Talk:IPhone 11: Difference between revisions

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 15:53, 13 November 2019

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Apple Inc. Start‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Mac, iOS and related topics 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.Apple Inc.Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc.Template:WikiProject Apple Inc.Apple Inc. articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Electronics Start‑class Low‑importance

	Electronics portal This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Leave messages at the project talk pageElectronicsWikipedia:WikiProject ElectronicsTemplate:WikiProject Electronicselectronic articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Technology Start‑class

	Technology portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Telecommunications Start‑class Low‑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.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merger proposal

The following is a closed discussion of a proposed merger. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the proposed merger was: Not done. no consensus to merge. BLAIXX 16:09, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposed of iPhone 11 Pro into iPhone 11. I'm not the nom. {{u|waddie96}} {talk} 14:20, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly Oppose the merge. The iPhone X and iPhone 8 are both seperate articles, even though they were released at the same time. This also applies to the iPhone XS and iPhone XR, as well as the iPhone 5C and iPhone 5S. Devices in Apple's Pro lineup, such as the MacBook Pro and MacBook, and iPad Pro and iPad (7th generation), each have their own articles, so I don't see the difference with the iPhone 11 Pro and the iPhone 11 Pro Max. ClueCog (talk) 19:18, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the merge. The iPhone XR and iPhone XS each have their own article, so why can't the iPhone 11 and iPhone 11 Pro?? Georgia guy (talk) 13:38, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support the merge. The name Pro only denotes an improved variant of the same generation of iPhone. I actually support merging iPhone XR and iPhone XS as this will reduce ambiguity and resources used to maintain articles.Alexceltare2 (talk) 13:47, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the merge. We have separate articles for the MacBook and iPad Pro, so it makes sense for this to have its own page too. HurricaneGeek2002 (talk) 14:09, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Pro simply indicates a variant of the iPhone 11. The article should rather discuss the variant in the body. {{u|waddie96}} {talk} 14:22, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging @Taewangkorea, Ghostofakina, Kitcatx, Nigos, Anthony Appleyard, JJMC89, and HitroMilanese: {{u|waddie96}} {talk} 14:27, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per User:Georgia guy. The 11 and 11 Pro have different displays, cameras, etc. Syntaxlord (talk) 14:24, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose while the iPhone 11 and iPhone 11 Pro share some common characteristics (A13 SoC, Wide & Ultra Wide camera, etc.) there are enough differences between the two models for each to have a standalone article. The reception each phone will receive will not be the same as well. Reviewers will likely compare iPhone 11 to its predecessors the iPhone XR and iPhone 8 while the iPhone 11 Pro will be compared to iPhone XS and iPhone X. Trying to merge iPhone 11 and iPhone 11 Pro (and even iPhone XR and iPhone XS) together will create hard to read articles and likely cause even more confusion to casuals who don't understand why Apple has named their phones in this manner. Keeping iPhone XR and iPhone 11 as separate articles its easier to establish that they are successors to the iPhone 8. The same is true for the other models, keeping iPhone XS and iPhone 11 Pro separate its easier to establish that they are successors to the iPhone X and are the flagships. The only problem with recent articles about iPhones in general is they are not as developed as previous articles like the iPhone 6. If articles about the more recent phones like the XR and XS were more developed then we wouldn't need to merge them. Alucard 16_{❯❯❯ chat?} 15:13, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose iPhone XR and iPhone XS have separate articles, and so do iPhone 8 and iPhone X, although they were both released at the same time. Their successors also should. Apple intended them to be different phones (see Apple website:https://www.apple.com/iphone/) so there should be separate articles, similar to the past two years of iPhone releases. Taewangkorea (talk) 16:24, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There's too much a lot of technical differences (and also the descriptions of each model in infobox) to be merged into one article.Consumers (talk) 18:02, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly support iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus to iPhone 6 and iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus, are parts of the same family. iPhone XS and iPhone XS Max too. But iPhone XR and iPhone XS are not part of the same. --Panam2014 (talk) 18:54, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This section of the iPhone Apple website here: https://www.apple.com/iphone/, gives the answer. Two sections separately for the iPhone 11 and iPhone 11 Pro, logically it's the same for the articles.Consumers (talk) 19:06, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pretty much everything I wanted to say has already been said. The iPhone 8 & 8 Plus, for example, are almost the same phone, and therefore, they shared pages, on both Apple's website and Wikipedia. However, the iPhone XS & XR are very different, and have separate pages. The iPhone 11 and 11 Pro are in a near identical situation. This makes the argument that 6-8 line share pages very weak. Plus, because they're so different, the article would be too confusing and hard to read. So yeah, I don't think these pages should be merged. JdRDMS 9:41, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
Oppose keep the same as the prior generation, XS and XR separately, 11 Pro and 11 separately. —DIYeditor (talk) 23:20, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose they're different phones - every previous generation of normal/budget iphone has had separate pages for each model 24.56.77.198 (talk) 23:37, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Wikiped201820 (talk) 23:58, 11 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose iPhone 11 is the successor to the iPhone XR. However, it is not a direct successor to the iPhone XS (which is succeeded by the iPhone 11 Pro). Cosecant57 (talk) 12:09, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As stated above, the iPhone XR and iPhone XS are separate, so what makes this any different? Also, it would get pretty confusing if you tried to stuff all the different specs into the same article.Thanks, EDG 543 (talk) 13:42, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Apparently people think that the 11 and 11 Pro are like the XS and XS Max, or the 8 and the 8 plus. The 11 Pro is NOT just a modified 11, it is an ENTIRELY SEPARATE phone. MacOS Master (talk) 9:26, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
Oppose The 11 and 11 Pro have enough differences to be seperate. The pro is the first professional iPhone, which makes it notable. --Frmorrison (talk) 19:01, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It should not get moved into 1 page. 2 pages wo — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.173.183.221 (talk) 19:45, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, keep separate - two different products. 11 is mainstream. 11pro is 50% more expensive or more, has a different number of cameras, has a different screen, etc. XavierItzm (talk) 21:37, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose iPhone XR and iPhone XS are separate articles, so should this. Let's keep things in line with what we've done in the past. Apple calls them different phones, and they have different pages on the Apple website. MattSandy34 (talk) 15:26, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a proposed merger. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

