Talk:O2 (UK)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the O2 (UK) 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

This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

United Kingdom

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Companies

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies 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.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany

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

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Telecommunications

	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.

Internet

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

Finance & Investment Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment 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.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Move request

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No conensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:33, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Telefónica O2 U.K. → O2 U.K. — As per WP:COMMONNAME. Gnevin (talk) 15:50, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article should be renamed "O2 U.K." per Wikipedia:MOS#Acronyms and abbreviations. -- [[ axg ◉ talk ]] 16:37, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support, WP:COMMONNAME is simply "O2". 81.111.114.131 (talk) 21:49, 4 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, This articles name should remain as "Telefónica O2 U.K." as abbreviating the articles name would contradict the Wikipedia:MOS#Acronyms and abbreviations "Do not use unwarranted abbreviations" section which states to "avoid abbreviations when they might confuse the reader, interrupt the flow, or appear informal or lazy." Renaming the article as "O2 U.K." would make the 'article appear informal and lazy', it would also 'interrupt the flow' as other subsidiary companies of Telefónica Europe are titled in the same manor, for example; "Telefónica O2 Ireland", "Telefónica O2 Germany", "Telefónica O2 Netherlands", "Telefónica O2 Czech Republic", and "Telefónica O2 Slovakia". "O2 U.K." is also the name used after it demerger from BT, so the renaming would also confuse readers. 86.129.198.91 (talk) 23:13, 4 April 2010 (GMT)
Comment. I was trying to close this but it is not clear that there is consensus. Also it is not clear that the proposed name is correct based on the arguments. The support opinions seem to be saying that O2 is the common name. If we accept that, then the article should be O2 (U.K.) or something similar since the common name is O2 and this needs to be disambiguated by country. So with these concerns, I am not able to close the discussion. Maybe additional comments will clarify what should happen here or maybe there really is no consensus. Vegaswikian (talk) 17:19, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Telefónica O2 U.K. → O2 (United Kingdom) — As per WP:COMMONNAME. Gnevin (talk) 02:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Support, Given the worst close ever above please move this per WP:COMMONNAME to O2 U.K.. A simple Google search will show the usage of O2 U.K.. Gnevin (talk) 02:01, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support, The website is o2.co.uk - not telefonicao2.co.uk. While it does acknowledge at the bottom of the page it is a telefonica company it is not the main brand name on the site - that is O2. noq (talk) 14:00, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done – Scott Bywater (talk); 19:00, 02 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

O2 launch date: 02/02/2002

The launch of O2 was actually 2nd February 2002 (02/02/02). Initially it was called MMO2 as O2 was owned by Oprah Winfrey. An undisclosed amount of money changed hands for the purchase of the name. No explantion of the meaning of the MM prefix was ever disclosed though it was thought to be Multi Media. A senior manager had the car registration MMO2GSM on his company car. A CEO put the registration M1NET (my net) on his company car. BTs Chairman Valance apparently took a dim view of this and had it removed! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.30.0.211 (talk) 21:28, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source? 86.129.254.98 (talk) 18:57, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Split O2 (UK) from Telefonica (UK)

O2 is no longer Telefonica UK's only network now that giffgaff exists. Should the merge be undone? I came here to find out about Telefonica UK, not O2. Brightonjon (talk) 18:21, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

O2 runs its own network. Telefonica owns O2. GiffGaff is a reseller like Tesco etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.152.46 (talk) 21:55, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. O2 is Telefonica UK. It's not Telefonica UK's only network because O2 is Telefonica UK. giffgaff is owned by Telefonica UK (they're a subsidiary) just like Tesco Mobile. Davwheat (talk) 19:44, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved as proposed. SST flyer 14:55, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

O2 (United Kingdom) → O2 (UK) – Should use acronyms as disambiguators according to MOS:ABBR. 2A02:C7D:564B:D300:652A:F88B:22C7:5F60 (talk) 16:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support: as for consistency. DaltonCastle (talk) 21:29, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. Unreal7 (talk) 10:23, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

This article reads like a PR job for O2

Seriously. Boscaswell talk 10:51, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cellnet formation and start date

Cellnet was the network name for TSCR Ltd. It was created in 1984. Cellnet went live on 10th January 1985. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.111.152.46 (talk) 21:52, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Big gap at the end of the 'Sale attempts' sub-heading

In my opinion, the big gap at the end of the 'Sale attempts' sub-heading in the article should be removed as it looks strange seeing such a big gap in my opinion. Xboxsponge15 (talk) 15:35, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. --Wire723 (talk) 16:44, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Per minute call charge

When Cellnet went live on 10th January 1985 it was 50p per minute, not the £1 per minute as in article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.6.108.20 (talk) 17:35, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a reference for that? TBH (and this is proper original research) ISTR that my 1986 Cellnet phone was 25p/minute in most of the country, but 50p/minute inside the M25. I know they had the dual-charging, but I'm not so sure on the actual amounts. 10mmsocket (talk) 22:30, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:BRD

I have changed an eight word piped blue link twice, now (one, two), both with appropriate edit summaries. The blue link, as-was, showed the words United Kingdom linked, which is contrary to WP:OLINK. The reverter Dash9Z is invited to explain the rationale (for highlighting United Kingdom in this way) here. Thank you.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 12:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]