Talk:Verizon Fios/Archive 1

Please go to

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:13, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

The section that starts "One misconception[citation needed] about FiOS's support for IPTV...." is confusing. Was this person talking about the QoS for VOD content vs that for streaming video from the general internet? Verizon give VOD content the second highest QoS (right behind VoIP), however both services do not travel over the internet, rather within Verizon's own routers. Perhaps this is what they meant, however poorly stated. As such, I have cleaned up the verbiage.

The second error states that PPV content is delivered over IP. This is completely false. The upstream signaling used to purchase PPV uses IP, but the content is delivered over standard broadcast frequencies, starting on channel 701. I have removed this and cleaned up the surrounding content.

The third error states "The optical signal is then coupled with the two other wavelengths passing data between the OLT and ONT." Only the 1490 is really combined at this point, since 1310 is being returned upstream from the ONT. So it is more accurate to say that 1310 is being split from this point, and not combined. This all takes place via the use of a WDM, so I have modified this as well. Toddyboy711 02:12, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

From a brochure I got from Verizon:

    1) How does one pronounce FiOS?
    It's pronounced f-eye'-oh-s and stands for fiber-optic service.

Apparently the current intro is wrong about the Irish word; I'm going to change it. CronoDAS 04:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

A quick Google reveals the following: Irish dictionary definition. Irish dictionary #2. It means knowledge. --Toddyboy711 04:38, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

As an Irish user, I can confirm this. The Irish version of the word is pronounced "fiss", like "fizz" but with the s sound from "hiss". Kupos 17:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

While the Irish or Gaelic word fios does mean knowledge, or knowledgeable, it is not associated with this company's service. In fact, it is associated with, by trademark, Fios, Inc., an electronic discovery service provider located in Portland, Oregon. The reference is not only incorrect, but in violation of the agreement between the two companies. FiosEDD 00:17, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

The United States Patent and Trademark Office begs to differ. http://www.uspto.gov/ - Registration # 3001081 and 3147510. There is no mention of any relationship with any company in Oregon. However, in both official government trademark filings, Verizon clearly states that "The English translation of FIOS is 'knowledge'." I don't see how anyone can dispute this. To the poster's creding, there are also multiple other filings for companies named "Fios" who offer a wide variety of products and services (including the Oregon company # 76066855). One is not to confuse the aforementioned company, nor a pillow case manufacturer in the UK (# 73437532), with having any relationship with Verizon. I searched the Fios, Inc. of Portland, OR website, and could not find any mention of any relationship with Verizon Communications. I did however find a reference (as if there were any doubt at this point) that further reinforces that fact that "fios" is Gaelic for "knowledge" http://www.fiosinc.com/about/background.asp -- (As a side note, filing # 77035330 defines "fios" as a Portuguese word meaning "cord" in English) Toddyboy711 06:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Something about local public, educational, government PEG channels could be related here with regard to FiOS TV... the zak 17:04, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

The line concerning the blocked ports for Residential service does not make sense, given the ports involved. A clarification is needed on this line, otherwise it will be dropped. A citation would help too. Brokenwit 03:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

The official TOS does not specify exact ports being blocked, however sufficient anecdotal evidence from various websites does suggest that at a minimum, outgoing port 25 and incoming port 80 are both blocked. The ports info doesn't seem appropriate lumped together with bandwidth info, so I broke it out in a new heading and added a reference to the VOL TOS. I am weary about the business info, someone needs to research this and add appropriate citations. Toddyboy711 16:24, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I removed the statement "This means that inbound port 80 (

SMTP) are blocked on dynamic residential and dynamic business accounts" and the associated link to a Broadband Reports FAQ. A third party FAQ is hardly solid evidence which "means" anything. Toddyboy711 (talk

) 00:33, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Does FiOS TV have any Public Access channels? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.67.35.214 (talk) 03:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

the fact that "fios" also happens to be an irish word shouldn't be included in the opening paragraph. it's irrelevant. it should be moved to another section or something129.64.143.32 (talk) 22:28, 28 April 2008 (UTC)jonah

I was told by customer service on 10/9/08 that an upgrade from 5/2 to 10/2 would cost me an extra $10.month, upgrades are not honored for current customers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rleyden (talk • contribs) 03:39, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Someone needs to explain in more detail what FiOS is rather than go on and on about what kind of service is available and where. This is an encyclopedia site, not a help page for Verizon. (Declair (talk) 00:33, 15 October 2008 (UTC))

acording to the dtv delay their licinse have been extended to broadcast analog stations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.242.125.149 (talk) 20:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

current Fios customer here, does anyone know if its normal that i get sub par dl speeds? is it possible its the server of the host that is too slow?98.117.133.68 (talk) 02:55, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

It could be the host. You can only download as fast as they can upload. FTR, you should probably take future questions to Verizon, not Wikipedia. ;) 71.187.32.39 (talk) 02:09, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

One of the things that drives me nuts about this service and similar services is that I can never find out with the true cost is going to be. In my experience, these things always involve connection fees, monthly unannounced costs (e.g. regulatory charges and taxes) and sometimes equipment rental or purchase costs. It would be awesome if this article stated what those additional costs are likely to be. philosofool (talk) 23:48, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

says it right here--98.113.233.136 (talk) 00:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Where should this info go? See-also links to new articles?

