Talk:Samsung Galaxy Note 7

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Android High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Android, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Android 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.AndroidWikipedia:WikiProject AndroidTemplate:WikiProject AndroidAndroid articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Computing Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as High-importance).

Electronics Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Technology

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

Telecommunications 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

How to translate article to other language[edit]

P Surendra Rulz (talk) 15:23, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Surendra Rulz This is not the best place to ask questions like this, but see WP: Translate where it says

"To request a translation of an English Wikipedia article into another language, click on the appropriate sidebar language link on this page (WP: TRANSLATE) to access the foreign-language Wikipedia's equivalent translation project."

220 of ^Borg 13:18, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Photo nominated for deletion[edit]

File:Notice about Samsung Galaxy Note 7 devices (29986812710).jpg has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons, with relevant discussion taking place at the deletion nomination page. -Mardus /talk 05:48, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Use of 'the' with the model name[edit]

Use of 'the' in "the Galaxy Note 7" is often superfluous in most situations. Use either of the following:

"Samsung Galaxy Note 7" — 'the' not required, because it's a full name;
stand-alone Galaxy Note 7 — because it's also full name (series and model), but must be italicized;
"the Note 7" — model name is also italicized;
Use 'the' in the construct of "the Galaxy Note 7 device|phone|model".

Because Galaxy Note 7 is not short enough for use with the 'the' article; while Note 7 and S7 (as short constructs) really are that short that they do require a 'the' before them.

That respectable native-English-language publications use the wrong construct of "the Galaxy Note 7", does not make the construct less incorrect grammatically. -Mardus /talk 11:23, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As a good example, this Slate article uses correct grammar and article use with device names and model numbers, as there isn't anything that I would complain about. -Mardus /talk 11:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it does not need to take definite article but the italics around every instance of a model name that you insist are much. Also, why isn't this formatting enforced on any other article? ViperSnake151 Talk 00:12, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Galaxy Note 7 could be non-italicised, because it's a longer name; and Note 7 and other such short names should be italicised, because they're that short. -Mardus /talk 01:51, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's not an exception on Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Text_formatting#Italic_type. ViperSnake151 Talk 03:22, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you add some context to what is not an exception and how? -Mardus /talk 22:21, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know where you picked up this stuff, Mardus, but you're wrong on all counts: the definite article is required, except in cases such as when it's used as an adjunct; whether the name is abbreviated is irrelevant; and product names don't get italicized. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 22:15, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@¡gobble! I'll concede a bit on italics, but if a product name is very generic, then at some point it's useful to use italics to separate it from the main text.

My primary worry stems from the fact, that very often, this is used a lot: "The Apple iPhone 7" instead of "Apple iPhone 7". The iPhone on its own is quite fine, and "iPhone 7" alone is also good. -Mardus /talk 03:52, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Give us a citation of this style, then; what you suggest flies in the face of normal English usage, as in this article from PC magazine that states "The Apple iPhone 7 will be available ...". How many articles can you find with the string "Apple iPhone 7 will" in running text (not titles)?

if a product name is very generic, then at some point it's useful to use italics to separate it from the main text—it's capitalized. We don't italicize product names. Curly "JFC" Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 23:06, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Separate content from air travel advisories into a new section about the ban?[edit]

Here I'd made changes in the Air travel advisories section, and renamed it to "Air travel advisories, subsequent ban".

Perhaps it would make more sense to move the 'complete ban of the device from airplanes' into a new section that would follow the second recall section, but before "Effect on Samsung". -Mardus /talk 12:59, 13 October 2016 (UTC) im.[reply]

@Mardus: Er, I think I've done what you suggested (above) here [1], in a section titled "Banned from aircraft" but I wasn't aware of this discussion at the time. Major Oz airlines have followed FAA in banning them, from midnight AEDST anyway (about 23 minutes from ...now!) 220 of ^Borg 12:37, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

But someone apparently didn't agree and, without even the courtesy of an edit summary, undid much of my editing. [2] - 220 of ^Borg 16:59, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is an aspect of the recall as a whole. I am not trying to "keep things together", but present a chronological narrative. ViperSnake151 Talk 20:04, 15 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The ban by airlines, from airports and airplanes can be placed into the chronological narrative without removing it entirely. The ban should in fact be at least a section, and in a section name, because that way, everyone first seeing this article will know for certain without having to second-guess. -Mardus /talk 01:36, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reception section[edit]

The first paragraph in the reception section comes off way too negative. As far as I know, before the recall, the device was extremely well received by reviewers, but the reception section doesn't give that impression at all. 192.19.255.250 (talk) 00:03, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DISCLAIMER: The Note 7 photo is fake[edit]

I've seen that device has not the Samsung logo as other devices and got an unofficial Nougat update. Galaxy Note 7 will never ever get Nougat update due to a discontinued product.
IMPORTANT: Someone will have to upload a REAL Note 7 photo. TheWikiContributor (talk) 18:28, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@ViperSnake151 and TheWikiContributor: I have uploaded a new photo. Regards. --Panam2014 (talk) 10:54, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion to split out into another article titled Battery faults of the Samsung Galaxy Note 7[edit]

Consensus against. f e minist 14:12, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

The following discussion 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.

I disagree with this suggestion. In general the battery issue was big enough to potentially warrent its own article. But, because the battery issue was the only thing that happened with this phone, there's not enough content for two seperate articles. To address this suggestion I was bold and created a new redirect page called Battery faults of the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 that redirect directly to the battery section of this article. I'll leave the suggestion here for now, but if no one expresses a problem, then I'll eventually delete the suggestion. Jean15paul (talk) 21:20, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this. There's no need for a separate article. If this was an ongoing problem, then maybe. But Samsung has recalled them all and permanently halted production, so there literally won't be anything else to report on either the battery or the phone other than maybe a sentence or two in the future about lawsuit settlements. - Scottwindcrest (talk) 22:45, 28 April 2017 (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.