Talk:Pixel (1st generation)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reception?[edit]

The initial reviews are out, with most[1][2][3][4] having generally favorable reviews of the device(s). Should a section be added?

Yes, the article needs to show the Reception. I may do it in a few days if it isn't done. --Frmorrison (talk) 14:53, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Bohn, Dieter (18 October 2016). "Google Pixel review: Home run". The Verge.
  2. ^ "Google Pixel review: Bland, pricey, but still the best Android phone". Ars Technica.
  3. ^ Pierce, David. "Google Pixel Is the Best Phone on the Planet". WIRED.
  4. ^ "Google Pixel review: A very good phone by Google". Android Police. 18 October 2016.

LTE bands listing[edit]

I believe that the LTE bands listing should be updated to include 17, 29, and 30, per the Google specs listing and various articles like [1]. Any thoughts. Thanks. Infoman99 (talk) 21:57, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, but unfortunately, the section on variants is a little too complicated for me, and because I want both the variants section and infobox to be consistent with each other, I don't personally dare to touch either one. I'm going to leave that up to the editor who added them, or any other editor who understands that coding better than I do. LocalNet (talk) 03:23, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Variants section on LTE bands and infobox LTE bands are now consistent with each other and with the sources. Infoman99 (talk) 20:05, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why are nearly all the bands for G-2PW4100 missing, e.g. Band 2, 4, 12. Using this device today on those bands. the US sold device with that G-2PW4100 model number has bands as follows: FDD LTE: B 1/2/3/4/5/7/8/12/13/17/20/25/26/28/29/30, TDD LTE: B 41 - why was the assumption this was not the case. Taken from https://store.google.com/us/product/pixel_phone_specs?hl=en-US which is listing the US device specs. The original link above redirects now to the Pixel 2 BTW - my link still goes to the Pixel specs --Np sca (talk) 17:44, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The title[edit]

I think we should call the article "Pixel and Pixel XL" instead of just Pixel because it's two different phones. Nookie123456789 (talk) 02:25, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They are not different enough to warrant that. If you look at the iPhone and Galaxy articles, unless it is materially different they are kept in one article, under the base model's name - GalatzTalk 02:35, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

History section[edit]

Hi everybody! I see that a History section has been added. However, it doesn't actually provide any details about history other than issues, which are already covered in the Known problems section. I suggest deleting the History section. Thoughts? LocalNet (talk) 11:09, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should keep past historic events in the history section. Davidmartinetern (talk) 08:42, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Davidmartinetern: Thank you for commenting and I understand your reason, but please take a look at the section. It doesn't cover any events at all, it only focuses on issues, which are covered in the Known problems section. If we had info on the history of the device itself, that would be great, but as of now, the section only covers two issues (which is weird itself, since the Known issues section has info on countless problems). LocalNet (talk) 08:47, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That a section or an article is small is no reason to delete Wikipedia content. I do not consider a good idea to put past historic events outside the history section as that is confusing. We can improve the history section to highlight each historic event with its date, but, please, do not remove the section and do not pollute other sections with historic events. Davidmartinetern (talk) 19:09, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm... wait.... what? I never said anything about it being small... And please clarify "to put past historic events outside the history section" because the History section doesn't currently contain any history. It focuses on issues, which have its own, dedicated section with info on all problems and not just two. Why would we highlight historic events we don't have with dates we don't have? I'm sorry, I'm really trying to understand you here, but none of your message made any sense to me... LocalNet (talk) 19:19, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

History should be about the phone's development and release. The current history section duplicates information already present in a more sensible location, and causes WP:UNDUE problems by presenting minor issues as key events in the phone's development and release. Removed. – Steel 19:16, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding a third opinion to this discussion, and for removing the history. LocalNet (talk) 19:19, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Variants[edit]

