The proposal would formalize pay-for-play arrangements in which streaming video companies and other types of Web services pay Internet service providers for a faster path to consumers over the "last mile" of the network.Ī statement issued by Wheeler responded to what he called "reports that the FCC is gutting the Open Internet rule." The chairman says that idea is "flat out wrong. If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.Ĭheers.Further Reading Uh-oh: AT&T and Comcast are ecstatic about the FCC’s new chairman.If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.This message is updated dynamically through the template (last update: 18 January 2022). 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.
FCC OPEN INTERNET ORER 2010 ARCHIVE
No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. This message was posted before February 2018. When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. 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 have just modified one external link on FCC Open Internet Order 2010. contribs) 19:11, 29 July 2011 (UTC) External links modified.Preceding unsigned comment added by John rb11 ( talk I believe this is a relevant observation. Therefore, it could not have plagiarized information from the website in question. However, according to the history of this wikipedia article, this page was written in May. I noticed that the source of the alleged plagiarism was posted on July 17th 2011. – Quadell ( talk) 14:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC) Plagiarism Source Essentially the background and details sections have the same wording, just made into lists. This duplication report shows most of the duplicated content. I was asked about possible plagiarism between this article and this political source. – Quadell ( talk) 14:43, 27 July 2011 (UTC) Possible plagiarism Let's discuss it on the article talk page, rather than here. When all these problems have been resolved, I would recommend nominating this article for peer review, and then trying a GA nomination when that process is complete.Ĭan you indicate the exact sections of this article that have been plagiarised? I went to the website mentioned, and I don't see anything that was copied. But most importantly, large sections of the prose has been plagiarized from It does not offer sufficient background, nor does it link to articles (like Federal Communications Commission) which could provide background. It overuses lists, instead of using prose. I'm afraid this article does not pass our GA requirements. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review. This review is transcluded from Talk:FCC Open Internet Order 2010/GA2.