Talk:IEC 60870

	Engineering portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Electrical engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Electrical engineering 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.Electrical engineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Electrical engineeringTemplate:WikiProject Electrical engineeringelectrical engineering 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.

I'll add a few more lines on the companion standards; mentioning their names doesn't tell anything. - HaPi

La page "http://www.kalkitech.com/iec.htm" donnée en lien dans l'article est signalée comme malveillante : http://safebrowsing.clients.google.com/safebrowsing/diagnostic?client=Firefox&hl=fr&site=http://www.kalkitech.com/iec.htm Cependant comme la page "http://www.kalkitech.com/protocolgateways.htm" ne semble pas l'être je ne sais pas s'il s'agit d'un faux positif. --80.78.0.137 (talk) 07:19, 1 June 2010 (UTC)K[reply]

High school French was a generation ago, but that and Google Translate says that the above is telling us about a malicious Web site. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:45, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge[edit]

Instead of a fleet of context-free stubs, let's have one stronger article that actually explains the topic, instead of a bunch of random phrases in standards-ese. How would one explain this to a barmaid, or at least someone who wasn't a lifetime member of mulitple IEC standards committees? --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:55, 10 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, merged, and it's still no good. Could someone please explain why anybody should care about this without sinking into a mess of acronyms and standards-ese ? --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:39, 12 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have moved the IEC101/103 & 104 to separate single page IEC 60870-5-10x as 60870 also contains details of TASE 1.0 and 2.0. Also provided the link of main articles here.Fahidka (talk) 13:48, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]