Hi everybody! I am looking at the Variants section, and thinking two things: Intricate details that only interests the tech-savvy crowd, and that the sources used (like this one, for example) only reference "HTC Corporation" and nothing else to mention that they are the Pixel smartphones. That makes me question the sources. I'd love to have some clarification on 1) the importance of the information, and 2) how we actually know that they identify the Pixel? LocalNet (talk) 19:28, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Googling the model numbers brings up lots of results linking them to the Pixels so I don't doubt they're correct, but I'm not sure which of the results would be suitable as WP:RSes. As for importance, I think if this page was getting too long and we needed to distill the most important information then we might look at removing these tables, but currently I don't think they're doing much harm. – Steel 11:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, thanks for commenting. :) LocalNet (talk) 12:00, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merger discussion[edit]

This is a place to discuss the potential merge of Pixel (smartphone) and Pixel 2 with Google Pixel per the direction found on the Proposed Merger article. Plantduets (talk) 15:52, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Care to give a reason why? - Galatz גאליץשיחה Talk 16:34, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Pixel (smartphone) and Pixel 2 are device subsets of the Google Pixel product line and may not require their own individual articles. In doing research on the variations between devices, I was confused as to why there were multiple articles for the Google Pixel smartphone. Users may find it helpful to have all of the devices listed on a single article. Plantduets (talk) 16:35, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
They definitely have stand alone notability and are summarized just like everything else on the pixel line. This is no different than the iPhone or Samsung Galaxy series of articles. - Galatz גאליץשיחה Talk 16:39, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, you're correct. However I don't see why these types of articles warrant individual entries. For example the Samgung Glalaxy Tab S 10.5 and Samsung Galaxy Tab S 8.4 are nearly identical with the exception of the device display size. A better way to handle these would be to fold into the Samsung Galaxy Tab series entry, in my opinion.Plantduets (talk) 16:46, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Pixel and Pixel XL, just like Pixel 2 and Pixel 2 XL are definitely very similar and share the same articles. Pixel and Pixel 2 are not just size variants. - Galatz גאליץשיחה Talk 16:55, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see no need for individual articles for items within the same product line. See Roku for how they handle iterative updates to hardware. There is no individual article page for the "Roku Ultra", for example. Each generation gets its own section on the Roku main article page, and even has a table breaking out the hardware differences between each device. Plantduets (talk) 20:51, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Plantduets, if you want to know why merging different products into a single article is such a bad idea, open a discussion to merge all the List of Microsoft Windows versions into a single article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.143.127.56 (talk • contribs) 04:27, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think people are trying to compare this proposal with straw men comparisons which isn't the right argument for why this proposal should be denied. The denial for the merger is because there's sufficient notable sources for each article. Pixel 1 and 2 already are inclusive of the XL and non-XL versions that come out every year. The main Google Pixel article lists the series of devices. The only confusion I can see is Google Pixel with Pixel (smartphone) because the "Pixel (smartphone)" article should be more about Pixel 1 than the Pixel smartphone line. – TheGridExe (talk) 16:03, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Pixel (smartphone)" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

Information icon A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Pixel (smartphone). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 9#Pixel (smartphone) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:20, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 4 August 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) OhKayeSierra (talk) 19:41, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I only realized that there is already a Wikipedia article titled Google Pixel after typing this. Most people searching Google Pixel are probably looking for the phone, not the series of phones, so i will start a move discussion on it's talk page to move it to Google Pixel series.

This is the official name of the phone. I can understand that there is a confusion as the names of it's successor are simply Pixel 2 instead of Google Pixel 2, but Google probably called it Google Pixel to avoid confusion with Pixel, which would also explain why they didn't call the Pixel XL as Google Pixel XL. There is no need for (first generation) as barely anyone would search that, as most people just call it Google Pixel. Technology Matters (talk) 07:00, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Have merged the two move requests into one, since one won't be moved without the other. – Thjarkur (talk) 10:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Pixel_(1st_generation)&oldid=1209775663"