Adelphia's Extreme High-Speed Internet (Leesburg, VA) Cablevision's 100Mbps symmetrical data service (NY) SBC/Yahoo/AT&T's Project U-Verse (fiber to the node [2] [3] [4] )

• source article

Lightspeed is not and NEVER will be a competitor for FiOS, Verizon and ATT are both monopoly telelphone companies, telephone markets NEVER overlap. Either you will get FiOS one day or Lightspeed, never both. Patcat88 19:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

This is simply not true. The two companies can't offer circuit switched phone service in each others territory. In this respect, they are geographic monopolies regulated by PUCs and bound by federal antitrust laws. They can however extend non-regulated services, such at data, video, and VoIP. Verizon is already offering services to customers located in AT&T territory in TX. Here is one reference, you can google thousands more. Verizon Encroachment Toddyboy711 (talk) 05:30, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps we create a new category called Fiber Optic Broadband or Optical Broadband (or something similar) and then create initial separate stub pages for the Adelphia Extreme and the SBC Project Lightspeed. We can update those stubs as more information on the services becomes available.

Just a suggestion. -wadems 03:22, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

Looks like there's an Category:Optical fiber category now. Still no entries on Adelphia, Cablevision, or SBC's offerings. - Brewthatistrue

The AP link the article references on Verizon cutting copper cables is a dead link. Digg.com's article links to Yahoo news, but that article is down, too. In short, I can't find any reputable sources reporting the story. And that's strange, because it was all over the tech news last month. It seems very fishy to me, does anyone know anything about this apparent media blackout?

• There is no policy of pulling copper, infact they prefer to leave it there because if the customer pressures them into a rollback, it's more work to put in a new line. If the user's conduit is damaged, then the installers may be forced to remove it to place the fiber optic cable. Copper is usually CUT from the user's phone system because the ONT provides its own POTS, but the wire is still going from your house to the curb 99% of the time. This is the same stuff as the techs that accidentally set fire to a customer's house. Or the installers that hit a gas line while bringing new conduit to the customer's house. It's a construction project, and sometimes 'stuff' happens, no matter how careful you are.

Both working craft people and management types tell me bluntly that they are told to cut it down. Friends have attempted to keep their POTS copper but failed. The exception is certain services, such as FX and ISDN. I've added a link to 2007 House testimony that showed Tauke backpeddling on the issue.69.3.85.124 (talk) 21:33, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I found a live link to another newspaper that picked up the same AP story, and used that one. W Nowicki (talk) 23:09, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I believe we should restore a criticisms section. Verizon has been criticized for FiOS through multiple avenues including "cherry picking", ridiculously sized and uninterpretable billing statements, strange fees, construction methods, failing to follow up on deals (such as the infamous free LCD TV deal), etc. All of these are easily cited and publicly available. Therefore, for encyclopedic purposes, there is no reason such a section should not exist. ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ② ^talk 18:48, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

As an added note, cherry picking refers to the act of picking one neighborhood while refusing to build out in others. ⒺⓋⒾⓁⒼⓄⒽⒶⓃ② ^talk 18:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I think that a criticism section would be a great addition to the page. Where would this information on criticisms be? Also, do you have any other ideas for sections on the Verizon FiOS page? Andrew.prafder (talk) 18:04, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

This article needs to answer two questions:

1. What is FiOS, as opposed to other kinds of Internet service?

   Note that service providers have tried to make their product sound distinctive, even when it was really the same type of thing. For example, Sprint used to advertise its

   cell phone

   service as an "The clear alternative to cellular", implying that it was a means of communication other than [[[cellular service]]. This, of course, was misleading at best, and probably false. They sold cell phone service; the only distinction, if any, was the quality of the service.

2. How fast is it?

   I see units like

   Mbps and wonder how this translates into the only download speed I've ever used, i.e., kilobytes per second. I looked at an article describing communication units but I didn't find a conversion factor. Do we just divide by eight? --Uncle Ed (talk

   ) 14:08, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I like the idea about comparing FiOS to other services. What services do you think would be best to compare Verizon FiOS to? How do you think we should portray other companies? Andrew.prafder (talk) 22:00, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

You divide by 8 to convert megabits into megabytes and then multiple by 1000 to get kilobytes.

I.E; 10Mbps equals 1.25 MegaBytes = 1250 KBps

Yes, although download rate is not always up to the quoted downstream maximum bit rate, due to bottlenecks at other parts of the system. That is why I prefer to use the more precise terms, even if marketing often does not. See the #Too fast? section above too. W Nowicki (talk) 23:09, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Does anyone have any information about Verizon FiOS's financial progress? I think that would be good to add to the article. Andrew.prafder (talk) 22:49, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

The previous section has a link to the official SEC filings. For US companies at least, there are liability issues (at least in theory) that make such public documents reliable sources in my opinion, albeit not independent sources (see guidelines for that distinction). But it is the parent company as a whole that files those. This is not the Verizon article, but FiOS, so only FiOS content should be here not general company info. And the company has discretion on how it breaks down revenues and certainly profits, so there might not be much info in the 10-K about FiOS in particular, except the usual promotional boiler plate ("premier broadband and entertainment service provider" for example is clearly promotional language and does not belong). Also need to avoid jargon and paraphrase into normal English. W Nowicki (talk) 23:13, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

This WikiMedia map gives an idea.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/55/Fios_Availability.jpg

Someone with more tech chops than I needs to handle making it link right so the map appears.

Article needs to say where available in US, or point to page that does.

68.165.11.10 (talk) 21:40, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Probably not. See the previous debates on this. The image you point out is three years old by now anyway. Just go to the Verizon site to find out commercial information. We can add prose with citations about historic events (e.g. expansions in 2005-2008, selling off parts, etc.) with citations. W Nowicki (talk) 23:09, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree that there should be a detailed section about where Verizon FiOS's services are offered. I think this would greatly benefit this page by informing people if they can even receive the service in the first place. I have been looking for information about the availability of Verizon FiOS's services on my own. Would you be able to steer me in the right direction? Andrew.prafder (talk) 18:08, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

So it sounds like we disagree. The guidelines for Wikipedia are clear to me that it is not a place to promote a product or service. The company web page or sales department is a better place for that. As I tried to say, and information about availability will be dated anyway by the time someone reads the article since it changes from day to day. If there is still not agreement on the guidelines, we might need to broaden this to other experienced editors to see if such commercial promotion is really appropriate. W Nowicki (talk) 22:49, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Alas, it looks like the out of date map was added. Worse, an entire new section added that duplicates the existing availability section. It also uses an odd inconsistent citation format. Needs to be fixed. W Nowicki (talk) 23:39, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Should this be linked from the IPTV and / or Internet TV pages as well?? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPTV —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.44.172.15 (talk • contribs)

It appears to be linked now via the {{CATV}} tag. 71.103.114.42 19:13, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

It would be good having a link from IPTV since there are applications to view TV online and on mobile via a Verizon FiOS service. http://www.engadget.com/2013/06/11/verizon-fios-mobile-on-android/ BertramHarney (talk) 21:18, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

To the students editing this article as part of the course in Online Communities: this comment was left on the course talk page, but I felt it is more appropriate here so I moved it from there. LeshedInstructor (talk) 14:27, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I saw a

Verizon FiOS

page itself, so I've come here, hoping this is the correct place for this discussion.

I just want to mention the Northern Hemisphere bias that is evident in the notice added by this edit, through the mention of "Fall 2013". I'd like to point you and your students to this excellent essay about hemispheric bias. Please consider rewording your notice, and any other content you add as part of your project here, to include the rest of the world. I understand that Verizon is a US company, but Wikipedia as a worldwide encyclopedia isn't. :) AugurNZ ✐⌕ 23:15, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

This article was the subject of an educational assignment in Fall 2013. Further details were available on the "Education Program:Cornell University/Online Communities (Fall 2013)" page, which is now unavailable on the wiki.

We are going to edit this article as part of a class assignment. Here is the link to our class page. Education Program talk:Cornell University/Online Communities (Fall 2013)

We are looking to expand the Internet access section, the television section, and the telephone section. For the internet section, we are going to talk about the upgrades from DSL to fiber-optic as well as the new packages and prices. We are also going to break down the financial information of the company as well as the availability of the services.

We are also going to add a section on the history of the company and how it has progressed over time. We will show the changes in Internet speeds and how the company has grown to new markets. We are also going to add a section on its competitors and how Verizon has dealt with that. In addition, we will add a section on Verizon FiOS's advertising and marketing. We will also be adding a section on new products and future products.

Here are the links to our user pages

• Alex Meyers, IS (Will work on Internet, TV, and Phone)
• Doug Tesoriero, Comm (Will work on Competitors, and New Products)
• Andrew Prafder, ILR (Will work on History and Finances of the Company)

Here are some potential articles that we can use for our project.

• FiOS Quantum
• FiOS TV
• Info for FiOS Customers
• Verizon Company Overview including Finances

Niteshgoyalwiki (talk) 15:10, 1 October 2013 (UTC)Feedback from Niteshgoyalwiki (talk)

• Move the Template for Educational Assignment to the top of the Talk Page.
• Why work on History and Finances of the Company? This is about FiOS - not Verizon. So, you should focus on FiOS alone.
• There is good feedback below by other wikipedians. Please read and respond accordingly. I'd also suggest going to other wikipedians talk page and talking to them about it if you don't get responses.
• Nominate your article to did you know by the end of class on Oct 1.

Please be warned as above, that content that is unsourced or promotional in tone will need to be removed. It might be a good idea to study the guidelines first, which might save some time and frustration all around.

Wikipedia:Dated. ANother good exercise might be to go through all existing citations and make them more consistent. For example, convert them to use the US style of Month day, year format since the company is based in the US. Also the convention is to put new discussions at the end of talk pages, not the start. Thanks W Nowicki (talk

) 23:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Per this request on my talk page, here are some other things to keep in mind: Per

talk

) 01:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

• "we are going to talk about the upgrades from DSL to fiber-optic as well as the new packages and prices."

This worries me. Please read

Hi Liz. This was just a preliminary idea, and we will be sure not to include that information. As we have been learning more about Wikipedia in class, we have been learning about the do's and dont's of the website. We understand your concerns and will not include this information. Andrew.prafder (talk) 16:50, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Feedback from Prof. Leshed

• It seems that your project is underway and you are already getting ample feedback and discussions with other Wikipedians. Be sure to follow up from these discussions on improvements to the article.
• Make sure you have at least someone on your group who feels comfortable with the wiki markup language so you can "wikify" your edits, follow formatting, style and other Wikipedia standards.

Happy editing! LeshedInstructor (talk) 14:20, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Verizon currently covers the East Coast of the United States. AT&T covers the midwest and there is no service overlap for competing services. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.47.186.246 (talk) 03:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

This is a good point, but there are some overlapping features with Verizon FiOS. They have access lines that do cover not just the east coast. One thing that people do no realize is that FiOS covers rural areas to connect these rural parts with access lines. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cornellax16 (talk • contribs) 17:25, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

The group that edited the Wikipedia page for Verizon FiOS made a significant number of changes to the article. The group consisted of Andrew Prafder, Doug Tesoriero, and Alex Meyers. First, we evaluated the needs of the article, and then we divided up the work evenly, which allowed each member of the group to work on material that he felt comfortable with. Before editing our Wikipedia page on Verizon FiOS, we conducted a great amount of research in order to find the best articles possible. We made sure to avoid the Verizon website itself because it may have given the reader an inflated impression of the Verizon FiOS service. Many of the articles we used were from credible newspapers, including the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal; in addition, we found many articles from third-party sources that commented on the services of Verizon FiOS.

Our group divided the assignments into different sections. Andrew Prafder worked on the history of Verizon FiOS, its availability throughout the United States, and the criticisms it has received. Alex Meyers worked on expanding the sections on the television, phone, and Internet services. Doug Tesoriero worked on the sections on competition and the latest products and services that Verizon FiOS offers. Alex Meyers was the biggest asset in terms of collaborating with the Wikipedia language, as he was able to post the information in the most suitable manner for Wikipedia readers and editors. Our group was also responsible by formatting the article and making sure the text flowed smoothly. We added the history section and worked with other Wikipedia users to combine it with the availability section. This gave a great introduction to Verizon FiOS as a whole. We also added an image to show users the availability of Verizon FiOS in 2008 to give readers a good understanding of how much Verizon FiOS has grown since then. Throughout the article, we made sure to link to other Wikipedia pages of interest. For example, we showed that Verizon FiOS was first available in Keller, Texas, so we put a link to the page of that town.

In our opinion, we feel that we have added enough content to the Verizon FiOS page to make it a B-Class article. Originally, the article was missing some key aspects of Verizon FiOS and had some gaps in the article. There was no history section of the article, and by adding it, it gave the article more flow and depth. There was also no information about the criticism of the services, which many Wikipedia editors felt was needed. Now, the article is much more substantial and has a great amount of additional information. We have added a great amount of additional references, which are properly cited throughout the article. We have revised the article for grammatical errors, and now the article runs smoother. In addition, it has a well-defined structure with strong sections within the article. We now feel that the reader gets more than just an overview of Verizon FiOS; now the reader gets an in-depth look at the services that Verizon FiOS provides and can be used for study purposes.

Overall, the most valuable part of the experience was working with other Wikipedia editors. They helped us evolve our article to what it is now. The support of the skilled Wikipedia editors allowed us to revise our article so it looked professional and had substantial sources. Since our group consisted of relatively new Wikipedia editors, the more experienced Wikipedia editors helped us a great deal on the talk page. One particular interaction was particularly valuable because this editor pointed out that our article could not have bias or content from the Verizon website, or it would be taken down. An editor named “Liz” reminded us to not put any information about the pricing plan of Verizon FiOS, so we were sure not to include that. One Wikipedia editor was also able to help edit and format our image so it fit with the Wikipedia content. We were also able to look at other Wikipedia editor’s posts on the talk page to get a sense of what the article needed. Without the contribution of one Wikipedia editor, we would not have added a detailed criticisms section to the page. We all had a part in communicating on the talk page, and we all felt this was a valuable experience. We are proud of the work we have done and hope to continue to edit this page after the class is over. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew.prafder (talk • contribs) 16:09, 4 October 2013 (UTC) Andrew.prafder (talk) 16:28, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Hey there. Remember to upload your report to the correct location, so that other editors who are not interested in this report don't need to see it. LeshedInstructor (talk) 17:22, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

sometimes they remove the copper lines. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/07/AR2005050700178.html http://news.com.com/2061-10785_3-5701533.html http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=06/06/07/2244215&threshold=1&commentsort=0&mode=nested&cid=15491071 http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=06/06/07/2244215&threshold=1&commentsort=0&mode=nested&cid=15491058

Criticism? How about Verizon puts your name+address on some people's static IP# records?

{FiOS Releases your private info} CaribDigita 21:59, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

TOS

I have criticism of their TOS for FiOS. For example, you are not allowed to tarnish Verizon's name using the service.

What would be most appropriate?

• Add a criticism section to the article - 2 votes
• Create a web page and link to it - 0 votes
• Gather support of my criticisms first - 0 votes
• Do nothing, its not appropriate content - 3 votes
• Other?

Thanks for any feedback. --Dustball 18:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a user forum for non-notable folks' complaints; see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Try http://www.broadbandreports.com or http://www.lightreading.com (their forums) for that sort of discussion. If some big name individual or publication makes critical remarks, those are allowed be cited in this article. You might look at the somewhat similar discussion of what is and isn't appropriate on the FTTH talk page at Talk:Fiber to the premises#User:192.76.80.74 edits. --A. B. 16:11, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

He had a valid remark and you feel that you need to quote rules. You're not dictator of Wikipedia nor of the internet. The only things stupider than a mistake is a self righteous moron who points something out and winds up wrong himself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.143.238.48 (talk) 17:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

"Criticism" section

I think that entire section should be removed, due to a lack of evidence and fact. Verizon is rolling out major infrastructure changes, and it costs money to do so.

