# Talk:Juniper MX Series

The current article is promotional and poorly sourced. It has content like "one of the industry's largest-capacity Carrier Ethernet platform" and "is a family of high-performance". Most of the content is unsourced original research on technical information and the sourced content is almost exclusively from press releases. 
I have put a draft together at Talk:Juniper MX-Series/Draft as a proposed replacement for the current article, that I believe would resolve the article's problems. As I have a COI, I was hoping a disinterested editor would review my work.  David King, Ethical Wiki (Talk) 20:42, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

 Done I read the draft and found it to be vastly improved over the current article. I did not copy the draft lead as I found the one already in the article gave me a better overview of what the product actually is. I think there still needs to be some work done, like perhaps explaining what some of the things mean for a layperson like me to understand, but this version is much less promotional and utilizes sources appropriately. Wugapodes (talk) 03:23, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for taking a look @Wugapodes:!!! I made some quick minor copyedits and misc tweaks in the Lead, but I also think we should delete this sentence: "The MX960 is one of the industry's largest-capacity Carrier Ethernet platform, with up to 2.6 terabits per second (Tbit/s) of switching and routing capacity.[1][2][3]" This is a fairly WP:EXCEPTIONAL claim supported only by press releases.  David King, Ethical Wiki (CorporateM) (Talk) 23:42, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
I actually just went ahead and rewrote the lead as I feel it didn't adequately cover the article either. I did remove the sentence you took issue with (along with pretty much every other sentence). A note on the article: there are a number of places where you use "late (year)" or "early (year)" which should probably use the specific period if known, like "in (month) (year)" or "on (date)" as "early" and "late" are really relative and can easily be misinterpreted. Anyway, let me know what you think of the new lead Wugapodes (talk) 16:13, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Looks good @Wugapodes:! I made some very minor tweaks to avoid using the word "series" twice in the same sentence, etc. One other thing I forgot to mention is that (as the article itself states) "3D" is now part of the name of the product family. It also doesn't normally have a hyphen. (see here). I suggest renaming the article to "Juniper MX Series 3D". David King, Ethical Wiki (CorporateM) (Talk) 16:52, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
I don't know enough about the topic to really make an informed call on titling. The relevant policy is WP:COMMONNAME which says Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's "official" name as an article title; it generally prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources. And I don't know enough about the sourcing on this to be able to say what the common name is. I'd recommend a requested move, let it run for at least 7 days, and go off that consensus, and probably notify the talk page of Juniper Networks as they might have good insight. Wugapodes (talk) 17:54, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Juniper MX-Series/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: I am accepting this article as my second GA review :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs)  07:32, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Look forward to your review. CorporateM (Talk) 13:48, 17 May 2016 (UTC)


### Criteria
### Review
Well-written:

Verifiable with no original research:

Broad in its coverage:

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:


#### Result
#### Discussion
Please add any related discussion here.


### Additional notes