Talk:iPod Touch (5th generation)

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the IPod Touch (5th generation) 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

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. (

non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 07:52, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

IPod Touch 5 → IPod Touch (5th generation) – "iPod Touch 5" just does not sound right to the article. The new article title fits the article. Blurred Lines 02:05, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

Support - I doubt many people are calling it iPad Touch 5. Red Slash 18:18, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Is there really enough to support a standalone article here? Generations 2-4 are formatted as "iPod Touch #" but these aren't titles—they all redirect to the main iPod Touch article. --BDD (talk) 20:43, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Apple doesn't refer to their products with numbers anymore, but with the generic name (iPod Touch) and adds the generation name/number to the end. Jakeable (talk) 16:17, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review
. No further edits should be made to this section.

Merger?

None of any previous generation of the iPod Touch has had its own article. Propose merger with

iPod touch article Justinhu12 (talk) 10:06, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

Oppose - The iPod Touch 5th generation has the most significant change since the iPod Touch 4th generation, so i believe it is significant enough to have it's own article. --Deoma12^(Talk) 12:25, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – (To start with the page is called iPod Touch with a capital "T" per proper English nouns usage; hence the stylized comment in the led. So the correct page should be proposed.) More importantly, as above. The 5th gen has significant changes, and future models will strongly likely get their own pages in future. Also, it makes sense as it matches most other Apple iDevices having their own pages for similar reasons. Jimthing (talk) 21:22, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:IPad (1st generation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 03:29, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested moves

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Move all. This seems to be the terminology actually used by Apple, and those who point out the effect on tables of products certainly have a point. I hope the names don't keep going back and forth: this is now the fifth move in 2014. Even here in this discussion, I think the policy rationale for these changes could have been spelled out more thoroughly and accurately. For example, this is the second discussion so far in 2014 in which

WP:ORDINAL was mentioned, but that is a style rule about superscripts which doesn't seem to have much to do with the issue here. I'm not doubting the correctness but the verdict would be more bullet-proof against future challenges if it's completely phrased in terms of policy and if the reasoning is accurate. EdJohnston (talk) 16:45, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply

]

{{requested move/dated}}

– An IP-only newbie editor has wrongly (yet again, sigh) had these pages moved on their misunderstanding of WP policy guidelines. As previously commented a number of times by many editors now, Apple itself uses the nomenclature of numeral ordinals (i.e. 1st, 3rd, etc.) to indicate generations in all its physical and digital non-marketing documentation (with third-party literature generally following the same convention accordingly, incidentally), so these are proper names, and therefore the correct terminology to use as titling for the associated product on WP according, and also following the additional common name rule

WP:ORDINAL

rule, which is used for products without such proper names available to use.

There are other additional beneficial reasons (WP legacy, ease of use in other WP page/table uses, et al.), which can be seen in a previous discussion that was taking place before these misedit pagemoves, see here: Talk:IPad#Naming convention. These need reverting quickly, as editors are starting to alter them in tables etc., screwing-up formatting, and causing many a headache in the process to fix. Thanks! Jimthing (talk) 03:21, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support, per nominator; I highly recommend that these pages be
move protected after this proposal is closed. WikiRedactor (talk) 19:35, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply
]

Speedy support for many reasons, and I'll add
WP:CONCISE, too. Red Slash 23:05, 9 June 2014 (UTC)[reply
]

Support for reasons stated above. — Jaydiem (talk) 15:00, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Common name and it just makes sense! IJA (talk) 11:41, 13 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support Deleterious over-consistency. ^walk victor falk^talk 03:45, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a
requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review
. No further edits should be made to this section.

Video Zoom

Can you pinch-to-zoom when recording video on this generation of iPod Touch? 216.145.67.128 (talk) 21:45, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]