Talk:Nokia 3410

	Finland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Finland 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.FinlandWikipedia:WikiProject FinlandTemplate:WikiProject FinlandFinland articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Brands

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands 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.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

Nostalgia phone, Still have my Nokia 3410 with all the buttons all worn down.You can't get it anymore in shops so it should really be in the past tense here. The Nokia 1100 and 1101, with comparable features are still sold (at half the price)- I suppose they survive in the modern mobile market because they are lighter and also the battery lasts three times as long as the 3410,(they also have a very useful torch feature bright enough to read with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.142.53.209 (talk) 17:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Release date early 2001? Unlikely.[edit]

If the 3410 is the successor to the 3310 as the article states, then it's unlikely that it was released in early 2001. The 3310 was released in the final quarter of 2000 (according to its article, which sounds about right from my recollection) and I bought my 3310 in mid-2001. If the 3410 had been released in early 2001, it would certainly have replaced the 3310 (a mere 3-6 months after the 3310's release?!) if it *was* the latter's replacement- by the time I got round to buying one.

(I appreciate that this personal comment does not constitute a citable "fact", merely that it provides ground for believing the original uncited comment is dubious and requires a reliable reference).

All in all, "2001" needs evidence or it should be removed.

Ubcule (talk) 20:32, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Additional, date was added by anonymous editor, so can't realistically contact them. Ubcule (talk) 20:34, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

3410 mono.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:54, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]