RfC about including pricing information in article

Please consider joining the feedback request service.

An editor has requested comments from other editors for this discussion. This page has been added to the following list:

Wikipedia style and naming

When discussion has ended, remove this tag and it will be removed from the list. If this page is on additional lists, they will be noted below.

I will be short. Should a chart that includes pricing information of the iPhone 11 in various countries (in USD) be included in the article? Taewangkorea (talk) 00:47, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure why not if well referenced. It is interesting how prices vary globally for a product.Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 03:04, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Price

This source appears independent?[1] So do not see justification for removing this. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 16:35, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't remove the prices, but I believe the justification was WP:NOPRICE. --Yamla (talk) 17:11, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and that requires "independent sources" Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:58, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid this is incredibly difficult to see as good faith, and have brought up the concern with Doc James: User_talk:Doc_James#Prices_for_medications

The source is a simple listing, demonstrating no encyclopedic value. This is exactly why NOT includes NOPRICES. --Ronz (talk) 18:00, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose including the list of prices. I take this position solely based on my belief that it clutters up the article; I do not make this argument on WP:NOPRICES grounds. I don't believe that information is particularly useful. The vast majority of visitors will only care how much the iPhone is in their local currency. I know that's all I care about. The fact that I can get it cheaper in Australia isn't meaningful to me at all. --Yamla (talk) 18:05, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support including the list of prices using an independent source. It is helpful to know the different prices. Readers can find out about their local price when reading about the list of prices. QuackGuru (talk) 18:11, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Wikipedia:Prices which says "Wikipedia has no specific policy on presenting prices of products". But I would move it lower in the article. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 18:22, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The source provides absolutely none of the policy-required required justification: WP:NOT: An article should not include product pricing or availability information unless there is an independent source and a justified reason for the mention. Encyclopedic significance may be indicated if mainstream media sources (not just product reviews) provide commentary on these details instead of just passing mention. --Ronz (talk) 16:38, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Oppose WP:NOPRICE and by the fact that the macindex does not appear to be a mainstream reliable source. Also, the chart clutters up the article and similar charts are not listed in other iPhone articles such as iPhone 11 Pro, iPhone 8, iPhone XR, iPhone XS, iPhone X, and others. We should follow precedent. Taewangkorea (talk) 17:29, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:NOPRICE: "An article should not include product pricing or availability information unless there is an independent source and a justified reason for the mention." "Encyclopedic significance may be indicated if mainstream media sources (not just product reviews) provide commentary on these details instead of just passing mention." Also, prices will change, especially when newer iPhones come out, so will the price table be updated every time? And including the price table without any justified reason/commentary seems to give the article a bit of a promotional-ish tone. Someone963852 (talk) 02:24, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- It might make more sense to not update it, and present the list prices at the time of release. People who want to know how much it will cost them personally, right now, need to be looking at a sales website. The encyclopedic information is in the "Huh, why does this cost 20% more in Greece than in France? They're both in the EU..." moment, not in the "I gotta save up another hundred bucks before I can buy that" moment. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:58, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Let's not forget that US market pricing for all devices is already included in the iPhone article, making this section redundant. If viewers outside of the United States wish to know the price in their market, they can simply go to their respective Apple website. As a further note, the Pixel 3 had a similar debate over pricing, and its section was ultimately removed. I suggest we do the same with this article. Ghostofakina (talk) 04:09, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for pretty much all these reasons. