Talk:TracFone Wireless
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] questions
[[|]]<--- What is this? PrometheusX303 22:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC) I dunno 156.3.163.99 15:27, 23 April 2007 (UTC)And i've got no freakin idea. Masterhand10(Talk)(Contributions) 03:43, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] strange characters at beginning of article
Originally the article had a link to an image of the Tracfone Company Logo. Apparently someone took out the image link but did not save the edit correctly.
Added a link to allow people to text message a Tracfone http://www.jasonholm.com/tracfone.html Jsholm 13:58, 4 June 2006 (UTC)jsholm
There is now a second group arrested on terrorism charges for buying 1000+ phones. I also added one reference on the lawsuit regarding unlocking phones. References for some of the other claims would be nice.
- charges were dropped. they were highly improbable in the first place. The case is becoming more about the pitfals of racial profiling. tracfone is actually the most difficult mobile to use for detonators since if you do not activate the handset with the original sim you can't without a lot of reprogramming -- more than any other brand. in this case the sims and batteries were removed. it is also obviously not useful to have battery removed on a "detonator."
- it is also important to note there was a very big tracfone promotion that week, and that many web dealsites noted the phones were worth in cash double the sales price.
- There is no serious terrorism suspicion case were the FBI and federal authorties would not have taken custody. But the FBI gave the guys a short interview and left. It took a while for the local prosecuter, but he dropped the charges today. IDD55 06:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
Put my link to http://www.jasonholm.com/tracfone.html back on. There were no notes as to my this working link was removed. Jsholm 23:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)jsholm
[edit] Try Consumer Affairs.com
anyone know that tracphone is on the to 10 rogues list for bad company practices?
check "tracfone" at consumeraffairs.com
put it at the criticism section of the article
156.3.163.99 15:54, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Created Customer Service problems section; Added link to information on class-action lawsuit
I forgot to create an edit summary for my recent changes, so I wanted to mention them here in the discussion. Yesfan001 14:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Update needed!
the official tracfone logo is the one that is all capital letters with the same block font. It shows up on all newer phones and the current version of the website.
Can someone please change the logo.
Masterhand10(Talk)(Contributions) 20:25, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
FINE. I'll DO IT. I hope you like the results. Masterhand10(Talk)(Contributions)
[edit] Net 10
What is the distinction between Net 10 and Tracfone?John celona 23:41, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
The main distinction is that tracfone has it's rates at about $0.33 a min. and Net10 has their rates at 10 cents a minute But tracfone has long service times and net 10 has very short service times, they both have the same lineup of phones because they're both the same company. Masterhand10(Talk)(Contributions)
please if someone is trying to explain the differences between tracfone and net10 please dont remove the information, imvoxianImvoxian 00:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] about the double minute card feature
Tell me if this encyclopedic material: the Double minutes for life feature lasts until the date you add it upon in the year 2050. I learned this off one of the trac service reps whe i called to ask about it. If it is, it should be put in the article Masterhand10(Talk)(Contributions)
--69.123.165.15 02:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)== Unlocked Phones on TracFone network ==
Is there any reason one couldn't put a TracFone SIM into a standard unlocked TriBand phone? Mathiastck 07:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
yes, tracfones have special software preloaded at the factory and to use the tracfone service, you need Trac units on the phone and unlocked phones dont have that. Masterhand10(Talk)(Contributions)
Most of the time such software is stored on the SIM card. Most phones are designed to use pay as you go service based on instructions from the SIM, and with most companies it should automatically appear in the menu after insertion. I don't know if this works with TracFone, but I know it works with T-Mobile, O2, Virgin, Tesco, and Orange. It obviously wouldn't work with a CDMA phone though.--69.123.165.15 02:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] FUD
Do we really need the section on terrorism allegations to be here?
This seems more like unnecessary FUD. The title makes it look like the company was directly involved in these matters, when it's really about a separate group of people purchasing items from them. Are we going to start adding "terrorism allegations" sections to articles on corporations just because they sold something to a terrorist group?
I'm taking off the entire section, it serves no real purpose in this article.
Sykopomp 00:01, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Should links to various Internet talk groups be inclided?
There are several groups that discuss pre-paid cell phones in general, and some that discuss TracFone and Net10 in general. Should there be included in the external links page?
I could add the links, but I am trying to be polite first since I'm a new editor. I'm still getting used to general policies and practices; it's a _lot_ to wade through.
Let's see if the tilda signatire works.
Big Fat Hairy Dude (talk) 23:11, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
- Short answer; no. The policy about external links is that they should lead to material that is relevant, reputable and additional to what the page itself already has. The trouble about a talk group, and other similar web-sites, is that they're ultimately just a collection of opinions without anything to prove their accuracy or significance. Wikipedia is in general not interested in opinions unless they can be backed up by the contributor's notability and expertise. Talk groups don't tend to have this and policy says they should be avoided. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 23:56, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
That makes sense. Since I'm fairly new to editing Wikipedia, I'll defer to that, but I would still believe it would be useful information to include somehow. There is one group in particular, Tracfone_users@groups.yahoo.com, that presents a a variety of viewpoints. They have members who actively maintain databases of current airtime bonus codes, information about programming phones, and so forth. It also tends to be an up-to-the-minute source (sometimes literally) of various promotions on the TracFone site that are useful to those who use TracFones.
I am a major contributor to that particular group, so I am by definition biased. There are however other groups as well.
I participate in this particular group in large part because it _does_ tend to present various viewpoints, and is not just a bunch of flaming radicals out to convince the world that their and only their viewpoint is the Gospel Truth. For those of us who use TracFones extensively, portions can be considered authoritative, particularly when taken in aggregate form, although I doubt that authoritativeness meets Wikipedia's standards.
All of these groups are, however, a part of the TracFone "universe," and I believe they should be mentioned in a manner appropriate to Wikipedia. Perhaps new section or subsection stating that there are resources available for users of TracFones, and in that area listing groups that are available? For the purpose of people looking for information about TracFones including information about the existance of user groups will provide a richer and more complete picture of the topic.
Big Fat Hairy Dude (talk) 05:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
- Again, no. I don't mean to question either your, or your group's, knowledge or good intentions, but the policy still applies, for good reason. Another policy states that Wikipedia is not a web directory. Its main aim is not to be a place for links to other places, but to contain the knowledge itself. The purpose of external links are to content that simply can't be placed on Wikipedia (for copyright reasons, for instance), it shouldn't be used to link to stuff that could be just as easily added to the article, or stuff that is a repeat of what's already there. So the best thing you could do for this page, and Wikipedia, would be to contribute the knowledge you have to the article itself (preferably with good cites). --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:17, 21 November 2007 (UTC)
