Talk:INSTEON
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Copyright
We hold the copyright to this material and grant permission to use this material under the terms of the Wikipedia license.
Mike (sig added by Cburnett, please type ~~~~ to add it in the future)
[edit] Cleanup
Thanks Mike for the start on the article. However, it needs to be cleaned up to be much less like an advertisement ("Reliability is a hallmark of INSTEON Networks." is a prime example) and more of an encyclopedia entry:
- Remove marketing POV
- Link in other articles
- Use the standard article format (External links, see also, an intro that explains what INSTEON is to someone who's never known about it or any buzzwords relating to it)
Cburnett 05:18, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)
Please do not add commercial links or links to your own private websites to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. If you feel the link should be added to the article please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thanks.
Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox
[edit] Warning messages
Hiya, I just added a couple of NPOV warnings to the page, and removed their company banner from the top, since the article does smell very much like advertising. However, I would vote in advance that it should not be deleted or removed, but re-edited (maybe totally re-writen) with an NPOV. --Tyr 80.195.231.235 11:20, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Transclusion of competing technologies
I have created Template:Wireless competitors which came from the entry for ZigBee, and am inserting the reference to that template into all the entries that it includes; this should create a fairer, more neutral, and automatic inclusion of all references to all of the competing wireless data networking schemes, whether it's wifi, bluetooth, X10 or whatever. If there's a new one or a better description, it can just be added to the template (or the template changed to update the information) and thus all the competitors have the same reference. Paul Robinson 13:55, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] cleanup
paul - good table, do you have any more suggestions in order to make this article better?
[edit] Editing changes
Hi, per the warnings and suggestions, I edited the opening paragraph and tried to remove the marketing POV, as well as adding a sentence explaining what INSTEON is to someone who has no idea about this type of technology. Please let me know if the changes are sufficient or if I need to do more. thanks. --Mpleasant 19:00, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] More of the same
Mpleasant reverted my rewrite of the beginning of the article without specifying why. I brought this to his/her attention on their talk page but ve did not respond (it has been 24 days). I am cutting and pasting my original rewrite. I sincerely hope that Mpleasant will join the discussion on this page. In case it is not clear, I feel that the intro is written in purple marketing speak, without addressing the technology's predecessor X10. Codeczero 00:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Advert, again
This article reads like an advertisement to me, and I've tagged it as such. If there are many good things to say about INSTEON, please find a good source and cite it. There are currently zero sources for the content of this article. --AbsolutDan (talk) 03:57, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Advertisement, NPOV, Sources
I have added sources and some additional information from the INSTEON.net and SmartLabs Pages. I also included some information from a PDF about INSTEON which is accessible via the link provided. Hopefully this clears up the lack of sources etc. I also tweaked a few things that sounded a little advertiserish. Please keep in mind that because I work for/with the inventors of this technology, it is hard for me to keep a NPOV. If anyone has any information regarding INSTEON from an outside source please add. Mpleasant 22:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Data in the table is incorrect
As many others have noticed, this looks like an advertising page. Additionally, the facts in the table are incorrect. ZigBee, for example, uses 16-bit addressing (64K unique addresses) in each of 16 channels. See, for example http://www.zigbee.org/en/about/faq.asp.
---
I've noticed it mentions 24bit address which provides for an "unlimited" number of devices. This would actually limit the number of devices to 2^24, (or about 16.7 million) which would be consistant with a generic IP such as 24.x.x.x.
Jarod (talk) 13:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] 110 vs 220 V
Is all of this available on both 110V and 220V networks? Or is this a USA-only system? -- Michael Janich 08:13, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Introduction is too long
The introduction is too long. The list of "features" in the introduction belongs in the article's body. Introductions need to be meaningful and concise. --KJRehberg (talk) 17:55, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Removal of the tags
I have become an INSTEON enthusist, and agree that they needed to cite more references. I hope I did everything right, I tried to take each issue nad fix it to the best of my ability. Any question, feel free to ask. Any fixes I need to make, also let me know. I will monitor my talk Back :)
