Talk:GS1 DataBar Coupon

What is the usage?

Perhaps it is because i'm not (?american?)? But after reading the article, i still have no idea as to why/what/where these coupons are used and for what purpose. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 08:21, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've no idea either! The article was written by accelotech (talk · contribs) and this seems to be a product of theirs. It seems to fail WP:PRODUCT though, so should probably be deleted. I think PRODding this would be ok seeming as it doesn't make any notability claims IMO. SmartSE (talk) 10:35, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added a description of the typical usage of the GS1 DataBar coupon barcode. Rkhardy (talk) 18:20, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Security through obscurity

There have been a number of edits in the past few hours by IPs replacing sections of the text of this article with:

"We are requesting that this information be taken down to prevent the proliferation of coupon fraud. Among other reasons for developing the new coupon code, was a desire to mitigate coupon fraud, by having a widespread publication of this encodation method, negates any of the efforts to reduce coupon crime."

This appears to:

run counter to policy WP:NOTCENSORED - WIkipedia does not delete articles on Lock picking or cryptanalysis; and
conflict with WP:NPOV.

Absent any comment or indication that publication is in breach of a confidentiality obligation I am inclined to restore the deleted sections

FrankFlanagan (talk) 22:28, 23 September 2011 (UTC) 21:48, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As you probably noticed, I already replaced it. A better example to cite RE censorship is the Rorschach test. If there is to be an article on this type of barcode (I'm not entirely convinced there should be) then it should certainly contain this information. SmartSE (talk) 09:22, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now that they have taken it down again via a DMCA notice, how does breaking down a set of numbers fall into DMCA? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.113.214.138 (talk) 15:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline updates?

Any updates regarding the rollout timeline would be appreciated. Also there seems to be a typo?

"By 2011, the final phase with stand alone Expanded Stacked barcode for coupon will be in fact." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsachen (talk • contribs) 07:39, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on GS1 DataBar Coupon. Please take a moment to review my edit. 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 made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. 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. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:20, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dot Pattern and DMCA takedown

There is a dot pattern between the codes that is not explained in the article. Also, in 2011 someone self-enforced a DMCA takedown notice and removed a bunch of technical information. Most things were not restored and the details are still missing in the article. --188.22.149.214 (talk) 11:16, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]