Talk:D-STAR/Archive 1

Archive 1

No more external linking from this article, please.

I have to agree with McNeight in that this wiki has gotten a little out of control in terms of external linking. Links that would be appropriate would be those that point to a article or sound bite by a credible source such as the ARRL. I think a lot of the links that were being posted here could have been grouped onto a website or even crossed meshed between sites which would in turn bring awareness to visitors of your yahoogroups page, webpage etc on the size and popularity of D-STAR on the Internet. I by no means want this to become a brick wall for those that are just putting up a website for D-STAR. I highly recommend that if you're just putting up a website that you get in contact with some of the other sites and come up with an agreement to cross link each ones website. --We6jbo (talk) 18:27, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

What needs improving?

Through out the life of this wikipage on D-STAR, I have noticed that there has been significant changes. Now would be a good time to ask what needs improving? Is there content that needs to be added and if so, what should that content be? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.62.18.62 (talk) 03:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Are we heading the right direction re. this Wiki page

I just want to emphasize to everyone on the direction that we're going with this Wiki page. One of the things that is troubling me is that we have all these talented persons contributing to this Wiki page and yet this page still remains as a low importance on the importance scale. I want everyone to ask themselves, how important is D-STAR if the Wiki that defines D-STAR is of low importance? Through out my time as a user of D-STAR equipment I have seen the type of growth in this community that is shocking. D-STAR is a force that is changing the way that HAMs communicate in the air. The amount of information coming from this change must be tremendous. These are the kinds of reasons to why I would say that the importance of D-STAR is much greater than what it's being rated at right now on this Wiki. The person that is grading this Wiki should be ashamed to give this page a rating of low importance and yet I'm not totally sure if this rating is at all bias. The amount of user boards being linked on this Wikipage tells me that there is even more information out there just ready to be told to the world. Right now we have posting of articles and media. We also have a definition and some information about the software that allows D-STAR to tick. This is a great start to a great D-STAR Wiki page that's gotta make the Wikipedia creators proud. Now let's just try a little harder and see if we can change the face of HAM radio operators to where they understand how important D-STAR is to HAM radio and the further advances of technology.--We6jbo (talk) 02:00, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

• I may be splitting hairs, but this is not "the Wiki that defines D-STAR", but rather a Wikipedia article (attempting) to describe D-STAR. I am not saying that this Wikipedia entry is not important, I'm just saying that I think you are over-stating its importance. -- ZL2GDN 203.100.208.50 (talk) 14:24, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  • You're right and I also want to say that I'm very proud of the work that's been done in this few days. I'm also glad that history is a main objective. --We6jbo (talk) 20:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Cleanup

This article is in need of an opening section that describes what D-Star is at a high level and then subsections that go into more details.--Kharker 18:10, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

• Agreed. I don't really what know D-Star is and can't really figure it out based on this article. Wickethewok 03:16, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Let us know if the page looks cleaned up or if there's anything that you feel is missing. Thanks and appreciate the help you've given us to make this a great wiki page We6jbo 00:55, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

• I'm going to try and take on some cleanup work here. I've been reading about D-Star in CQ and QST for the last couple of years, so it should make for a nice little research project. --StuffOfInterest 20:48, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Looks good. I think your way of citing information is a lot better too. We6jbo
    • Thanks. Unfortunately, I had to remove a lot of material being that it was copy/pasted from outside sources. Hopefully some more original text or outside developed diagrams can be added later. Note that I found D-STAR on two other wikis, but from what I could make out they didn't have much more we could use. --StuffOfInterest 19:32, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Copy & Paste plus odd image files

I've started doing some cleanup work on the article. Unfortunatley, I've found something disturbing. There appears to be a lot of copy & paste from Icom's and other websites. This is not allowed as it is a copyright violation. The sections with this text need to be redone or they will have to be removed. Of particular concern right now are the Overview, History, and Technical information sections. Specific features is currently nothing but a quote, but at least it is labeled as such. Still, all of these need to be redone.

