Talk:Internet in South Africa

South Africa High‑importance

	South Africa portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa 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.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Internet culture

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of internet culture 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.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles

???

This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Internet culture To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : View all requested internet culture articles
Expand : Pick an article from here or here
Photo : Category:Internet culture articles needing images
Stubs : All stubs are located here
Other : Category:Internet self-classification codes (!?); Try to get YouTube to FA; Tag all articles you find with {{WikiProject Internet culture}}
- See also Category:Internet culture articles needing attention

Political reference

"early on in the transition from the apartheid-era rule of South Africa's National Party to multi-party, multiracial government under the African National Congress" - Is this relevant for this article? Bernd Jendrissek (talk) 12:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also fail to see the relevance of the political reference. Therefore, deletion is

Done. --User:DiscipleOfKnowledge (talk) 03:46, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The political commentry remains, very odd. Perhaps mention of the early networks that preceeded the SA internet would be valuable. Also the move to commercial use of the internet was held back for quite a while and hobby users had access via UUCP and USENET gateways before the co.za domains came into use. My research has shown that BKSINC.co.za was the first commercial domain registered, the company still exists but have a new domain. Idyllic press (talk) 12:26, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a bit of balance to the political commentry but I still think none of it is relevant to the page and should all be removed. Idyllic press (talk) 08:28, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

More Detail

Readers want to know more about the topology of SA networks including the function of Tier1 network providers such as Telkom SAIX etc. Antony Carthy (talk) 16:48, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I struggle to see why the political references are relevant. I think it suggests amateur authors or blatant advertising. I expected a more technical article as the comment above suggests. 41.134.75.2 (talk) 08:52, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am going to start working on this. --User:DiscipleOfKnowledge (talk) 03:47, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting links

Here are a few sites that might bear mentioning

http://archive.hmvh.net/txtfiles/interbbs/SAInternetHistory.pdf

http://www.internet.org.za/

history.internet.org.za was mentioned on the radio today so there may be extra people searching for information Idyllic press (talk) 13:03, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Update stats section

The stats quoted are now rather old. According to The New Wave report (2012) based on research conducted by Research ICT Africa and the South African Network Society project at University of Witwatersrand, 34% (12.3m) South African adults (age 15 and over) use the Internet. This is based on a representative survey. See www.networksociety.co.za for more information. (Full disclosure: I wrote the report) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Researcher in africa (talk • contribs) 13:23, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The figures reported in the New Wave report from the South African Network Society Project are strikingly different from the figures reported for South Africa by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU). The New Wave report says 34% of South Africans use the Internet in 2012, while the ITU reports 74.2% are using the Internet in 2011. Or the New Wave report says that 24% of households have a computer at home in 2012, while the ITU reports 69% in 2011. The New Wave reports 20% of households have Internet access from home in 2012, while the ITU reports 57.7% in 2011.

Any ideas about why the figures are so different? Am I comparing apples to oranges or otherwise misunderstanding that the different figures represent?

Here are some figures from the ITU:

Use as a percentage of Kuwait's population:

	2001	2006	2011
Individuals using the Internet^[1]	8.6%	28.8%	74.2%
Fixed broadband subscriptions^[2]	0.3%	1.3%	1.7%^[3]
Households with a computer^[4]	—	—	69.0%
Households with Internet access^[5]	—	—	57.7%

^ "Percentage of individuals using the Internet 2000-2011", Excel, International Telecommunications Union, retrieved 7 June 2013
^ "Fixed broadband subscriptions 2000-2011", Excel, International Telecommunications Union, retrieved 7 June 2013
^ Figure for 2011 is not available, using figure for 2010
^ "Core indicators on access to, and use of, ICT by households and individuals", Excel, International Telecommunications Union, 2012, retrieved 7 June 2013
^ "Core indicators on access to, and use of, ICT by households and individuals", Excel, International Telecommunications Union, 2012, retrieved 7 June 2013

I'm hoping to update the Statistics section of the article with more recent data and also add some references since the section is almost entirely unreferenced now. But with the differences between the New Wave report's figures and the figures from the ITU, I am at a loss on how to figure out what figures to use. Suggestions needed and welcome.

--Jeff Ogden (W163) (talk) 04:08, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It appears stats have not been updated for a while, where can we find the updated stats for 2021? TapticInfo (talk) 19:09, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Internet in South Africa. 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) 07:21, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updated 2021 Statistics

Statistics have not been updated since like 2016, where can we find these updated stats for 2021 and add update the page? TapticInfo (talk) 19:11, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated Fiber Optic Cable Systems

Fiber optic cable network infrastructure has not been updated since 2013, we need to try and update these TapticInfo (talk) 19:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in Internet in South Africa

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Internet in South Africa's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "ITU":

From Discrete cosine transform: "History of Video Compression". ITU-T. Joint Video Team (JVT) of ISO/IEC MPEG & ITU-T VCEG (ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11 and ITU-T SG16 Q.6). July 2002. pp. 11, 24–9, 33, 40–1, 53–6. Retrieved 3 November 2019.
From Internet in Africa: ITU (2007)

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 19:28, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Music In Africa Foundation" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Music In Africa Foundation has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 18 § Music In Africa Foundation until a consensus is reached. GanzKnusper (talk) 08:43, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] "Percentage of individuals using the Internet 2000-2011", Excel, International Telecommunications Union, retrieved 7 June 2013

[2] "Fixed broadband subscriptions 2000-2011", Excel, International Telecommunications Union, retrieved 7 June 2013

[3] Figure for 2011 is not available, using figure for 2010

[4] "Core indicators on access to, and use of, ICT by households and individuals", Excel, International Telecommunications Union, 2012, retrieved 7 June 2013

[5] "Core indicators on access to, and use of, ICT by households and individuals", Excel, International Telecommunications Union, 2012, retrieved 7 June 2013

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]