Talk:Videotelephony

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Videotelephony 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: Index, 1: 90 days

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.

Disability

Videotelephony is within the scope of WikiProject Disability. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.DisabilityWikipedia:WikiProject DisabilityTemplate:WikiProject DisabilityDisability articles

Other talk page banners

This article has previously been nominated to be moved.

Discussions:

Not moved, 7 May 2022, to Video conference, see discussion.
Not moved, 9 July 2023, to Video call, see discussion.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Trump at videoconference.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 23:13, 12 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Room220.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:22, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 7 May 2022[edit]

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) -- Vaulter 13:44, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Videotelephony → Video conference – This (and videoconferencing for the technology) is the most common expression for this kind of meeting (and this article needs to talk about more than the technology) and is much more common than videotelephony. (See edited beginning for frequency source.) The article was moved without a discussion and apparently without any research. Espoo (talk) 14:27, 7 May 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. 晚安 (トークページ) 16:11, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a contested technical request (permalink). GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 17:27, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest that this should be discussed. The proposer says there was an undiscussed move, but I don't see any record of that, and the most frequent term in the ngram result that the proposer just added to the top of the article is different from what they are proposing. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:15, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The undiscussed move/merge is mentioned on the talk page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Videoconferencing#Proposal_to_archive_and_rewrite_this_article of videoconferencing. And I already explained why the second most common Ngram result is what we want: Video conferencing for the technology and the more inclusive term video conference are the most common expressions for this kind of meeting, and this article needs to talk about more than the technology. --Espoo (talk) 06:17, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The merge proposal template pointed to Talk:Videotelephony#Awkward distinctions and proposed rearrangement rather than that section. Ping @Beland, who performed the merge. Nardog (talk) 09:08, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So there was apparently a merge, not a move, and it was discussed on the article's Talk page, and it was five or six years ago. That seems like a situation that should not be overturned by a "technical request" without a discussion. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 15:10, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Nardog (talk) 15:11, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose/confused for now. Surely you don't call a one-to-one video call a video conference, do you? Nardog (talk) 09:08, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I personally do, but not sure how common that is in practice. -Kj cheetham (talk) 10:12, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, but unsure of best title. We're looking for an umbrella term, which is not necessarily the most common. The article itself says "Videoconferencing implies the use of this technology for a group or organizational meeting rather than for individuals, in a videoconference." and has a citation to back that up. So that term doesn't seem to naturally cover person-to-person smartphone calls. Does "videotelephony" cover video communication without the use of a telephone, such as with dedicated hardware or two web browsers? I'd say it's not a natural fit, but we still do call browser-to-browser communication a "video call". Perhaps something more generic like "video telecommunications"? Or less formal like "video call"? Even when you're participating a video conference you're still "on the call". -- Beland (talk) 17:13, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Video call is the only natural, precise choice Red Slash 20:56, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Video call as the best choice for readers to identify. 𝖿𝖾𝗆𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗌𝗍 (talk) Слава Україні! 11:31, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, since "conference" may imply group use rather than individual use. The current title seems fine as a general term that encompasses group-use systems, individual-use calling apps, "telepresence" variations, and systems that operate with a "shared space" rather than a "call". Also, "videoconferencing" is more common in the ngram results than "video conferencing". Also oppose Video call, since that seems to change and narrow the scope. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 17:44, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose not all uses of videotelephony are for videoconferencing. Indeed, most of the time is is a one-on-one call, so not a conference. And who calls their Skype, Facetime call with their grandparent a conference?-- 65.92.247.17 (talk) 03:13, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 9 July 2023[edit]

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) – Material Works 15:10, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Videotelephony → Video call – Contemporary term, analogous to "Telephone call"; also supported in a previous related move request. fgnievinski (talk) 14:37, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose This isn't about a phone call / video call, this is about the technology. Telephony is different from Telephone or Telephone call ;; similarly with videotelephony. -- 67.70.25.80 (talk) 23:27, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We already have the articles Telephony and telephone call. This might just need a separate article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:04, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.