Talk:Metro by T-Mobile

message: "Also, it is near impossible to reach a customer service representative without going to a store as the support phones are handled by computer operators." is false and should be removed unless there are any objections.
Thank you for that edit.
Why remove it?  It IS near impossible to reach a customer service representative, and it's very frustrating.
A MetroPCS customer
== RE: When you call customer service and need help, try saying "Something else" at the prompt, and they'll push you through to an operator. Also, if you call in to the activation line, people answer in a matter of seconds.
You could also try calling a store directly or visiting one. The CSRs are there to help. After making this edit I called the sevice number (1-888-8metro8). Upon hearing the prompt, I said "something else", and it took me 2 1/2 minutes to get someone. I would say that's not too bad...
**RE: Actually I am a metroPCS customer, and even though they have a voice recognition answering system you do not have to say "something else" or "I need something else". After it prompts you to enter or say your phone number after dialing 1-888-8metro8 you can press "7" and you will be automatically connected with a customer service representative within minutes. (R3445v 00:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Original research" isn't allowed, but as a customer I can say it's sometimes difficult to get to a human, but not impossible.  MetroPCS seems to be growing faster than it's ability to keep up with customer support demand.  I think it's fair for the article to say something about possible difficulties in getting a human on the phone.  Also I've noticed problems with the website, and at least one customer service person (live, in a store) confirmed that the level of service is sporadic.  None of this can be printed in the article, but these are the "tones" that I think could fairly be included if a reliable source is found.Jonny Quick (talk) 14:39, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Customer Service 

message: By Zipexec Zipexec (talk) 15:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nationwide Calling 

message: I belive that we should add a "Coverage Area" section of the page. I don't want to do it because I may mess up the wikipedia page =p. Well anyways if you believe this is a good idea please reply, thank you. R3445v (talk) 02:10, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coverage Area 

message: The mathematical citations on the "Plans" part of this article are both incorrect and unnecessary. Incorrect because the activation fee is actually $15, not $25. Unnecessary because the fact that they don't have contracts is reason enough to explain the full price charged for the phones. The fact that you get your first month free and activation free is an explanation in itself of the savings incurred with a phone purchase. Any objections? Samuraidrive (talk) 14:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no "Plans" part of this article! Unfree (talk) 17:13, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Three years ago there was such a portion. It has since been removed. Cheers 69.155.81.39 (talk) 17:34, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plans 

message: The coverage section should be fixed -- MetroPCS HOME coverage area includes only Atlanta, Florida, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Detroit/Grand Rapids, Boston/New York/Philadelphia, and Dallas/Fort Worth, as well as adjacent areas. Anything else would be considered "EXTENDED" coverage, available with specific plans or with an extra monthly fee. 76.112.125.229 (talk) 18:00, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  "coverage" 

message: I this this article reads a lot like a news release and it seems that new additions to the article are making it more so--209.181.16.93 (talk) 20:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a very unusual article to have this news-ticker style. Probably needs a rewrite.--Lester 00:04, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Whatever that style was, it's gone now. Unfree (talk) 17:14, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  News Releasey 

message: What the hell is this? wap? edge? 3g? shenenigans?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.198.28.100 (talk) 14:57, 3 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Metroweb 

message: As it exists now, this article is little more than two long lists, of "current models" and "past models".  Please, could somebody add "[hide]" buttons to these lists? Unfree (talk) 15:45, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Phone models

