Talk:Palm TX

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brands Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. 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 section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:26, 29 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TX (handheld) → Palm TX — Don't see any reason to omit the "Palm" brand name here (hence avoiding disambiguation parentheses). Letdorf (talk) 13:41, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.

Support avoiding parentheses would mean that there would be valid searchbox hits for the title, instead of no search hits on the current title. 76.66.194.32 (talk) 04:03, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Support: most articles on handhelds use the format "Manufacturer Model". Why not this one? jgp T C 07:19, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Any additional comments:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. 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.

Corrections

Link to reference 2 leads to 404. Can anyone dig up the original source or do we need to delete the dead-link? Ghorwin (talk) 23:23, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]