Jump to content

Talk:Optus

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

iTWire is about to move from ".com.au" to ".com" can we change the link by simply removing the ".au" thanks --Paulhosking (talk) 20:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Parts of this page need a rewrite to eliminate slang. For example, the use of the term 'killer application' in the section on Optus' Fibre and Coax network. --Lei, 23 June 2007

Uecomm is also a wholly owned subsidiary of Optus.. http://www.uecomm.com.au/ this should be added? (--unknown user)

This page needs some significant corrections and updates. For example, I'm pretty sure Optus' first product was mobile telephony services, via resale of Telstra's AMPS network. Also it would be nice to get a more accurate date of their inception - I've only just corrected this from "1980's" to "1990's". The Communications in Australia article actually has a significantly more complete and accurate account of Optus' early history than appears on this page.

There's no mention of their former XYZed business (now fully merged), providing business xDSL services via their own DSLAMs in Telstra exchanges, nor the current rollout of newer DSLAMs to provide retail and wholesale residential ADSL and telephony services. This is quite significant to both the company and the telecommunications environment in Australia generally. Also no mention of Southern Cross Cable, of which they own some 40%.

Meanwhile what's listed as "subsidiaries" are mostly now fully integrated into the company, giving an inaccurate impression.

I'll try to do a little research first to get the right story before updating.

--Rob.au 17:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have since added new sections on Infrastructure and Subsidiaries to address the most glaring issues. What used to be labelled "Subsidiaries" I've renamed to "Overview" for the time being. Some of it is now redundant... the most coherent future I can think for it is a brief overview of the services provided... although you'd want to avoid advertising.

--Rob.au 15:28, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consistency with Telstra and Vodafone, etc

[edit]

Who thinks that this page should be in the same style as Telstra and Vodafone? Tri400 18:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is interesting to note that the talk page of Telstra repeatedly has comments that refer to the Optus page as a good example of a good NPOV article - with several editors calling for the Telstra page to be more like the Optus one. -- Rob.au 11:49, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shut up Optus fan boy. 60.230.216.163 (talk) 13:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OPEL broadband network

[edit]

any info on Madame Coonan's OPEL network? Tri400 17:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. I've created a main article under OPEL Networks and added references here. -- Rob.au 14:49, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Company Name vs Trading Name

[edit]

Just to comment on some recent edits to the company name. There is no such thing as "Optus Pty Limited".

The company name is SingTel Optus Pty Limited, but certainly it trades under the name Optus or 'yes' Optus.

This encyclopedia article appears under the name "Optus" and most references through the article also refer to simply "Optus", appropriately enough. But in terms of the infobox and the introduction, it is appropriate to reference the formal company name - one which is also well known and often used, especially in financial/business news reporting. Given this formal name has notability in its own right, it should appear in the article.

One thing which should not appear is a name which just isn't right at all. -- Rob.au (talk) 13:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The legal registered name is "Singtel Optus Pty. Ltd." (http://www.search.asic.gov.au/cgi-bin/gns030c?acn=052_833_208&juris=9&hdtext=ACN&srchsrc=1) and "Optus Pty. Ltd." is a deregistered company (http://www.search.asic.gov.au/cgi-bin/gns030c?acn=053_171_654&juris=9&hdtext=ACN&srchsrc=1). The ASIC website makes this clear. Optus does *not* trade under the name "Optus Pty. Ltd.", but as Rob.au points out does not use the Singtel name in Australia for trading purposes.
Therefore, where this article refers to "Optus Pty. Ltd." it's simply wrong and this should be changed. References to "Optus" or "yes Optus" (i.e. without Pty. Ltd.) are fine and can stand.
I'm a little bemused to find that this factual correction seems to be the subject of a mini edit war! --MarkPos(User Page | Talk | Contribs) 13:22, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Under further investigation its official Company name is Optus Australia Pty Ltd, I will make changes Tomau (talk) 13:07, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Optus has never been known as Optus Australia Pty Ltd, as can be easily confirmed by anyone searching the ASIC register. -- Rob.au (talk) 14:41, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are many associated and sister companies that Optus acts as an agent for. Just have a look at an Optus bill and you will see. I know that I'm paid by Optus Administation Pty Ltd. 121.209.51.180 (talk) 12:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

