User talk:ZipIt

hey ziplt, like your line about Marconi inventing wireless email! And I’m not trying to be funny! PDAgeek 00:45, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"They cannot only be credited with the creation of a great product but also as the product that made wireless data feasible and a must have for business" that might be pushing it a bit. What about Motorola’s long list of products – some handhelds before RIM. Or all the other’s that failed prior to internet popularity. What do you think? PDAgeek 13:24, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I generally agree but I still think made wireless data feasible is a little too over the top. How about the first to make handheld wireless data communications a commercial success. PDAgeek 21:01, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EKF/is_n2146_v42/ai_18948223

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=940CE5DA163FF934A35754C0A962958260

http://www.networkcomputing.com/606/606frezza.html

http://www.infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/00/06/27/000627hnhawkins.html

ok i'll do the rim edit - where's Royce?? I wonder if someone hacked his ID and page.

no i don't have his email - strange!?? PDAgeek 03:22, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you undo my changes regarding nicknames on the BlackBerry node? Ricmoo 20:42, 30 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I apologize for the incorrect data. I will re-add some of the data with the corrected model numbers. Ricmoo 00:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you had reverted my addition of this really interesting dissartation -- It's academic (of course) but really good on the history of mobile data & mobile phone and the forces behind with Mobitex as one of the systems investigated. Sven Lindmark: "Evolution of techno-economic systems (2002): an investigation of the history of mobile communications", ISBN 91-7291-194-8 — Do you care to share why you removed this addition? V29 16:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

well, the ISBN is not invalid but you can not find the book on Amazon. Try to locate it through a library at some university. I copied the Isbn from the library at chalmers.se & have proof-read it vs my physical copy — it's the same; btw: I have also been in this business for ages V29 08:47, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:BarrowCountyCourtHouse.jpg listed for deletion[edit]

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:BarrowCountyCourtHouse.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Ashley.farrow 01:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC) Ashley.farrow 01:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I feel Image:BarrowCountyCourtHouse.jpg was made obsolete by Image:Barrow_County_Court_House.JPG —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashley.farrow (talk • contribs) 01:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:BellSouthPager.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:BellSouthPager.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:BellSouthPager.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:BellSouthPager.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. 72.88.70.179 (talk) 03:13, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of File:DowntownWinder.jpg[edit]

The file File:DowntownWinder.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

unused, low-res, no obvious use

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:01, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of RadioMail[edit]

The article RadioMail has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lacks WP:SOURCES since 2012

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. CommanderWaterford (talk) 15:21, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]