Talk:Telephone numbering plan

Archives (index)

1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be auto-archived by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 2.

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (center, color, defense, realize, traveled) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Telecommunications Mid‑importance Telecommunication portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications 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. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Edit Request for the Integrated telephone numbering plan section

New words underlined. Deletions strikethrough.

In an integrated telephone numbering plan multiple countries share a single ITU country code. The North American Numbering Plan comprises 25 countries or dependent territories in North America and the Caribbean using country code 1. Similarly, in eastern Europe and Asia, world numbering zone 7 with country code 7 comprises Russia and Kazakhstan with country code 7.

Perhaps "country code 1" and/or "NANP" should link somewhere, as "country code 7" does. -- 89.240.139.230 (talk) 18:16, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Open vs. closed numbering plans

There's no explanation of the comparative advantages of each of these types of numbering plans.

If we're going to make this distinction, it seems like there ought to be a motivation for selecting one approach vs. the other. Fabrickator (talk) 22:17, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The distinction is not a Wikipedia invention, but rooted in historical developments, or perhaps rather, in historical decision making by the relevant engineering groups. Feel free to find their technical reasoning that informed their decisions. Good luck. kbrose (talk) 04:22, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

variance

"HAS variation, not ALLOWS" – so you're telling me that, if at any moment all the numbers happen to have the same length, it is no longer an open plan, even if there is nothing in the design to prevent lengths from varying again tomorrow?

Also, why is "variance" a better word here than "variation"? —Tamfang (talk) 22:00, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]