Another area I'm cocerened about is the uploading of non image content such as PDF files. I'll need to do some research but I thought the image function was mainly intended for in articule illustrations and not reference material. Such material probably belongs on WikiSource or it should be kept as an off site external link. I'll try and find out more but if someone else can provide some insight here it would be helpful. Thanks. --StuffOfInterest 13:47, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I just took a bunch of the copy/paste text out with this edit. Better to have the article as a stub than to have plagerization in there which could cause trouble. Try reading the related articles and put the material in your own words. Even with that, still use reference links to show where you are getting the information. As time permits I'll try to get some of the technical details distilled out myself. --StuffOfInterest 18:43, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Bias information

Clearly a lot of the information for the D-Star wiki is bias and needs to be edited content wise. 66.91.245.251 22:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Please expand on this. Anonym1ty 23:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Any words that might strike of POV need to be avoided. --PhantomS 07:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Um.. Ok then. Anonym1ty 16:13, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Suggestions as per WP:RADIO assessment request

From a quick glance, it looks like there needs to be a discussion of the history of the device. Also, you should tell more about the standard and the process that went into the creation of the standard. Also, how closely do the devices keep to the standard versus adding proprietary additions, etc. --PhantomS 07:36, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Some additions were made including some history. There are a few missing dates which I'm still researching. I also added a D-Star project section to demonstrate some of the additions to D-Star i.e., ARPS d*Chat. We6jbo 08:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Images that have been taken by myself, and may be used on D-Star related projects, by anyone.

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] We6jbo 18:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Introduction

I re-wrote the introduction. I'm not intending offense at whoever wrote it; I just think it needed a little bit more specificity and re-wording. I took out the part about HF; I'm not personally aware of D-Star HF radios. I may very well be wrong, which is why I'm posting here. Does anyone know of any? I know my intro isn't perfect, but hopefully should be a good starting point for any changes. K8ARW 20:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Work being done is better than no work at all. :)We6jbo 06:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

D-STAR done in many languages

This may be a little too soon to ask this. D-STAR is a protocol that ICOM has implemented into their radios and has sold these radios in many regions of the world. These regions are not bound to only English which we have learned when the gateway decided to go world wide not too long ago. In order to provide the same level of information to everyone and not only English speakers, I'd like to ask someone or a few or many to start interpreting this or part of this or even a new version of this Wiki to different languages. I've copied the main page containing a few of these languages to here, Deutsch · Español · Français · Italiano · Nederlands · 日本語 · Polski · Português · Svenska. Then let's make a link to the D-STAR topic on this wiki so that anyone that is looking for information on D-STAR can do so with out having to look for a article in their own language. We6jbo (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 18:20, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

"Neutrality" of technical details?

OK, who disputed the "Technical Details" section's neutrality? There's nothing in it that's the least bit subjective. These are all factual specifications. Scott Johnson (talk) 15:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC) Looks like this was placed in the wrong spot and should be under Importance of Digital Technology and D-STAR. 76.88.84.5 (talk) 00:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

WE6JBO's comments and photos to be removed on 6/15/10

Unless anyone objects I'll be removing my comments (including this one) here and the photos on my page. The main reason I feel this needs to be done is because I would like to see the discussion part of this article used again for the current work being done such as the new additions talking about P25 and I feel that much of my comments have become outdated and do not serve a purpose any longer. In addition I have not been in the D-STAR field for some time and I feel that my expert opinions on the subject have become outdated. I will remove the photos of my ID-800 because I know that there are better photos out there of newer radios. These photos still fall under public domain and anyone is free to use them still. (See the comments attached to them for details) We6jbo (talk) 22:15, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Talk page comments are not to be removed, see WP:TALK: "Archive—do not delete". --ChrisRuvolo (t) 19:47, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the link Chris, archiving is now setup on this page for content that is greater than 1 year old. I'll check on it for the next few weeks to make sure that everything is working properly. If anyone feels that the archive should happen sooner or later feel free to make the adjustments at the top. We6jbo (talk) 05:44, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Sounds good, thanks. --ChrisRuvolo (t) 17:55, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Talk

• Please don't refer to yourself ("the author") in articles. Please read other suggestions I wrote on your talk page. Wickethewok 06:48, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

This page does indeed read a bit like an Icom advertisement. It's important technology, to be sure, and Icom has every right to be proud, but I'd rather see the codecs involved, datarates, and differentiations between the standard FM/PM radios and D-Star radios... Ah, well. I don't feel much like doin' it. Jdos2 18:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC) I did find some information about the codec here http://www.dvsinc.com/products/a2020.htm along with samples on the page. They are forig.wav and f2400.wav D-Star uses 2.4 as the information stated here, http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/techchar/D-STAR.pdf 1.1.2 Let me know if you feel this would be acceptable information for D-Star. Thanks and I'll work on it some more this week and after Fathers day. We6jbo 08:45, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

The PDF covers it pretty well. Thanks for the pointer!