In Fort Wayne, Verizon -- due to negotiations with the city -- developed the poorer areas prior to doing the higher-income areas. Greenlead 16:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Maybe the wording can be softened, but otherwise the section is fairly on-target. I happen to live in a relatively affluent service "island" of perhaps 20,000 Verizon customers, surrounded by a competing telephone provider. Even though we're next to the famed high-tech "Silicon Valley", the likelihood of getting Verizon FiOS in this community before 2015 is essentially zilch. More likely, Verizon will be bought out before we ever see fiber service to our house walls. —Quicksilver^{T @} 22:55, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

In Pennsylvania almost 40% of communities where FiOS is being deployed are either more diverse or have lower average incomes than the counties in which they are located. 198.23.5.73 19:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree, I will eradicate it. -FpsFugazi

We have added a criticisms section because we felt it would be valuable to see the negative opinions of Verizon FiOS. We felt this was a great way to conclude the article. In addition, many Wikipedia projects include a criticism section about a product, so we felt it would be good to add one. Andrew.prafder (talk) 17:35, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Cleanup?

Since I tagged this weeks ago it has made a dramatic recovery Sure, it can be expanded, but I think it is pretty well written and structured and this point. Whats your say? Mkaycomputer 17:02, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

It is better, but is it different enough to be considered cleaned up?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=FiOS&diff=25638327&oldid=24107204

Removed cleanup tag

In helping to clear up the backlog of cleanup requests, I reviewed this article, its talk page, and edit history. It is unclear why a cleanup tag was applied, and a reading of the article did not reveal what issues have not been addressed. I have removed the cleanup tag so that editors can concentrate on more obvious cases. If you still think cleanup is required, please use one of the

The pricing data was just completely wrong, so I deleted it. I'd bet that prices are going to fluctuate anyway, so unless someone is going to babysit them (which nobody currently is doing), I think the prices should be left off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.186.49.36 (talk • contribs) Sorry about the signature thing.I Use Dial 03:17, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Pricing and availability of plans depends almost entirely upon the local competition. Greenlead 03:04, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, some crept back in. Just go to the service page to find pricing, not here, since it will get out of date anyway. We might be able to add some third-party comments, such as that it tends to be more expensive than others, but also tends of offer higher rates, etc. with citations. W Nowicki (talk) 23:09, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Should consider removing the list of areas

Unless someone is going to be refreshing that data religiously, that should be left to places like broadbandreports.com. It was useful perhaps when there were just a few, but now there are many. At most, give a listing of states and major cities. jesup 20:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, assuming there are sites that keep track of this information better. The states should be listed, but not cities or counties. If we remove information, it would be nice to make the "external links" section clearer so it is obvious where to find that information elsewhere. 71.103.98.22 22:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

The previous poster is right, all the areas just make the article painfully long and is just unimportant information. It also adds to the page seeming like an advertisement. The page is about what FiOS is, how it works, what it does, not what cities it's available in. I'm deleting the cities and leaving the states, unless someone objects. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.126.226.44 (talk • contribs)

I support. With this list it looks more like a Verizon's service directory, which wikipedia is definitely not. This would certainly contribute to cleanup currently needed to remove the ad-like impression given by the current article. --BACbKA 18:53, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Keep it. I link through the Maryland link to the build schedule every month to find out if they're doing my street yet (so far - no). Whether it meets some vague criteria for inclusion, it's useful to me and I would wager to others. As far as I know, this is the first true FTTP commercial implementation in the US and is significant and interesting for that reason alone. 204.149.81.4 21:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)BigOldGeek

I agree that the list of coverage areas is useful, I was searching for a coverage map and was directed to this page. Anyone care to explain why D.C. is on this list, I don't think it should be. There's coverage in the MD and VA suburbs, but not in D.C. itself.71.163.198.250 05:25, 14 December 2006 (UTC)anynon

I think the list of areas should stay. I would say alot more broadband users know about wikipedia than broadbandreports.com. While talking to Verizon CSR's they say, "well you guys can see the trucks around we cant. The people usually know about deployment in their area before it is even available for me to see in the system." This availability portion of the Verizon Fios article seems to go into more depth than broadband reports. In this it actually specifies is there TV, is there Internet, is there even negotiations? People contribute to Wikipedia and people know what is going on in their town/neighboring towns. -FpsFugazi

I modifed the service offering for Montgomery County, MD becasue it was wrong (there is no TV offering as of today). - DMM 12/27/2006

I think if people want to keep the list of areas up to date, it should be split into a different article. dj 12/28/06

Forget the locations!

Amen. Dump the FiOS locations to either a new page or for good--either way-- it doesn't belong on this page!! I'm obligated to help! Lets just do it instead of talking about it for ages. Feel free to contact me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.239.163.83 (talk • contribs)

OK - I made the new page. It's my first new article...I hope I did ok... Dj stone 23:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC) dj

I like. - 71.103.112.88 23:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Verizon product information

In my not so humble opinion, this article is starting to read like an advertisement for Verizon. Much of this information is unnecessary and does not belong on Wikipedia. Information like the TOS,pricing schedule, and particular plan details don't seem like they belong in an encyclopaedic article. There are websites like broadbandreports.com that deal with this exact thing. Does anyone else agree? --Kooky (talk) 21:47, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree, some of this should be removed. 71.103.98.22 22:27, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

I strongly agree as well. The highly POV and ad-ish "binding for the future" heading makes me suspect somebody with financial interest in the tech is editing the article. Let's hope I'm wrong and it's just a bunch of fancruft. I'm going to slap the advert tag on the article right away. --BACbKA 20:17, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

What would you suggest, "Investment in Infrastructure", "Infrastucture Investments", "Infrastructure Development"?