History

[edit]

Nothing in the history about Optus being the major sponsor of the Australian Rugby League premiership(s) for a time. I believe teams competed for the 'Optus Cup'. Worthy of a mention?--Jeff79 (talk) 09:30, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not entirely convinced a short-lived sponsorship arrangement from over a decade ago is notable enough to be worth mentioning on the Optus page, but there's certainly Google results for it and existing mentions on Wikipedia - Winfield Cup, David Zdrilic, Western Reds, List of New Zealand Warriors results, South Queensland Crushers, Mark Hughes (rugby league) and Australian Rugby League season 1997 all reference the Optus Cup. Personally I think it has more significance to the sport than it has to Optus. -- Rob.au (talk) 09:20, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Just figured it was part of the company's history so belonged in the 'History' section of the company's article.--Jeff79 (talk) 06:53, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Abysmal 3G network

[edit]

I think there needs to be a section on Optus's abysmal 3G network and the significant media attention it has gained in the last year or so, especially since the iPhone came out. Endless user complaints about poor reception, if they can get reception at all. And the endless network outages last year.

Slow Optus credits iPhone 3G users for woes - http://www.smh.com.au/news/digital-life/smart-phone/slow-optus-credits-iphone-3g-users-for-woes/2008/08/15/1218307197759.html

Optus 3G mobile phone network has 'issues' - http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24112082-2,00.html?from=public_rss

Is the Optus 3G network stretched to breaking point? - http://apcmag.com/another_unlimited_callsinternet_deal_but_can_optus_cope.htm

Optus 3G network goes down - http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24545587-15306,00.html

Optus 3G falls into black hole - http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/09/23/1221935603550.html

Optus 3G mobile network paralysed - http://www.australianit.news.com.au/story/0,24897,24112301-15306,00.html

Optus 3G network faces outage for the fourth time in Australia - http://wirelessfederation.com/news/optus-3g-network-faces-outage-for-the-fourth-time-australia/

Optus 3G network down again? - http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;1218588607;fp;39;fpid;26733

59.167.191.106 (talk) 09:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this would be in keeping with the requirement of WP:NPOV. The earlier dated articles do vaguely refer to a general problem, but then the problem seems to disappear without further explanation, making it difficult to provide neutral coverage of it. The later articles refer to a couple of isolated incidents - over which there is a question of notability. In the scheme of things, how significant have these events been to Optus considering telecomunications networks do suffer faults from time to time? Do their financial results show a significant loss of customers and/or revenue as a result? This would most certainly make it notable... but this doesn't appear to have been the impact.
"Wikipedia is not a news source: it takes more than just a short burst of news reports about a single event or topic to constitute evidence of sufficient notability."
Your section title, straight off the bat, suggests a WP:NPOV problem. -- Rob.au (talk) 10:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, no place for that section on the Optus page. 121.209.51.180 (talk) 12:35, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.cbronline.com/article_cg.asp?guid=A424DE21-CA27-40FE-8302-7D7B6FEF197D
    Triggered by \bcbronline\.com\b on the local blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 15:50, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Resolved This issue has been resolved, and I have therefore removed the tag, if not already done. No further action is necessary.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 00:12, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Vivid Wireless

[edit]

Why is there not even a single sentence about Vivid Wireless?

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Optus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:25, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Optus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:05, 24 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Optus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:59, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vivid Wireless

[edit]

The page Vivid Wireless redirects here but this page doesn't seem to contain any information about it at all. Tiggum (talk) 05:09, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Optus. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Money taking out my account

[edit]

Refund 2001:5B0:4BD1:42C8:49AC:73F2:1A08:3CF1 (talk) 13:54, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to reach octus 2001:5B0:4BD1:42C8:49AC:73F2:1A08:3CF1 (talk) 13:56, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Optus&oldid=1208357830"