Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Apple Inc.

This is the talk page for discussing WikiProject Apple Inc. and anything related to its purposes and tasks.

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

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8: 28 days

Assessment

As a note, I've gone through all Unassessed Apple Inc. articles (from 19 to 0), feel free to review of my assessments. TappyTurtle [talk | contribs] 14:31, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Criticism of Apple Inc." listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Criticism of Apple Inc. has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 17 § Criticism of Apple Inc. until a consensus is reached. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:43, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PowerBook 100 under FA Review

I have nominated PowerBook 100 for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" in regards to the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. George Ho (talk) 08:33, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As an additional note, I've suggested a restructuring of the PowerBook articles on the FAR, so it might be good to get initial thoughts there before I go around proposing a merge, etc. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 15:05, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consolidating pre-1998 Macs

Our coverage of modern Macs generally follows the tack of writing about the overall product line (e.g. the iMac line: iMac G3, iMac G4, iMac G5, iMac (Intel-based), iMac (Apple silicon): each covers multiple hardware refreshes.) Our pre-1998 coverage ({{Apple hardware before 1998}}) definitely does not, with for example the PowerBook lines or stuff that was basically only one or two models but each one still has their own page. I wanted to take the temperature on whether anyone had general issue with folding some of these together in the process of expanding them? At present none really have issues with length, and most don't demonstrate any standalone significance (on the above PowerBook 100 FAR a user suggested that the 100's singular importance means it shouldn't be merged, which makes some sense but definitely isn't true of the many random 1XX models, or stuff like the Centris or rebranded Quadras.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 23:49, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

iMac -> List of iMac models

See Talk:IMac#Rework into a list?. Looking for any feedback. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 01:17, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:List of iPhone models

Link: Talk:List of iPhone models#Sticky headers for remaining tables. George Ho (talk) 22:11, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at Talk:iOS version history

A discussion is being held at Talk:iOS version history#iOS support tables on whether or not we should continue to use this format of tables as we use on various other articles as well (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, etc.) over this format. Extra opinions would be great. YannickFran (talk) 21:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good article reassessment for MacBook (2006–2012)

MacBook (2006–2012) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Hog Farm _Talk 23:48, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]