Wikipedia:Peer review/National Broadband Network/archive1

National Broadband Network

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because after a major expansion I like some feedback before going for FA. Thanks, -- d'oh! _[talk] 03:18, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Notes by Peripitus

Error in "terminated the partnership, along Aurora Energy" - though perhaps ?
some convoluted language
→"Telstra, NBN Co, and the Australian Government are negotiating a $11 billion deal to allow NBN Co to use Telstra's infrastructure to lower the total cost of building the project. The deal will also lead to the decommissioning of the copper network which will see Telstra's customers transferred to the NBN"

The deal is not an $11bn one but is worth that to Testra - the above implies it the wrong way around
The paragraph does not make it clear that this is a heads of agreement rather than a contract

Perhaps better longer and different as something like —→ "Telstra, NBN Co, and the Australian government signed a heads of agreement in June 2010 that provided Telstra compensation for the gradual decommissioning of its existing copper network. The agreement was estimated to be worth $11bn to Telstra and benefits NBN Co by transitioning existing customers, eliminating a wholesale competitor and providing access to existing infrastructure.

"was temporarily set at a flat rate A$300 per premise with no ongoing charges which will expire in July 2011" - comma or reordering needed somewhere here.
There really needs to be a section on the roll-out process and timeframe.
There is no explanation of how the A$27.1 billion figure was come to, how and over what timeframe it is proposed to be spent, how and over what time it is to be recovered, what the total proposed cost of the network is ($40 something billion) comes to mind and who and how is to pay for the difference between the two figures. These things have been fairly well written about.
I would like if there was somehting about the connection requirements for ISPs - I remember reading Simon Hackett writing (on whirlpool.net) about the number of required POPs and the consequent cost for ISPs to connect and the subsequent implicit lower limit on the size of ISPs. Hopefully some of this subject was picked up elsewhere and can be use.
Internet is a proper noun and should be capitalised
POI should be all caps in all places.
Does WiMax need a hyphen ? I don't know
The lead has cited material that is not in the body (for instance the $35.7bn figure) this material should all be in the body of the article as the lead is supposed to summarise.
The lead should summarise the article - at the moment it works as an introduction instead. Much of the construction, design and operation sections are not alluded to.

Hope that this has been helpful - Peripitus (Talk) 23:20, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, it is very helpful. The reason I used "PoI" instead of "POI" is NBN Co used "PoI" in the business plan. Other than the "resell" rule for RSPs mentioned in the article, there is not other requirements for accessing the NBN, Hackett just pointed out the high start-up cost for smaller RSPs. Prices or the way NBN charges shouldn't be included because they can and will be changed without media attention, which will make it very hard to update the article. -- d'oh! _[talk] 06:16, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]