message: There's nothing here!  It should be pointed out that MetroPCS doesn't allow its customers access to their account details without paying a fee.  The business seems to be oriented towards directing customers to its stores, which are often overcrowded, and where store employees seem to have a lot of trouble dealing with whatever systems they have set up.  Their voicemail system ties up customers' time and seems intentionally designed to make them give up.  They provide an answering machine like service which also wastes a lot of time.  The unlimited aspect of their plans seems to rely on most customers not using their phones often, in order to subsidize those who do.  For example, I'm paying about $45 a month, but can't see what plan I'm on, or what I'm being billed for.  I don't use my phone much.  I can't call Alaska, where one of my friends lives.  The coverage of Florida is supposed to be good, but I saw a map in a store which indicates that it's actually rather spotty.  The only reason I like MetroPCS is that I've signed no contract, which to me gives it a great advantage over all the other companies.  I tried accessing my account online, went through all the steps, including receiving a password via a text message on my phone, and when I tried logging on, the system complained that the username and password didn't match, though I'm quite sure they did.  When I called 1-888-8METRO8, as a note at the bottom of the login page suggested, a lady said I couldn't access my account without signing up for an additional service.  As things stand now, my bills are paid automatically out of my bank account, and the only way I have of knowing what they've charged is by examining my bank statement, long after the money's been paid out. Unfree (talk) 17:07, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Empty article

message: AOC25, can you please explain WHY you want this article deleted rather than improved?  You do not have consensus support for speedy deletion.
This article is 5 years old and has over 500 edits. I don't think speedy deletion makes any sense here.
Please use this talk page, and not commented text in the article to discuss. Thanks —fudoreaper (talk) 22:54, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speedy deletion 

message: I was a bit hasty because I was panicked: The article was written exactly like an advertisement, and had only one source, (which I put in) verifying the company's starting year. I was shocked, and not in a good way. I tried to start improving it with a few references, but soon realized it beyond my knowledge of the company to fix. I wanted it gone, since I was concerned that it would drive Wikipedia readers away. I tagged it with multiple issue and major rewrite templates just a few minutes ago, and I really, really hope someone will improve the article, and quick, since MetroPCS is a popular real-life subject, which some people will look up and go to Wikipedia for knowledge on. They will not find it and probably be quite angry at Wikipedia. I would like to know how it got to the state that it's in, since it was likely to be a slow, steady decline in quality. Thank you, and sorry.—AOC25 (talk) 22:30, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speedy deletion reply (Sorry it took so long)

message: This article has very little content, and not many sources. So why would we remove most of what sourced content it has?. I reverted to the version before the content was removed.
Cheers,
Thparkth (talk) 03:13, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  I reverted the removal of large-scale content 

message: AOC25 has again tagged this article as an advertisement, without providing any explanation for doing so. I do not believe that this article as written could possibly be considered to be an advertisement for MetroPCS. I do not want to simply revert his tag again, as this could turn into a slow edit war, so I am requesting a third opinion on this matter.
Should this article be tagged as an advert? And if so, which are the troubling passages?
Cheers,
Thparkth (talk) 12:55, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Third opinion request - advert tag 

message: I figure someone who pays more attention to this than I may want to look at http://www.tmonews.com/2012/05/deutsche-telekom-looking-to-purchase-metropcs-combine-with-t-mobile-usa/.  Perhaps it warrants mentioning in the MetroPCS article, perhaps not.</br>
LP-mn (talk) 03:02, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  T-Mobile buying? 

message: I corrected an error in the article T-Mobile US which said that T-Mobile US owns the fourth and fifth largest cellular networks in the United States. Yet, on this article and the article U.S. Cellular they both mention owning the fifth largest cellular network in the U.S. So it seems to me like the sentence in the beginning paragraph is inaccurate. I don't know however how they rank, so I am requesting that someone please look into this and fix it. Jesant13 (talk) 23:53, 27 February 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something doesn't add up to me 

message: Makes the point that MetroPCS was measured to be (more or less) at 3G speeds due to infrastructure they were using.  Due to the rapidly changing nature of technology, etc... this statement is meaningless unless it has a date to anchor it.  Was this yesterday, last week, last month, last year, etc....? Jonny Quick (talk) 14:35, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reception and Criticism - needs a date 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on MetroPCS. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130512193219/http://www.metropcs.com/metro/aboutus/management.jsp to http://www.metropcs.com/metro/aboutus/management.jsp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:22, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:36, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion 

message: Is “formerly” or “formally” meant here? I suspect it’s more likely the former (pun maybe intended) than the latter, considering company history. I’ve seen many get tripped up by these near-homophones on the internet lately DougieUnFresh (talk) 13:47, 1 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wording of opening line