The gateway tech requirements currently say "typically running kernel 2.4.20" but that is seriously out of date for a CentOS 5.1 system. Is this correct? If it is, this section should be expanded a wee bit to explain that an obsolete kernel is required. 24.136.247.144 (talk) 03:18, 10 November 2008 (UTC) It should read something like this Linux® Kernel 2.4.20 or later. That's described on this page of the icom website who sells the gateway software (N9JA G2 Gateway Software (Announcement) - 2/1/2008 10:14:54 AM) http://www.icomamerica.com/en/support/forums/tm.asp?m=7706 Most of the other requirements are described this way from that page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by We6jbo (talk • contribs) 17:41, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

More cleanup

There is lots of content in the article now; 34Kb worth. What we need to do is refine it and bring it into alignment with Wikipedia style guidelines. The tone of the writing needs to be worked on as well as the continuing maintenance of the external links. Of course, solid sources also need to be added using the inline citation style.

I did add a tag to the criticism section that has quite a bit of personal opinion. The tone is directed at the reader and this makes it less encyclopedic. I may add more cleanup templates to the article. My hope is that by doing this we may attract the attention the article needs. Maybe we can eventually elevate the article's status on the importance scale. Dawnseeker2000 02:47, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Problem with adding an external link?

I've tried to change the external link regarding the D-Star trademark to the one relevant page on the US Government's TESS website - but I have two problems - first, Wikipedia doesn't recognise the link as a link, and second, the sessions on the website being linked to expire.

I'm a novice at editing wikipedia pages, if someone could point me in the right direction so that I can put the government info as the link instead of a third-party site, it would be appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.121.130.51 (talk) 20:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

encryption

In the US, the D-STAR codec is NOT considered encryption. It is considered encoding. The difference is that encryption is either a secret algorithm or an algorithm with a secret key that is only available to limited parties. If these "secret" parts are published or otherwise widely available, it isn't encryption anymore. The D-STAR encoding codec is clearly widely available. --ssd (talk) 14:41, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

cleaning

This article had lots of repeated information, so I cleaned it up and re wrote a few parts. It read like an advert in some places, so I tried to make the tone a bit more...normal. Mongoosander (talk) 19:29, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

You need a new, more useful introduction section

This article seems to be written for readers with lots of experience with commercial radios or digital communications modes. I think you need to add a section explicitly stating what communication problems that D-Star solves, for Amateur radio operators who don't know anything about digital technologies. This audience more closely matches the needs of the Wikipedia audience.

Please follow this new section with a slightly expanded bullet list of D-Star technical features, and then briefly discuss how a typical Tech or General Class operator will typically install, configure and begin to use DStar, but at a high level. If D-Star is primarily something that installs onto a repeater (I can't tell from this article), then explain in general terms, how a licensed operator adds D-Star to his/her repeater functionality. 76.191.223.178 (talk) 17:45, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:D-STAR/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

The article has very limited information. Stub-class. --PhantomS 07:52, 22 January 2007 (UTC) Let me know if adding the history section on D-Star has made the article start-class. Thanks We6jbo 21:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC) The history needs to be detailed. For it to be start-class, it needs at least one "well-developed" section. --PhantomS 01:45, 26 January 2007 (UTC) Added some more history and a photo. Hope that helps some.

Last edited at 23:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC). Substituted at 14:36, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Consider a Controversy Section

I removed the sentence "The proprietary Codec used in D-STAR has no business in Amateur Radio, and should be replaced by Icom with an Open-Source alternative." While I understand this is a common opinion among many amateur operators, it's not appropriate as it is currently presented. If someone would like to add a discussion of the criticisms or dissenting opinions regarding D-STAR -- and can provide references -- it might be appropriate to add such a section to the article.

--Monupics (talk) 16:02, 4 April 2014 (UTC)

Other Digital Modes Section too long?

Personally, I'm a Yaesu fan, but in any case it seems to me that the Other Digital Modes section here is longer than it really needs to be. There is this ongoing argument about which mode is "the best" which might be suitable for a separate entry, but it doesn't seen necessary here.

The See Also section should reference Yaesu System Fusion, but there is no such entry. Dlhagerman (talk) 21:19, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

The Other Digital Modes section doesn't belong here at all. There is a link at the top of the page to a list of digital modes. The Other Digital Modes has little to do with DSTAR and is incomplete. What about System Fusion, Tetra, NXDN, etc.? This information all belongs in a separate article on those modes. --Scotthon (talk) 07:33, 4 May 2015 (UTC) N7SS

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on D-STAR. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20051104122530/http://www2.arrl.org:80/news/stories/2003/09/10/3/ to http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/09/10/3/#Icom

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:10, 16 January 2016 (UTC)