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 05:47, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Wikipedia:Prices --Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 14:18, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not crazy about including a table of prices, but I feel like price should at least be mentioned given the amount of coverage it received. Calidum 14:21, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose a bare chart. I support prose based on reliable sourcing commenting on price, e.g. any notable variations in price between countries. Bondegezou (talk) 10:56, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Fails NOPRICE. No attempt by editors to demonstrate it meets NOPRICE, or the source demonstrates the need for an exception. RECENTISM, SOAP, UNDUE, and generally of questionable encyclopedic value as sourced. --Ronz (talk) 19:49, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose. In most cases, pricing is a useless information in an encyclopaedia (unless linked with a controversy, high publicity etc). Whoever needs to know the current product price in their own country, is free to check Amazon, Google Shopping, eBay, or whatever online shop they have in their area. Encyclopaedia needs to list the essential qualities of an item and not make an effort to track prices across models, years, countries, sellers, etc. It's not what an encyclopaedia is for. — kashmīrī ^TALK 22:02, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per WP:PRICES, which is an essay to which I contributed. We need a balance. Wikipedia does not need to be so price sensitive for iphones, but for phones in general, knowing whether the retail price is ~US$100 versus $500 versus $1000 is essential general reference information for understanding the product. For drugs knowing whether a dose is $1 versus $10 versus $100 versus $1000 is essential. I know that prices are messy to report globally but somehow Wikipedia articles need to communicate when a product exists to benefit and be accessible for the poverty, lower, middle, or upper economic class of consumers. I do not care about exact prices, but prices are one way to distinguish products for the lower class versus the upper class. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:53, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

If no one can make a case that NOPRICE is met, or somehow we have an encyclopedic exception to NOPRICE, then we're wasting our time here trying to create local consensus against content policy. --Ronz (talk) 03:10, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since some editors believe that the essay Wikipedia:Prices somehow applies here, I think it important to point out the RfC on it's talk page, Wikipedia_talk:Prices#RfC:_why_no_prices_at_all?, which I believe undermines any such arguements. --Ronz (talk) 19:54, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 80: / Line 80: @@
 *'''Oppose''' Fails NOPRICE. No attempt by editors to demonstrate it meets NOPRICE, or the source demonstrates the need for an exception. RECENTISM, SOAP, UNDUE, and generally of questionable encyclopedic value as sourced. --[[User:Ronz|Ronz]] ([[User talk:Ronz|talk]]) 19:49, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
 *'''Strong oppose'''. In most cases, pricing is a useless information in an encyclopaedia (unless linked with a controversy, high publicity etc). Whoever needs to know the current product price in their own country, is free to check Amazon, Google Shopping, eBay, or whatever online shop they have in their area. Encyclopaedia needs to list the essential qualities of an item and not make an effort to track prices across models, years, countries, sellers, etc. It's not what an encyclopaedia is for. — [[User:Kashmiri|<span style="color:#30C;font:italic bold 1em Candara;text-shadow:#AAF 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em;">kashmīrī</span>]]&nbsp;[[User talk:Kashmiri|<sup style="font-family:Candara; color:#80F;">TALK</sup>]] 22:02, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
+*'''Support''' per [[WP:PRICES]], which is an essay to which I contributed. We need a balance. Wikipedia does not need to be so price sensitive for iphones, but for phones in general, knowing whether the retail price is ~US$100 versus $500 versus $1000 is essential general reference information for understanding the product. For drugs knowing whether a dose is $1 versus $10 versus $100 versus $1000 is essential. I know that prices are messy to report globally but somehow Wikipedia articles need to communicate when a product exists to benefit and be accessible for the poverty, lower, middle, or upper economic class of consumers. I do not care about exact prices, but prices are one way to distinguish products for the lower class versus the upper class. [[User:Bluerasberry|<span style="background:#cedff2;color:#11e">''' Blue Rasberry '''</span>]][[User talk:Bluerasberry|<span style="background:#cedff2;color:#11e">(talk)</span>]] 15:53, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 ===Discussion===