Talk:Nokia Lumia 1520

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

Corrections Needed[edit]

The RM-940 is the AT&T vairant, not the RM-938 Lumia1520 variant RM-940 for AT&T The RM-940: DTM feature and WCDM1700/2100 (Band 4)(T-Mobile) will be disabled, GPRS will support multi-slot class 10, has only Wireless Charging interface pins in the backcover for PMA charging and built-in Wireless Charging (WPC/Qi) loop has been removed. The RM-940 will have 16GB of memory. Windows Phone.com AT&t Lumia 1520 spces All the remaining variants of the Lumia 1520 will have 32GB of memory. Existing reference 10 All Lumia 1520's have the IPS LCD display, not amaloid. Lumia 1520 GaryM114 (talk) 16:15, 31 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See page 17 of FCC filing: http://fccid.net/document.php?id=2085335

  • RM-937 Global variant, LTE 1 3 7 8 20
  • RM-938 US variant - Went through FCC, LTE 2 4 5 17, has WCDM1700/2100 (Band 4)(T-Mobile) ?
  • RM-939 China variant
  • RM-940 AT&T, Went through FCC, DTM removed, no Q1 charging, LTE band 4 disabled, 16GB, LTE 2 5 17 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.171.94 (talk) 23:30, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The RM-938 has been showing up in North America. It does have the AWS WCDM1700/2100 band, whereas the ATT RM-940 does not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.128.111.196 (talk) 21:27, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not all lumias freeze[edit]

Apart from the dubious source, I've never seen any article stating that all Lumina freeze. I don't know if it's bias, lies or just a very poor source. What resources do we have to challenge this information?

I think its not notable, the first problem was reported by 3 users, the second is questionable. The whole section should be removed, other phones don't have sections like this when the problem is not present in all phones. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.86.161.97 (talk) 14:55, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems like someone using different IPs (or maybe more people) want to give bad publicity for the Nokia Lumias vandalizing the Wikipedia articles. Note the similarity in IPs, like 2.137.*
User / IP revision comment
2.137.207.201 589125419 reinserts non-WP:Neutral point of view content
2.137.200.146 589281684 Re-adds content (with URL as reference that has no relation to the statement) citing it is sourced.
79.146.166.251 589266829 Again re-adds content (with URL as reference that has no relation to the statement) citing it is sourced.
81.36.45.10 591118634 Adds content again, giving to much WP:Weight
79.154.202.43 591119213 Adds URL as reference that has no relation to the statement.
83.38.50.7 593301738 commenting "Removing a reliable source prevents a neutral point of view"
2.137.131.186 593414596 commenting "Unexplained revert"
The added sources are not reliable sources (Internet polls, opinions). Some statements are opinions, and some are obliviously non-NPOV, for example "The phone freezes and hangs ramdomly, like other Lumia phones.", which needs reliable sources. Götz (talk) 02:11, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
These sources are based on facts (the phone randomly reboots) not opinions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.137.181.69 (talk) 10:14, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Then you have to follow Wikipedia guidelines and provide a reliable sources. There is also the question, is it significant? For this see Due and undue weight. The second part (like other Lumia phones) is also non–neutral point of view without a reliable sources. —Götz (talk) 17:21, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
They are both reliable sources. This is significant. Many people are upset about this issue. Both sources cite that the random reboot issue affects other Lumia devices. If you remove this issue you are not maintaining a neutral point of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.39.145.206 (talk) 11:32, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A poll is not a proper source. If the article says "The phone freezes and hangs randomly" this would mean that every phone freezes and hangs (no encyclopedic style) without any reason, which is obviously not the case. Also, please remember that Wikipedia is not a product support site, where the freeze/hang issue could be relevant enough for mentioning. |FDMS 16:11, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The poll was started after the author noticed even more random reboots. Why do you want to hide this issue? Are you a Microsoft (or Nokia) worker? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.150.97.254 (talk) 16:33, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The same can be said about you, do you work for Apple or Google Spain? Did you have a bad experience using a Nokia Lumia? But this is not relevant.
If you really don't understand the issue, then look, you need to adhere to Wikipedia Policies, this is, you need content that is neutral, baked with reliable sources. Those blogs that you link are not reliable sources, everyone can write a blog or such. The wpcentral.com site talks about issues after installing an app, and below that is a poll (no RS), with the majority (66%) not having problems after installing the mentioned app. So, that site doesn't even talk about the phone's random resets you were talking about.
And please, sign you comments on talk pages.—Götz (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is enough. You clearly want the issue hidden. I opened a Wikipedia:Dispute resolution at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Nokia Lumia 1520. 83.40.247.218 (talk) 15:29, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Which was closed by not having extensive discussion at the talk page. Do you want to discuses it? —Götz (talk) 03:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations! You guys win! The random reboot issue will remain hidden in Wikipedia. —83.35.231.22 (talk) 13:05, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a competition. Do you think it is encyclopedic to mention about an issue that affects a small part of the users? At least this convinced you. —Götz (talk) 17:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You said the issue affects a small part of the users. Do you have a reliable source for that? —83.37.106.116 (talk) 14:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not relevance, but irrelevance must be proven, right? [sarcasm] |FDMS 14:27, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Different text, same problem[edit]

Why do you continue, anonymous user, with your constant addition of clearly non-neutral point of view content to the encyclopedia article? You have to ask you this questions: Is the content encyclopedic? Is it significant enough to be mentioned? After this, you have to back the content with references, but not any, the references have to be from reliable sources.
The necessary links for the policies and guides have already been given to you, but one more time with some more:

I hope this helps. —Götz (talk) 23:17, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The content is encyclopedic. It is significant enough. They are reliable sources. Too bad for Wikipedia I do not have the time to fight your censorship. --81.37.122.60 (talk) 11:09, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

¿Phablet smartphone?[edit]

The intro reads "is a phablet smartphone" ¿Aren't both form-factors? Sincerely, --Namlong618 (talk) 10:08, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

9859 120.89.104.78 (talk) 11:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

SD capacity[edit]

The main text says it supports SD cards up to 128 GB, but the source article cited for this fact does not say that, nor does it even mention SD cards. The sidebar of this article says it supports only up to 64 GB, which is what I've seen elsewhere for this phone as well. (I don't know if 64 GB was just the largest available at the time of manufacture, or if the SD slot specification used on this phone has a hard limit of 64 GB.) I can't make the correction because I don't know the answer, but the internal inconsistency of this article, as well as the inconsistency of the source cited, point to the need for some reaearch and correction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ScribeMonk (talk • contribs) 20:19, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nokia_Lumia_1520&oldid=1218717841"