User talk:XTerminator2000/Sandpit/Telkom SA

Official Telcom Comment

Telkom has its own website that includes all relevant information regarding Telkom as a company. With respect to the information contained at Wikipedia, as it is a free site, information is collected from a range of 'sources" [sic] and it is not Telkom policy to track the world wide web [sic] with regard to information published about it.

-- Lulu Letlape, head of communications for Telkom, Mail & Guardian online: Can you trust Wikipedia?, Elvira van Noort, Johannesburg, South Africa, 07 November 2005 09:13.

That can hardly be considered objective - unless of course Telkom opens up their website for public editing. Silver Surfer 14:02, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Poor Service

This is an incredibly biased page. I also have my reservations about Telkom, but the anti-Telkom sentiment has no place in an encyclopedia, let alone dominating the entire article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.209.97.34 (talk • contribs) 06:29, 22 May 2005

This is an incredibly generous page given Telkom's attitude and gross inabillity to render acceptable service to their clients. Their high prices and low levels or service still secured in excess of 4 billion ZAR net profit for 2004. Yet they keep reducing their workforce by 10% every year and leave hundreds unemployed. The author tried to convey a very balanced view of the situation but failed to capture the severity of the economic hurdles that Telkom has created in its many decades as a monopoly. Recently Telkom employed "bully boy" tactics and threatened to cancel its ADSL service all together and stop development if their unique double line rental pricing structure is hamperred by the appointed independent regulator ICASA.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Cobuss (talk • contribs) 01:42, 16 September 2005

Fair comments. I wrote/improved most of the body text for the telkom article about four months ago, and I could neither find sufficient (and non-libelious) evidence to support such claims in a fair manner, nor word such an argument in a non-point of view manner.

Maybe write an 'Abuse' section for the page, and dump it in the discussion talk page, so it can be hacked a bit and commented on,

- Dave 196.2.120.110 23:12, 18 October 2005

AntiTelkom sentiment

Would it be possible to add a section to this effect. The presence of Helkom and antiTelkom links tips us off that there is such a feeling. The sub heading would probably be more objective if titled Public Opinion. I'm unable to write the section since I am in no way neutral about Telkom. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.54.202.234 (talk • contribs) 02:58, 8 November 2005

Is it possible to have a "public opinion" section?

You could rename the "Critisism" section - Public Opinion sounds more NPOV. Make sure it is not your opinion - Wikipedia does not like original research. Wizzy…☎ 12:15, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup

In a drive to further validate all articles of South African content (and the addition of new ones), I am suggesting that this page undergo a cleanup. With expansion and a more NPOV, this article stands to be Featured. I will, in the meantime, conduct further research into Telkom and flesh this article out somewhat. Please let me know if we should tag this article as such. Ssteedman 12:52, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it! The SA articles certainly need work... Mikker ^(...) 02:49, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions:

The "currency conversion" are problematic.
Use inline citations. Shawnc 10:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Telkom's new capping policy

I think that Telkom's new "relaxed" capping policy should be mentioned. Look here: TelkomInternet confirms new ADSL capping policy Laursch 22:35, 31 August 2006.

Not if you hear the stories of users who got threatening emails from Telkom telling them that their service would be suspended if they continually exceed their cap limit and that they should purchase "additional" bandwidth instead. Suggesting it to be merely for public image (as if anything could change that) and that they don't really want people to use it. It could just be rumours but Telkom has been known to use such tactics in the past.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 196.30.118.75 (talk) 10:37, 1 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Weasel word alert!

In the critisms section: "Call costs are considered to be high". The word 'considered' is a weasel word. Call costs are high. There is ample data to show they are, by any measure, increadibly so. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.96.5.126 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 9 October 2006

Fair enough but if that is so then there must be accredited books, studies news or academic websites that one can reference. Without a backing reference it is just an unfounded statement and a candidate for removal.

