Talk:Common-channel signaling

	Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Meaning of "common" in this context

Why is the channel referred to as common? -- 71.252.13.184 (talk · contribs), 09:32, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because a number of different data channels use one signaling channel to carry all their signaling information (i.e. it is common to all of them). For example, in the case of ISDN over a T1 the 23 "bearer" channels all use the same "data" channel to carry their signaling. ThreeBlindMice 19:18, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Insufficient Context

Not sure why this page has been marked with an "Insufficient Context" tag. As far as I can tell it has as much context as the CAS page and certainly makes sense to me. I plan on removing the "Insufficient Context" tag in a few days unless somebody can provide a good reason why it should remain (I'm new to Wikipedia, so if this isn't the way this sort of thing is done please let me know). ThreeBlindMice 20:22, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since there was no feedback one way or the other I've removed the "Insufficient Context" tag. ThreeBlindMice 00:12, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about describing how it works? There are no references to FSN, BSN or MSU! 193.113.57.167 (talk) 14:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. If someone is firmly opposed to the hyphen, please open a new discussion on that single point. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:41, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Common Channel Signaling → Common-channel signaling – Normalize case and punctuation per guides, MOS, and reliable sources (e.g. [1]). Dicklyon (talk) 05:01, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would support if the proposal was to move, Common channel signaling. --Extra999 (talk) 09:28, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is indeed common for specialists in a field to drop hyphens when a compound modifier becomes very familiar; but many reliable sources still use the hyphen (like the ones I cited in the article), because that makes the meaning more clear. WP style is to not drop hyphens that help clarify meaning. See WP:HYPHEN. Dicklyon (talk) 04:47, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The hyphen is incorrect. Ronayne which is cited uses the term extensively and never with a hyphen. — Dgtsyb (talk) 04:54, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not incorrect. I cited several references to show that. There are many more. Dicklyon (talk) 05:14, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support: We hyphenate compound modifiers for reason. Without it, in this case, no one who is not already a specialist in the field like Ronayne knows whether this means signaling through a shared channel or channel signaling that is done often, unless they read the article. It's not our job to intentionally use ambiguous wording to force people to read articles in order to not be confused. I severably support the lower-casing, regardless of the outcome of the hyphenation proposal. We don't capitalize random common nouns just because current acronym style has shifted to "ABC" instead of "a.b.c." for the most part. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒〈°⌊°〉 Contribs. 06:19, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.