If it sounds bold, that's because it is, especially in contrast to others who seem to be hoping for cheaper alternatives than infrastructure investment. 71.103.148.60 22:57, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

"Infrastructure Development" seems the most neutral to me. But what really gets me is the lead of the article, which is written in a deep marketing-speak. Any references to the future (even if they're stated as "... expected ...") in there should be referenced with something, and not with the verizon's own fios-promo material. --BACbKA 06:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

We have added information about Verizon FiOS's latest products as of 2013. We felt this would be a good point of reference, as it would allow people to see what products were offered as of 2013 and to see how much things have changed since 2005 when FiOS started. Andrew.prafder (talk) 17:38, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Advertisement tag removed

This information is all objective, not subjective and 99.9% of this article is facts. People use Wikipedia as an source of information. They may want to know how much this new fiber network will cost them per month, seeing as how the network yields relatively high bandwidth rates compared to copper. -FpsFugazi

Reading like a Verizon commercial

I agree with the former comment that this article is reading too much like a commercial for Verizon. It would, for example, be better to remove the detailed city by city listing of FiOS service and replace that with a link to Verizon's website for that kind of info.

The article can just list the major markets in the US where FiOS is available.

Lets try to keep this both concise and NPOV.

Tony 20:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

The problem with doing only that is that it does nothing concerning the article name. Presumably other suppliers offer FiOS service, possibly with a different name. If they use a different name, we need a generic name. Will (Talk - contribs) 08:33, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

"Verizon includes the Actiontec MI424-WR Coax-enabled broadband home wireless-G router now for free with installations. " To me this line reads like an ad. ~~

Looks decent finally. I can only pray that sneaky marketing/fanboy edits don't pollute it again. For the record (and following the accusation on the AfD page), I am 1) not working for a competitor 2) actually I am a previously (when I lived in NJ) satisfied customer of Verizon (not FiOS service, though) 3) presently I live in Israel and I have no business relationship with either Verizon or its competitors. Sorry if that's just feeding the trolls --- with my own frustration about, in this case. pro-verizon marketing through WP I can easily imagine others' dislike for any anti-verizon motivated edits. --BACbKA 10:28, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

I just wanted to chime in and say that as of 2007-09-17, at least one user (me) does not find this article to be a problem despite it being flagged as "written like an advertisement". I came here seeking objective information about a subject (the offerings of Verizon's "FiOS" service), and I found it. The content of the page appeared to me to be comprehensive and objective, and it was useful to me. I'd be in favor of removing the "written like an advertisement" flag. But I'll leave actual changes to people more familiar with wikipedia practices and I'll just chime in here with my opinion. mcherm 13:47, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

It's still a Verizon commercial. The article really should be one sentence long: "Fios is Verizon's trademark for fiber-optic service." Reading the article gives me the impression that Fios is no different from any other fiber-optic service, of which there are several (while the article says, before I changed it, that Verizon Fios is the only fiber-optic line to your home) and Fios is not even the first. Ccerf (talk) 23:00, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Let's move it to

FIOS

Instead of killing this article, I think we should move it to

I disagree. FIOS not the correct acronym for Fiber Optic Service If one were to genericize it, the article should be called just "FiOS", or, according to Wikipedia's silly naming rules, "Fios". —Quicksilver^{T @} 00:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Our group has added a number of additional sections. The first one is the history section. We felt this was important to add because it would allow people to see how much Verizon FiOS has grown since its founding. We also worked to combine this section with the availability section so people could get a good overview of where the service is offered. We also added a "products offered" section so people could see the products that were offered as of 2013. We also added a competition section so people could see who Verizon FiOS is competing with and how they have dealt with competition. We also added a criticisms section so people could see how Verizon FiOS has receive some negative feedback.Andrew.prafder (talk) 17:43, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Hello, I'm reaching out here to bring an error recently added to the lead sentence of this article to the attention of Wikipedia editors. As an employee of Verizon, I won't make any changes myself, so I wanted to bring it up here in the hopes someone can fix this. The error in question is the addition that Verizon FiOS is a service "that operates over a fiber-optic communications network to over 300,000 people in 13 states."

This number is incorrect: Verizon FiOS lines have passed 19.8 million premises. If editors did want to update to the most recent subscriber figures, here is an independent source confirming that there are 5.7 million FiOS video and 6.7 million Internet subscribers. These numbers can also be found in Verizon's 1st Quarter 2015 report.

Would an editor be willing to remove the edit? Thanks so much, VZBob (talk) 19:22, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello. Since my last request, there have been a couple additional changes to the lead sentence. 73.198.146.88 replaced fiber-optic with "[tic]]". IP address 137.99.42.47 then changed that to TIC. Would an editor be willing to change that back to fiber-optic, and consider implementing the correction I noted above? Thanks so much, VZBob (talk) 21:00, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Hello again.

