Talk:Samsung Galaxy S20 FE

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

It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Merger Proposal to main Samsung Galaxy S20 article[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

There is rough consensus in favor of merging. Arguments against pointed out the different release dates of the models and showed examples of similar instances where the pages were kept separate. The first argument is very weak and was discounted, as a different date is not notable enough to demand a separate article. The similar instances argument was weakened by the inconsistent nature of how smartphone variations are dealt with on Wikipedia, as examples could also be provided of different smartphone variations being kept in the same article. The current article consists of tech specs and minor design elements, which could be easily merged into the Samsung Galaxy S20 article. Thus, the arguments in favor of merging were significantly stronger in light of the relevant policies and guidelines, and thus the closure that makes more sense here is one of rough consensus to merge. I additionally strongly urge participants to reach a more consistent approach to smartphone variation coverage on Wikipedia by discussion in the relevant WikiProjects. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 19:14, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

EDIT: This now also includes the Samsung Galaxy S21 FE article. GadgetsGuy (talk) 02:42, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I noticed some inconsistencies to which resulted to me proposing to merge the article into the main Samsung Galaxy S20 article. A good precedent for this is with the Samsung Galaxy S6 article wherein the later on Edge Plus device, despite its way later release date together with the Note 5, was merged to the article given that the device mostly shares not only majority of the specs but also the name and design language of the earlier edge and flat devices. Given that, I think the content here is best merged with the main S20 series also because the specs and design language of the FE models are mostly similar to the regular counterparts with minor differences. To add to the point both the Regular and Plus versus Ultra devices have greatly varying specs but are still in the same article. GadgetsGuy (talk) 15:30, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GadgetsGuy: I don't agree. --Hajoon0102 💬 23:10, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hajoon0102: Care to expound why? Also while removing redirect is okay, dont remove other user's content when it does not violate just because you dont agree. Will revert your revert on the main S21 article for now. Avoid reverting again until consensus has been made to avoid committing WP:EDITWAR.GadgetsGuy (talk) 02:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GadgetsGuy: release dates are different, and specifications are different. --Hajoon0102 💬 02:56, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hajoon0102: Again as mentioned the Samsung Galaxy S6 series did not have a problem with this despite the S6 Edge+ launching at a later date and having a bit of different specs than the S6 and S6 Edge. The S21 FE is similar in the sense that only a few components such as screen size, back, camera array and fingerprint scanner are different and the rest are similar to the regular S21 series especially the SOC.

This shall also serve as a final warning for reverting any S21 FE content on the main S21 article. I will revert again and should you revert again I would nominate your account for any admin action on WP:VANDALISM. AGAIN: lets avoid WP:EDITWAR, no revert on both articles until consensus has been reached. GadgetsGuy (talk) 03:06, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GadgetsGuy: No. Don't do that! --Hajoon0102 💬 03:13, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GadgetsGuy: iPhone 13 and iPhone 13 Pro are almost the same. But there's article iPhone 13 and iPhone 13 Pro.

--Hajoon0102 💬 03:23, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hajoon0102: Given the precedent that both the main Samsung Galaxy S10, S20, and S21 articles have, the Plus and the Ultra models are always included in the main S21 article since the Samsung Galaxy S9 series despite variations in the specs. (Heck this can also be extended in the Samsung Galaxy S6 series as the initial two devices wherein one is flat and the other is curved can be subject to a different article). Ergo specs alone does not merit the device a separate article under WP:NOTABLE. GadgetsGuy (talk) 03:34, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom and, from a reader's perspective, it's a lot easier to compare similar models when they're described in the same article. I'm also wondering whether the S20 TE should be merged as well. Waz⁸:T-C-E 18:40, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Waz8: I believe it could be given as to how the S20 TE is basically just a regular S20 with software modifications for government application and slides into a rugged outercase. Heck even the older "Active" models with specs significantly deviating from the main S line and uses a different chassis altogether is just merely integrated into the main S articles. GadgetsGuy (talk) 08:20, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about this one. It may be easier to compare models, yes, but they are different phones with a completely different release date. We don't merge in the S20 and S21 article just to compare for example and they are probably quite similar. So I'm leaning oppose right now but don't want to put anything in bold. --Ferien (talk) 17:47, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Release dates are different, and specifications are different. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:35, 18 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The S6 Edge and S6 Edge+ are in the same article despite different release dates, The S9 and S9+ are in the same article despite varying spec difference in display size, ram size, battery capacity, and camera modules. To further make a point, the S10 series are all in the same article despite differences in date and specs. Heck even Samsung themselves bundle the S20 series to the main series in their websites here [1] which was continued later on by the S21 series here [2]. Ergo the rule on WP:NOPAGE apply in this case given that the manufacturer bundles it also on their official website plus differences are minor enough to merit its own article. GadgetsGuy (talk) 04:35, 21 February 2022 (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.