Talk:Last-call return

message: The article does not mention whether or not there is a charge or fee in the United States 
for using the *69. Are you charged for dialing *69, or only if you ask them to automatically call the caller back for you? Or, are you even charged at all for any of the features/services? Or will you initially be charged simply for dialing *69? I find that this information is lacking, especially when I often use the feature, and would like to know if I am being charged for it. Can someone add this bit of info. in?
Also, this paragraph, "Conversely, to explicitly send the caller number on a line where the number is normally withheld, "1470" can be used as a prefix in the UK and *82 in the US." sounds confusing to me; does it mean that the return-caller can "override" the *82 feature, and still get the number s/he wants? It needs to be reworded.
: *82 is used to call numbers that do not accept calls from lines that do not send CID information by default.  One can set up phone service to automatically reject calls without CID information, just as one can set up phone service to not send CID info.  *82 gets around that. --DCrazy talk/contrib 14:27, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fee in U.S. 

message: The article incorrectly stated that *69's rotary equivalent was 1167 instead of 1169.  Is 1167 the proper analog analogue (pun definitely intended) for *67?  Rotary phones are hard to come by these days.  --DCrazy talk/contrib 14:26, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: In many cases "11" is used in place of the asterisk. So '*69' would be '1169' Lexlex (talk) 18:29, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rotary Codes 

message: I remember that when *69 first was available, it simply rang the other end right away.  The comment I just put on the page regarding this is from personal experience.  Can anyone find anything official on this, just to make sure that I'm not remembering incorrectly? Mapsax 19:01, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Direct connection 

message: The feature which continuously attempts to connect to a busy number is *66, not *69.  I would try to make that explicit in the article itself but it's a disaster so... it's here until some one endeavours a cleanup. - BalthCat 06:35, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  *66 in Canada 

message: :"Many companies withhold their direct-line numbers when calling out, or mask them with a generic switchboard number, and in many government agencies it is a disciplinary offense to make a direct-line number available in this way."
I've marked this as requiring a citation. The second part in particular is not universal - I work for a UK Govt department, and it is policy that our direct dial extensions are on every letter and email we send! Thryduulf 20:56, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disciplinary offence for revealing direct dial number

message: Does anyone know if this service is available in New Zealand? ··gracefool☺ 06:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Available in New Zealand 

message: There is a long comic sequence in an episode of the UK series Coupling that revolves around one character's dilemma over whether to use "1471" to determine if the aborted phone calls she is receiving are coming from her boyfriend, with whom she has had a fight (I think the episode is "Split," which would be the third series/season premiere). I don't want to make a trivia section, but it does seem to merit a tiny reference. What to do? What to do? Lawikitejana (talk) 12:11, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: A link to the guilty episode summary is List_of_Coupling_episodes#Series_three and I guess it could be a single line trivia section.  Jim.henderson (talk) 02:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ''[[Coupling (TV series)|Coupling]]'' reference 

message: I was just watching a contemporary horror movie set in the 1980s, in which a creepy moment occurs where a person gets a call returned at a pay phone. So the point of the scene seems to be that *69 did not exist in the USA in the 1980s. Is this accurate?Walterego (talk) 01:52, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: When did this come into existence?

message: Last-call return →  – Most official uses of this term, which is typically in instruction manuals etc. from phone service providers, capitalizes this as the official name of a service. Gary King (talk · scripts) 19:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: NoeticaTea? 07:09, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Last-call return. 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/20110314000130/http://www.telstra.com.au/homephone/features_services/call_return.html to http://www.telstra.com.au/homephone/features_services/call_return.html
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) 19:25, 17 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified