Computing: Networking Template‑class

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This template is supported by Networking task force.

Internet Template‑class

This template 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 Template This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

created template to replace those already in existing articles. Improvements welcome.--SasiSasi (talk) 22:45, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It's misleading to put a logo in this template because network neutrality doesn't have an official logo. It's just a concept. The logo makes it seem like an official organization, which it is not. Plus, the logo that was in the template was ugly. I cannot think of anything of value that it added to entries covering net neutrality, so I removed it.--Chmod 777 (talk) 12:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The concept of aesthetic is totally personal. The logo has been there for a while and the community has allowed it to stay as it gives identity to the template. Thanks --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 17:14, 21 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'd favor removing the logo. I don't think it adds anything of importance, it is not widely recognized as being associated with Net Neutrality and would probably be non-neutral if it were recognized, it takes up space, and generally clutters things up. -Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 14:02, 14 April 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm the fifth editor on this page in favor of removing the image, and have now done so. The creator of the logo (@Camilo Sanchez:) is the only editor defending it, and he/she has re-added the logo six times, four of them without an edit summary. 201020102010201020112014. 83.226.255.86 (talk) 01:19, 1 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Camilo Sanchez: "The logo is being removed by editors that oppose NN. The logo had been in place for years" The only reason it has been in place is because you have added it back, despite overwhelming support not to include it. Not that is matters, but the image has not been in place longer than it has. We're not here to keep the status quo, and consensus can change. But it hasn't. You willfully edited against consensus by reinserting the image in 2011 (which was quickly reverted) and then again in 2014, that time also without any discussion. As the creator of the logo, you have an obvious conflict of interest and should not reverting good-fath editors in the first place. I do not known where Chmod 777, W163, Fram and Best Dog Ever stand in the matter, but accusing other editors of editing in bad-faith sure isn't helpful. 83.226.255.86 (talk) 16:32, 1 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Camilo Sanchez: For the record, I am in favor of net neutrality. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 12:26, 14 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I removed the logo again. --Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 12:35, 14 July 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A removal of an image on this template has been intended by a User with a long history of personal altercations and attacks towards my edits in Wikipedia. Any changes on an image that has been on an article for over 2 years requires at least a discussion on the talk page. As usual, decision should be reach on consensus . Thanks --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 20:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As can be seen above, I am the second user to attempt to remove this image. It has been created by Camilo Sanchez, who has quite a history of creating images (e.g. for countries and Europe) and trying to impose them on templates and articles. It is not the business of Wikipedia to create fancy logos to be used in articles (I don't care about portals, there user-generated images or headers may be very welcome). What is the purpose of having such a self-created net neutrality logo here? Fram (talk) 07:33, 23 March 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image has been used by major media organizations like PBS and CNN. Example Thanks --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 06:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Which is the problem. We create an image, and lazy journalists use our article and use our image as if it is anything official. Using this logo gives the impression that it is an official logo, while it is some fancy graphic with no history. It doesn't add anything to the articles it is used on, and can be misinterpreted as being an "official" net neutrality logo. Fram (talk) 07:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dude, are you in love with me or something? You have been chasing me over a year already. --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 17:41, 1 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Btw, what do you mean official? its a concept, there is nothing to be official about NN.--Camilo Sanchez (talk) 18:16, 1 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If network neutrality does not have a logo, then it should be removed from the template. This image has apparently confused at least one journalist. I know it confused me when I first saw it. I assumed that net neutrality was an organization. But then I researched it further and realized that it was not an organization. If we don't stop this right away, the logo could spread to other sites and begin confusing a lot more people.

On another note, why are there circuits in the logo? Network neutrality is about networks and neutrality, not computer circuits.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 20:31, 1 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

hmm..excuse me, but if you are talking networks, you are definitely talking computer circuits, unless you have found a complete different system to transmit pieces of data. --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 02:46, 2 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No--the Internet is a packet-switched network. The PSTN is a circuit-switched network. Why do I know this? Because I'm a certified network repairman. I'm certified by both Cisco and CompTIA to talk about these things. The only circuits in the Internet are virtual. Permanent virtual circuits are one example. Are they soldered onto printed circuit boards? No. They're constructed with cables.--Best Dog Ever (talk) 03:11, 2 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dude, relax, it's just a symbolic representation, not a detailed illustration. --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 04:33, 2 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

By the way this template is an example of a template having an image that conveys the identity of the concept. And I must add that the image has been here for over 2 years and nobody had a problem. this is just happening becuse user Fram is in love with me and loves chasing me around the wiki..thanks --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 03:03, 2 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I wasn't the first to object to this image, and you are now the only one defending your own image for this template, with three people opposing it. Consensus is against you, live with it. Fram (talk) 06:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey Fram, you are just not my type of man. So you live with it, stop chasing me around the wiki.--Camilo Sanchez (talk) 14:47, 2 June 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is it intended to add every country with a seperate article on net neutrality to the list in the template? --Jethrogb (talk) 00:28, 5 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]