Brianhe fixed "fiber-optic" in the lead sentence on July 1, 2015. The inaccurate information about the number of people with FiOS access remains. Would someone be willing to take a look at that portion of the lead and correct it? Thanks so much, VZBob (talk

) 16:24, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

The 2015 numbers were down later in the article, I referenced them in the lede. Thanks for going through the process. —

talk

) 16:53, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi

Brianhe. Thank you so much for making these changes! Much appreciated. VZBob (talk

) 20:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

It should be noted that FiOS does not yet support IPv6, or at least not on a large scale. There should be a controversy/criticism section that discusses the lack of candour on the part of Verizon with regards to their plans for IPv6. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.66.104.220 (talk) 16:38, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Will fiber-only telephone services have the same level of reliability as copper? Will service continue to work during a power outage?

• It works for several hours on battery, and can be re-enabled for short periods after that. jesup 20:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Verizon installs an uninterrupted power supply when they install Fios. Although telephone service is dependant on the power grid, this backup power should last several hours in case of power outages, if I understand it correctly. Evilrhino 02:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Battery backup

I'm writing this from a FiOS line, and I have disconnected the power. If this saves correctly, the article is inaccurate: The Battery Backup _DOES_ hold the data network up.05:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

The ONT will maintain data services for 15 minutes in case of a minor outage that temporarily disrupts the home's AC power, the duration can be extended, decreased, or removed altogether. This is set within the ONT itself and has nothing to do with the BBU. During a long power outage, all non-essential services will be cut to reserve power for emergency phone calls. The newer BBUs being deployed are equiped with an Emergency Use button which allows the user to restore power back to the ONT for a short time. The BBU will automatically shut off after it drains to a specified level, thereby leaving some emergency charge left for this purpose. --Toddyboy711 21:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Any source for this except personal testimony? W Nowicki (talk) 23:09, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Recharging

What is the technology on this battery? Please put it in the article and link to the rechargeable battery page if possible. I have a Verizon person claiming unlimited recharges and I don't believe it. 4.249.15.1 (talk) 21:10, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

The ONT uses a sealed lead acid (SLA) battery, typically 7.2–8 Ah capacity. Although SLA batteries in standby use, kept charged by a "float charger", have a longer service life than a typical lead acid vehicle starter battery, they still need to be replaced after 5 to 7 years, depending on environment. There is no battery technology currently available that allows unlimited recharges. Supercapacitors, which aren't batteries, allow a far greater number of charge-discharge cycles, but they age and deteriorate, too. — Quicksilver^{T @} 15:53, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Hi page watchers, I have another request for this article.

Fios is available in 9 states, not 8 – and the references now used in the article show coverage in 9 states (see the map at broadbandnow.com and this page). Can this be updated?

Also, I think there is too much detail about Frontier's service in the introduction of this article. This information about another company's service seems like it would be included in the article body, in reference to the licensing from Verizon, but not in an executive summary about Verizon Fios. What do other editors think? Is someone willing to remove details about Frontier from the introduction, or move the content to the article body, if preferable?

I work for Verizon and have a conflict of interest so I ask others to look make these edits on my behalf. Thank you, VZBob (talk) 18:20, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

I updated the 9 state coverage sentence. I don't think the material about Frontier's service in the introduction is blatantly excessive. After all, it's only one sentence. And there is a connection to Verizon, since Frontier purchased those networks about a year ago. I can imagine consumers from those states visiting this article to figure out why their service provider changed. However, I am open to rephrasing the sentence to focus more on the sale of territory from Verizon to Frontier, since the phrase "continuing to license the FiOS name from Verizon" misleadingly implies that the two Fios services are not entirely separate. Thanks, Altamel (talk) 04:49, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

@Altamel: Thank you for updating the article. VZBob (talk) 12:44, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Part of an edit requested by an editor with a conflict of interest has been implemented.

Hi page watchers, I am back with another round of suggested edits for this article. This time, I prepared a new draft of the History section. My draft, which you can find

I work for Verizon and have a conflict of interest so I ask others to look at my draft and move it into the article if it looks good. On a side note, I realized I needed to add a connected contributor banner to this article, so I have done so. Thanks so much, VZBob (talk) 19:45, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Sorry—I'm declining this edit request. The draft undercuts the controversy surrounding the Fios rollout. The article currently says "Some viewed the halt in expansion as a violation of Verizon's agreements with some municipalities and states, since Verizon has collected revenue to deploy infrastructure upgrades that never occurred," (emphasis mine), but the bold portion is missing from the draft. You can't just cut out the fact that Verizon received benefits in exchange for the Fios expansion promise, especially when articles like this one from the Philadelphia Inquirer quantify the amount of revenue Verizon collected to build the fiber optic cables. The draft sentence "Verizon halted its expansion of Fios beyond the expansion efforts that were already underway to meet regulatory commitments" is also problematic. It implies that Verizon fulfilled the minimum required by regulatory commitments and then stopped, but the source you gave does not say anything about these regulatory commitments. In my opinion, the draft as it stands is not preferable to the current version. Thanks, Altamel (talk) 17:27, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

@Altamel: Thank you for reviewing this edit request. To your point on the sentence in my draft about Verizon halting its Fios expansion, you're correct. I have rewritten this to say "Verizon halted its expansion of Fios beyond the expansion efforts that were already underway, like those in Washington D.C., Philadelphia and New York City" to better reflect the source material.

