Talk:BlackBerry Storm 2

remove
This page should be removed, WikiPedia is not a crystal ball. The article is about a product not officially announced and the only sources are rumor sites. -Sphbecker

I don't think it's proper to state a release date without official confirmation. Despite how reliable the source may be (according to that website), it remains merely a rumor. -CameronYoung

The Ford class aircraft carrier doesn't exist yet either. Nor have the 2010 Olympics been held. How about the New Moon film's page? (The "Twilight" Sequel)? Let's delete those pages too! If we purged everything that hasn't happened yet or doesn't *yet* exist from Wikipedia, then you'd see thousands upon thousands of valid pages deleted. -Markvs —Preceding unsigned comment added by Markvs88 (talk • contribs) 14:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

There difference is, that all of what you listed are confirmed. If you knew anything about manufacturing, then you would know that just because there are remours, doesn't mean that the item is for sure. Who says RIM won't scrap the project, and decide to work on it next year instead? Or decide not to bother with it, and create an entirely new touch-screen product, rather than an upgraded one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.32.7 (talk) 11:46, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Anonymous: Er, what? Information Week (link #2) *has* undisputedly seen the next generation Blackberry device. By your own arguement, that's all that's needed. Thanks! For that matter, who's to say that the government won't scrap the Ford Carrier program? Or that the 2010 Olympics won't be cancelled by terrorism or war or some other event? Or that New Moon is even on film and ready for distribution? So let's keep the measurement of worth equal, eh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Markvs88 (talk • contribs) 15:08, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Delete

 * Delete. It is unconfirmed. Sure RIM is planning to release new devices in the future, but there is no source suggesting that it will be a Storm 9550 rather than something else. It would be better to wait until the release of such device is announced. McMarcoP (talk) 12:19, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

The article is sourced. What part of the deletion policy does it run contrary to that it should be deleted? I don't see a reason in the flag. Markvs88 (talk) 18:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Name
Whilst one of the names is indeed correct (won't mention which), it is merely a code name. The 8900 was called Javelin, the Pearl Flip phone (82xx) was kick-start ... Doesn't mean anything >_> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.93.32.7 (talk) 08:16, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Merge
As stated above, the name isn't offical, it is offically called the Storm, not the Storm 2. The model isn't drastically different, a few added features and some cosmetic polishing is all.. One article should suffice, as with the iPhone. Also, there are several automobiles that have changed a lot more than this phone have, over decades even, and they have one article for them. Ejfetters (talk) 03:53, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Yet the Chrysler 300M, 300C and other models have their own pages. Also, it *IS* called the Storm 2. http://phones.verizonwireless.com/blackberry/storm2/?cmp=KNC-PaidSearch Markvs88 (talk) 15:25, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

The 1986 Ford Taurus and the 2010 Ford Taurus are drastically different, but they have the same article. The 300M was a model, and the 300 is a separate model. The 300"C" is a trim of the 300. 74.204.40.46 (talk) 10:54, 22 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Every generation of Ford Taurus has its own page. Go to "Ford Taurus" and note the "First Generation", "Second Generation", "Third Generation", "Fourth Generation", "Fifth Generation", *and* "Sixth Generation" links. Markvs88 (talk) 15:48, 23 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Pontiac Grand Am, Pontiac Grand Prix, Dodge Avenger, to name a few others. Ejfetters (talk) 05:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

So the reasoning goes that since cars have different pages for different generation so should the Blackberry Storm. its like a 6th grader logic. If he has it so should I. whether it makes sense or not isn't necessary. I guess you guys will vote for iphone page to be ripped up and each generation should have it's own page as well right? MySchizoBuddy (talk) 21:12, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Blackberry Website lists Storm 2 under the Storm section as well. MySchizoBuddy (talk) 21:15, 8 April 2010 (UTC)


 * As soon as there is an iPhone2, sure. Also, please be civil. I'm sure you're not pleased with me pointing out that by your logic, we should just merge everything onto the smartphone page. Markvs88 (talk) 21:38, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

CPU Speed
Is there any chance of adding the speed of the CPUs on Blackberry devices? It helps make decisions on how good their technology actually is.. Thanx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.59.247.242 (talk) 18:59, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on BlackBerry Storm 2. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091209123932/http://worldwide.blackberry.com:80/blackberrystorm/storm_specifications.jsp? to http://worldwide.blackberry.com/blackberrystorm/storm_specifications.jsp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100514092147/http://na.blackberry.com:80/eng/devices/compare/product-attr-compare.jsp?products=1326&products=1726 to http://na.blackberry.com/eng/devices/compare/product-attr-compare.jsp?products=1726&products=1326
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100727120202/http://shop.three.com.au:80/mobile-details/BlackBerry-Storm2-9520-Black? to http://shop.three.com.au/mobile-details/BlackBerry-Storm2-9520-Black
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081011004934/http://www.blackberry.com/blackberrystorm/specifications.shtml to http://www.blackberry.com/blackberrystorm/specifications.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:14, 3 November 2016 (UTC)