This is not a soapbox no matter what one thinks of Telkom

--Tiucsib 20:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Broadband internet

There seems to be relatively too much content related to broadband internet on this page. I think it to be summarised on the Telkom page, and the existing content split onto a new page linked using {{main|Broadband Internet in South Africa}} at the start of the section. Comments? Zaian 14:23, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. Wizzy…☎ 14:39, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would agree. The broadband industry is a separate point. Telkom is just one of the providers. Tiucsib 08:25, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup and Neutrality required

The article is really an article criticising Telkom. There is no balance to the article and it is certainly not NPOV

There is

no history
no Company description

In addition to this many statements are

emotive
cluttered with weasel words

Where criticism is relevant to the article then fair enough but it must be supported by references. There must be accredited books, studies or even news/academic/industry websites that one can reference. Without a backing reference it is just an unfounded statement and a candidate for removal. Wikipedia is not a soapbox no matter what one thinks of Telkom

I suggest that this be flagged for a lack of neutrality and that we discuss the cleanup on this TalkPage

--Tiucsib 20:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Probably a Telkom employee

Actually I am not a Telkom employee/contractor whatever, never have been, never will be. Happen to know a bit about the Tel co industry though.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a soapbox. Go to the Mc Donalds/Microsoft articles (companies that get panned all the time) and see the balance of the article. Most of it is historical and informational with a proportional amount on criticism. This is not a blog. For that go to http://www.myadsl.co.za. I go there frequently and I am not kind to Telkom. There is a right place for everything and this is not the right place for an anti-Telkom soapbox. Articles are meant to be factual and not emotional and should express a NPOV. Ask any of the Wikipedia mediators. Also argue against me by all means. However argue against my opinion as to what the article should contain. We may well agree on many points. PS -> And by the way please sign your posts. Tiucsib 08:21, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is really an article criticising Telkom. There is no balance to the article and it is certainly not NPOV

Im affraid the "checking for neutrality" is unneccessary. Dealing with it point for point: There is

no history
no Company description

-> this is not a question of neutrality but rather completeness

In addition to this many statements are

emotive

-> the only emotive words comes in the form of a pro-Telkom comment from the World Fact book. Further the criticism section indicates clear examples of criticism including criticism from the countries most eminent court

cluttered with weasel words

high cost is a statement of reality anything more is a euphemism and hence weasel word - weaselling out of the truth.

Subsequently I am setting the tag to a neutrality dispute. Paul Hjul 22:36, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--

I agree that this article has become full of much pointless weasel words. For one, 3G bundles and users decision to use them bears no relevance to "Telkom Broadband". As much as we all do not appreciate Telkom's business practice, we should not sacrifice information integrity to try and show the world this - the _facts_ should speak for themself! —Preceding unsigned comment added by ColinAlston (talk • contribs) 12:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

could someone please provide a link or at least some sort of reference regarding the story of the apparent advertisement in the Mail and Guardian regarding Telkom's poor service that was pulled out? It was placed under the Criticism section of the page. It'd be really useful for an assignment I'm working on but I'd need a proper reference to mention it. 137.158.152.206 (talk) 11:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)UCTcommercestudent (10apr2008)[reply]

Bandwidth & Data Volume

Bandwidth is used throughout the page where it should be Data Volume

I know that the "relaxed" usage on the page is commonly accepted in South Africa, but as Wikipedia is international, this is shabbly usage for an international audience and will cause confusion:

Bandwidth: a rate of data transfer, or bit rate, measured in bits per second i.e. how wide (fast) is your connection

When I as a South African speak to my international Open Source colleagues and say bandwidth is limited they correct my usage with varying degrees of politeness.

This is precisely the group of people who would care most about removing Telkoms' unfair control on access to information and communication at a reasonable price. {See Fiscal Drag}

RichEd (talk) 14:01, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fiscal Drag

I am not able to cite a reference, but I have been given comment from an International IT speaker that the unreasonably high cost of phone calls and internet access due to the Telkom monopoly "cause a fiscal drag on the South African economy of around 1.8 to 2%."

There is every reason then for the Wikipedia page on Telkom to accurately portray the organisation as expensive and controlling, but I agree that the current page however reads like a personal rant, and not a well researched article.

What about some language neutral information about the current pricing policy ?

Telkom drop the costs of international calls (where they face open market competition) and increase the costs of local land line calls - which in turn influences local cellphone call rates, and internet connection charges - yet they portray the overall price increases as balanced and reasonable.

This in my opinion contributes to the fiscal drag mentioned above, reduces opportunity for small business entrepreneurship, and inhibits job creation.

All crucial life influencing factors, all goals for the New South African economy, all dragged lower by a quest for profit.

RichEd (talk) 14:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]