To your other point, you note that my draft eliminated the second part of this sentence, which references a 2012 Huffington Post opinion piece: "Some viewed the halt in expansion as a violation of Verizon's agreements with some municipalities and states, since Verizon has collected revenue to deploy infrastructure upgrades that never occurred”. I had omitted the sentence because it's long been superseded by the deployment of additional Fios infrastructure, meeting and exceeding the 18 million pledged, to which the Huffington Post writer (who is a blogger, not a staff reporter) was referring. To illustrate, FierceCable reported that Verizon Fios’ network passed 15.6 million premises in 2010, when the company halted expansion; in January 2015, Ars Technica reported that Verizon Fios passed 19.8 million premises; and in October 2015, FierceTelecom reported that "Verizon has passed 20 million homes with FiOS, surpassing its 18 million goal". Does this change your view of the sentence? I am open to making a change to include more information here, but I would welcome your feedback before offering an alternative. What do you think?

I am happy to update my proposal if that’s something you would take a look at. Thanks so much, VZBob (talk) 11:07, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

I don't see the relevance of the 18 million figure. The issue is that Verizon made agreements with certain states to roll out Fios to all households in that state. Perhaps Verizon has exceeded its own goal of 18 million, but I'm still finding articles like 22 years after Verizon fiber promise, millions have only DSL or wireless that say states like Pennsylvania basically gave up on holding Verizon to the original terms of their fiber optic deals. So I still don't see evidence that Verizon fulfilled its agreements with municipalities and states in entirety. Altamel (talk) 15:49, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

@

neutral point of view

, I understand we should represent both sides and I do not wish to whitewash the article on this point. I updated my draft again to include a slightly edited version of the original sentence: "Some viewed the halt in expansion as a violation of Verizon's agreements with some municipalities and states, since they argue Verizon collected revenue to deploy infrastructure upgrades that never occurred". Also, I included mention of Verizon's response, which is included in various sources including the ones you linked. In my opinion, if we're going to cite sources claiming Verizon is not living up to its end of the deal, we should also include Verizon's response, especially when it is presented in the same articles.

I thank you for taking the time to discuss this. I believe my draft of the History section gives more context and a fuller picture of Verizon Fios' history, and I would not want for other good information to be left out because of one sentence that's being debated. If it is in the opinion of Wikipedia editors that the aforementioned sentence remain as is, that's fine. But I think that when there is another point of view it should be included. Thank you again. I'm happy to discuss this further if needed. VZBob (talk) 20:18, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

For now, I have merged in some portions of your draft. I removed the quote from The Weather Channel spokesperson, as it is needlessly promotional and doesn't give any substantive information on TWC's point of view besides what was already elaborated in a neutral tone in the article. I need to take a closer look at the Fios rollout concerns and may end writing those paragraphs myself. Altamel (talk) 04:15, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Hi page watchers, I am here with another request. To me, the Internet access section of this article seems outdated and longer than it needs to be. I have uploaded a draft in my user space that summarizes Fios' internet offering more concisely. The draft gives very brief historical context followed by the current internet speeds available and number of subscribers.

Is someone willing to give this a look? I work for Verizon and have a conflict of interest so I ask others to look and make these edits on my behalf. Thank you, VZBob (talk) 21:24, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

@Altamel: As you have been active on this page in recent months, I was wondering if you can review this? I'm happy to discuss. Thanks so much, VZBob (talk) 22:27, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done, but clarification needed on the number of subscribers: FierceTelecom said "ending the period with a total of 4.9 million and 4.5 million FiOS subscribers"; do you have any idea why the article refers to two different numbers of subscribers? Altamel (talk) 06:11, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

@Altamel: Thanks for updating. Also, besides being confusing, the number in the FierceTelecom story is not accurate. Thanks for catching that!! Can we replace that sentence with the following: According to mid-year 2016 figures, there were 5.49 million Fios Internet subscribers at the end of Verizon's second quarter.^[1]

Thank you, (an embarrassed) VZBob (talk) 18:32, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for providing a new citation and the correction. Altamel (talk) 04:17, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Hi page watchers. On March 14, ViperSnake151 wrote a paragraph under 2011–present on New York City's lawsuit against Verizon for its Fios deployment. The Ars Technica story referenced and cited also contains a response from Verizon, but that response does not appear in the Wikipedia article. Verizon's response was also covered in other publications, such as The Wall Street Journal. Seems only appropriate to me that if the encyclopedia includes the accusations from the lawsuit, it should also include a response.

Perhaps this works: Verizon denied the allegations, saying that every residence in New York City is within reach of Verizon Fios' fiber optic network, and not all landlords in the city have given Verizon permission to connect properties to Fios.^[2] Verizon proposed continuing Fios expansion in the city to remaining homes by investing $1 billion over the following four years.^[2]

Both sentences can also cite the Ars Technica story referenced (<ref name="ars-verizonnyclawsuit">)

I work for Verizon and have a conflict of interest, so I do not edit this article directly and work with Wikipedians on Talk pages to work toward consensus. It is worth noting that I have left an identical request on the Verizon Communications Talk page. Thanks so much, VZBob (talk) 22:14, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151: Thanks for updating. The article is more balanced by having Verizon's response included. Thanks so much, VZBob (talk) 21:11, 28 March 2017 (UTC)