Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/IPhone 4S/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by GrahamColm 16:17, 26 May 2012 [1].

IPhone 4S[edit]

IPhone 4S (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Zach Vega (talk to me) 22:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because it's been improved a lot lately and has reached GA status. Zach Vega (talk to me) 22:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments: Haven't read the article yet, but I noticed some repeated wikilinking in the Hardware and Critical reception sections. A couple prose issues I saw at a glance:
  • "Previous generation iPhones are recirculated through the markets through various methods, third-party buyers may purchase older generation iPhones, Apple also buys back previous generation iPhones under a special program." Looks like some comma splicing here.
  • I see one paragraph starting with "iPhone 4S..." and then the next with "The iPhone 4S".
  • "At announcement plans were in place for the iPhone 4S to support many languages from around the world." I think "from around the world" is implied here. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:40, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Under History, is it policy to have a great big list of countries and the release date of the product in each? A table would be much concise and accessible. MasterOfHisOwnDomain (talk) 14:01, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps as a compromise we could retain the table but with a show/hide option? --Thanks, Hadseys (talk) 21:39, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:49, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • The only unreliable source found was blingboutiques. All the other ones are Apple news sites, with the exception of iFixit, which shows iPhone teardowns. Zach Vega (talk to me) 12:14, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • They're not official Apple news sites, but are put up by people of various backgrounds - some are blogs, some have no info about author or editor. iFixit is a wiki. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:18, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article would be nearly empty if we only included sources from Apple. Zach Vega (talk to me) 00:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • There seems to be some misunderstanding here; perhaps I can clarify: Nikkimaria is not suggesting that only Apple-authored sources can be used. Non-Apple sources can most certainly be used so long as they are actually reliable—peer-reviewed scholarly journals or major news outlets, ideally. However, the sources that Nikkimaria linked to above are not reliable. Unless you can provide some justification for their use, those sources should be replaced or their respective contents removed. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 00:48, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, TUAW is owned by AOL. iFixit, while being a wiki, is pretty much the only source for teardowns. I'll replace all the others. Zach Vega (talk to me) 01:07, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • An article being "pretty much the only source" for something does not magically make it reliable. I'm on the fence about TUAW, as it does appear to have a reasonable amount of editorial oversight, but iFixit definitely needs to be replaced. If it can't be replaced, its content should be removed. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 12:19, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Be consistent in what is wikilinked when
  • Check for consistency in italicization
  • Don't use hyphens in titles where dashes should be used. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:49, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from Cryptic C62. As I'm reading through this article, it is becoming more and more apparent that it was written for an audience that already has complete knowledge about the iPhone 4. This is absolutely not the correct way to present the information. It should be presented with the assumption that the reader knows nothing about Apple products. On a similarly dire note, there is a lot of information missing from this article. Where is the Marketing or Promotion section? Where is the Design section? Where is the information about third-party apps? Can this device play music? On top of all this, the prose is written quite badly:

  • "The phone added a voice recognition system known as Siri" I realize it would be somewhat cumbersome to refer to the subject as "the iPhone 4S" every single time, but I think "the 4S" would be a better abbreviation than "the phone".
 Done
No, not done. "The phone added a voice recognition system known as Siri" is exactly as it was. (This came from the lead, btw). --Cryptic C62 · Talk 12:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lead doesn't summarize any material from Critical reception.
 Done
  • From the lead: "On October 4, 2011 in Cupertino, California, Apple started accepting pre-order requests for the iPhone 4S on October 7, 2011, in seven initial countries (United States, Canada, Australia, United Kingdom, France, Germany and Japan) with the first delivery date set for October 14, 2011 and available on that same day for direct in-store sales in those countries." This sentence is too long; it should be split. More importantly, it's confusing. Did Apple start accepting pre-orders on Oct 4 or Oct 7?
 Done
  • "while pre-orders for purchasers buying contracts started on October 7, 2011" This clause is completely redundant with the previously mentioned sentence.
 Done
  • Why does the first paragraph of Software focus almost entirely on the hardware?
 Done
  • Not a prose issue, but this image is of absolutely unacceptable quality and needs to be redone. Use a smaller aperture in order to keep more of the subject in focus, recompose the image so that the devices are entirely in view, clean the fingerprint smudge off the bottom device, and make sure the "hold" switch is in the same position for both devices.
Seems good to me. Zach Vega (talk to me) 01:03, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's not. The purpose of the image is to show the similarities and differences between the two models, but the focal depth is so shallow that I can't even tell what the volume buttons look like. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 12:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The purpose of the image is to show the difference in the position of the antennae, which are clearly visible. Zach Vega (talk to me) 21:22, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "These commands can vary greatly and control almost every section of the phone." Presumably by "section" you mean "application"? "Section" implies physical volume or area.
 Done
  • "is that it is much easier and/or possible" Don't use "and/or". Ever. It was a phrase invented by cavemen who didn't understand the difference between exclusive or and inclusive or.
 Done
  • "such as language and its voice feedback ability (its ability to talk back)" The parenthetical comment does nothing to clarify the main phrase, due to the fact that it uses almost the exact same words as the phrase it is intended to clarify.
 Done
  • "At launch Apple said Siri is still in beta, and it has a certain set of abilities with restrictions, such as being able to dictate texts but not emails, and only controlling certain apps" Why is this written in the present tense?
 Done
  • "iMessages are in blue, and regular texts in green in the screen bubbles." Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an instruction manual.
 Done
  • The article is not consistent in its use of "spell checker" vs. "spell-checker".
 Done
  • "The device is a world phone and can work on both GSM & CDMA networks." Is "GSM & CDMA" a proprietary name? If so, why isn't it linked? If not, why does it employ an ampersand?
 Done
  • "On a 2G (on GSM) network it supports up to 14 hours of talk time." Is this related to battery life? If so, why is it in the software section?
 Done
  • "The camera can now be accessed directly from the lock screen" This is a perfect example of how not to write an article about a new gadget. The use of "now", despite being completely inappropriate per WP:ASOF, is totally meaningless unless the reader already knows how the iPhone 4 behaved.
 Done
  • "The right side of the device is devoid of inputs except for a SIM card slot." Well, it's not devoid of inputs then, is it? I am completely devoid of limbs except for my arms and legs.
 Done
  • "The top left on the back of the device houses an 8 megapixel f/2.4 aperture camera with an LED flash." Why isn't this in the paragraph about the camera?
 Done
  • "The improvement in interactive multimedia applications was obvious compared to its predecessor." Promotional. Blatantly so. Also, MOS:OPED explicitly forbids "obvious".
 Done
Not done. It's still promotional. It should either explain the in what way the applications are better, or it should ascribe the statement to an author. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 01:10, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The German phone company Deutsche Telekom said they were "satisfied" with consumer interest." How does this relate in any way to the paragraph to which it is attached? Consumer interest and consumer satisfaction are not the same thing.
 Done
No, not done. The problem persists. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 12:46, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
  • "In both the iPhone 4 (New 8GB Model Only)" This use of "new" is problematic per WP:ASOF, as the model will become non-new at some point in the near future.
  • "Therefore, if the iPhone 4S is gripped in such a way as to attenuate one piece of the cellular antenna" This usage of attenuate is not correct.
  • "The camera on the iPhone 4S, also known as an iSight camera, can take 8 MP photos" What does MP stand for? Wikilink or explanation needed.
  • The first paragraph of Software is now almost entirely unsourced.
  • "The response to user input is immediate and provides a fluid interface." Blatantly promotional.
  • "Supported video formats include such as" Was this sentence written by Caitlin Upton?
  • "These include a 3-axis gyro" I didn't know that the 4S come with a free sandwich. Perhaps you meant "gyrometer"?
  • "The overall dimensions of the iPhone 4S are lower than that of the 3GS." This doesn't make any sense. Are you trying to say that the 4S is smaller than the 3GS?
  • The third paragraph of Design was copied from the Design section of iPhone 4. The problem here is that in the iPhone 4 article, a comparison was being made with the iPhone 3, while in this article a comparison is being made between the 4S and the 4. The result is that the copied paragraph does not make sense in the context of this article.
  • The last paragraph of Design starts with "it". Bad.
  • "There were no external differences between the iPhone 4 CDMA model and the iPhone 4S" This statement directly contradicts this image.
  • "new/better camera" Which is it? If you want to get better at writing, don't use slashes.
  • "and Sprint carrying" Do you mean "Sprint coverage"?

There is also a shocking number of phrases which are totally redundant with each other. Many of these are split between Software and Hardware, which leads me to believe that the author doesn't understand the difference between the two concepts.

  • "The iPhone 4S introduced ... "Siri", unique to the 4S" and "Siri ... is currently a feature only available on the iPhone 4S" and "Siri, a voice control feature exclusive to the iPhone 4S"
 Done
  • "it is much easier and/or possible for people to use device functions while driving, exercising" and "one area it may be useful is driving and exercise activities." and "Since Siri can send text messages, a person can text and drive without taking their eyes off the road".
 Done
  • "It can download at maximum rate of 14.4 Mbps" and "The iPhone 4S can support a maximum output theoretically of up to 14.4 Mbps"
 Done
  • "On a 2G (on GSM) network it supports up to 14 hours of talk time." and "The iPhone 4S is stated to have ... 14 hours talk time on 2G"
 Done

This article isn't ready. Not even close. Frankly, I don't understand how it passed GAN. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 18:19, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's good to see that some of the nitpicks have been fixed, but I pointed out some fairly substantial flaws in my initial oppose that have not been addressed at all. Where is the Marketing or Promotion section? Where is the Design section? Where is the information about third-party apps? Can this device play music? --Cryptic C62 · Talk 12:29, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Added "Design" section. Currently adding more info to software. Zach Vega (talk to me) 22:51, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Given the extent to which this article falls short of the FA criteria, I think that it would be best to withdraw this nomination and run the article through a peer review before renominating it. I agree with Cryptic C62's comment that this shouldn't have passed the GAN in its current state. Nick-D (talk) 08:26, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose I agree with Cryptic C62's comments about this article's prose: it's not even close to FA standard I'm afraid - many paragraphs don't have defined topics and some of the wording is clunky. I also agree that the article appears to have been written for people who are highly familiar with this topic. Nick-D (talk) 11:38, 17 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • You're Oppose, it's not even close to FAC standard I'm afraid - many of the points you raised have not been properly complemented with specific and actionable examples. Randomblue (talk) 16:38, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Um, I'm clearly agreeing with the points raised by Cryptic C62 above. I don't really have much to add beyond his or her comments, and don't want to pile on by repeating them. If it helps, the 'History' section is particularly badly written. The later sections of the article contain many sentences such as "The 4S uses the Apple A5 system-on-a-chip that uses an Imagination Technologies PowerVR SGX graphics processing unit, which features pixel, vertex, and geometry shader hardware, supporting OpenGL ES 2.0." which are also difficult to understand and seem to be written for people familiar with this topic. The article also needs to cover how the phone was developed, how it's produced (which has attracted a lot of media coverage) and how it compared to other high-end smartphones available at the time it was launched. Nick-D (talk) 23:33, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/IPhone_4S/archive2&oldid=1136097217"