleanup is not delete all unsourced material. ~Kvng (talk) 16:02, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to help with this article. My feeling is that for unsourced claims, especially under the arguments for/against sections, it would be prudent to first search for a source that may back the claim listed. If no such source can be found, the point can be removed, in my opinion. I agree with Kvng that we should not just delete all unsourced material, but there are certainly points in this article that don't hold up.

Isafic (talk) 07:58, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you can produce some better sourced material to replace the unsourced, you're welcome to toss the unsourced without much analysis. It's the, "this is shite and needs to go" that can be unproductive. ~Kvng (talk) 13:41, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]