This article is within the scope of WikiProject Amateur radio, which collaborates on articles related to
amateur radio technology, organizations, and activities. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.Amateur radioWikipedia:WikiProject Amateur radioTemplate:WikiProject Amateur radioamateur radio articles
The contents of the Yaesu FRG-7700 page were
merged into
Yaesu (brand) on January 8, 2017. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see
its talk page.
Proposing merger of radio model articles to brand article
I've started checking out the Yaesu radio model articles and most are little more than tables or lists of facts with no support reference or assertion of individual notability. I'd like to propose that most, if not all, of these model articles be rolled into the Yaesu brand article. The model list in the article can be rebuilt into a table showing models, modes, important dates, and key details. Part of what I'd like this discussion to cover is how the table will be formatted and what information should be included. Once this brand is done we'll probably end up doing the same for both ICOM and Kenwood. What are people's thoughts and feelings? --
StuffOfInterest12:53, 13 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Don't support. If you want to see the result of a page made up of tables of comparisons see
Comparison of e-mail clients which is a nightmare with all sorts of meaningless specifications and impossible to follow what most of the edits refer to. Quite a few rigs, certainly the FT101, FT1000MP etc, the FT290R (very popular in Europe) which I started and the FT817 deserve their own articles. Those who moan they are too short should expand them. I vote for the status quo.
Dsergeant15:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Don't support. It would be really nice if models of note had some kind of separate page associated with them, it would be kinda hard to list all the helpful info about the popular models in a table.
Kayfox17:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Won't support. However, We MIGHT want to consider breaking these down into separate types of transceivers; HF-capable base units, mobile radios and hand-helds. BTW, I added my own pic for the VX-5R, what a great handy-scratchy!
Edit Centric21:19, 25 February 2007 (UTC)reply
Don't support. Merging them all into the
Yaesu (brand) would make for a crazy-long article. (As a counter-argument, though, there doesn't seem to be much of a precedent for having articles for each amateur radio in a line of products.) I don't think merging the articles into the main Yaesu article is the way to do this, and there's really no sense in outright deleting the articles.
Fogster02:16, 29 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Don't support, their should be some coordination done so that the reader is given the oportunity to see the articles on each Unit, with incidental units just mentioned in the main article. Several of the products are aimed at different spheres (Unlikely that someone in the market for information on a FRG-7 is also searching for info on a 2M hand held.
cmacd16:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)reply
Don't support. The claimed lack of "support references" will not be fixed by the proposed change. Combining all articles on into one page will reduce organizational flexibility and generate roadblocks. The proper way to organize information is to maintain separate stores with links connecting them as appropriate. E.g. All articles on Yaesu radios have a link back to the "Yaesu article".
Don't support. Each radio has unique issues. People are focused on learning about a particular radio. There are radios that are very similar and can be merged, such as the VX-7 family, but not all.
Altaphon22:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)reply
Don't support. This proposal hasn't had a single supporting vote in 5 months. The merge tag on the various individual radio articles should be removed.—The preceding
unsigned comment was added by
Dan East (
talk •
contribs)
Works for me. After seeing several attempts to delete small articles like this ones listed I figured it would be safer to merge than fight deletions all the time. Maybe this process will provide some top cover, but the next time a deletionist comes along we may have more battles to fight on such small articles. --
StuffOfInterest11:38, 10 July 2007 (UTC)reply
This discussion is appreciated, nearly a decade later, but the underlying articles have not progressed in the intervening decade. They are being picked off for deletion one by one. Merging the content here will preserve it more than any other approach would. A nice table, per above, may be an improvement.
49ersBelongInSanFrancisco (
talk)
08:49, 8 January 2017 (UTC)reply
Image:YaesuMusen logo.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under
fair use but there is no
explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the
boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with
fair use.
Please go to
the image description page and edit it to include a
fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at
Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure 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 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.