Talk:ThinkPad/Archive 4

File:W520 screen.jpg Nominated for Deletion
There use to be lots about old models here but it looks to me as though someone (frome Lenovo?) has been into this article and turned it into an advertising puff. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.212.29.94 (talk) 13:05, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

linux
I don't think "linux" belongs in the "OS" field of the infobox, because it's an aftermarket add-on, not vendor supplied. I've asked for clarification at Template talk:Infobox information appliance. If we leave it in, are we then also going to add NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Hackintosh, etc? Kendall-K1 (talk) 22:00, 31 March 2013 (UTC)


 * I got one response, a suggestion that we just remove the OS field. I'm going to do that. Kendall-K1 (talk) 15:39, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Cigar box vs bento
I don't have a copy of Hamm, but the PC Mag story says the design was based on the bento, not a cigar box. Kendall-K1 (talk) 03:21, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

R series
Don't panic not a criticism- just an observation.

There is no R series section- though many of the illustrations are from the R series. I am sitting here in front of a R50e- and looking for information on a replacement, so using multiple references to ebay. I am looking for a baseline description of this model so I can compare the new features against what I know. It seems a shame that I got more info from the talk page than the article- anyone mind if I just copy that over as it is lacking in refs!--ClemRutter (talk) 18:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * I will make the lack of the R series a criticism of this article. It seems to have been included previously and is still referenced in the article. 124.170.2.66 (talk) 11:15, 4 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Quite a bit of material, including A, G, i, R, and S series, was removed in Dec 2011 apparently because it was unsourced: . I think it might have been better to request sources rather than just remove the material. Maybe it was discussed at the time. Kendall-K1 (talk) 21:32, 7 October 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm putting the A, G, and i series sections back in. Please don't remove them again without discussing first. Unsourced material can be challenged and removed, but you must first provide an opportunity for someone to provide sources. See WP:V. Kendall-K1 (talk) 14:19, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm afraid that this is a criticism of the way this article has been edited. It used to have much more detail on earlier models but now seems to be just a puff for Lenovo. Can we have the old stuff restored please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.135.35.207 (talk) 08:31, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

David Hill's title
David Hill's web site says his title is Vice President of Lenovo corporate identity and design. Someone changed it in the article to Vice President of User Experience & Design, which I can't find in any of the four sources given. Do we have a source for this change? Kendall-K1 (talk) 23:50, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Remove censored photograph?
The article ThinkPad uses the censored photograph File:ThinkPadX230.jpg which has the contents of the laptop's screen pixelated. I feel the inclusion of the censored photo harms rather than helps the article in a free information resource the encyclopedia is, and maybe we shouldn't display or accept censored images at all, for any reason, as censorship is by itself an offending an inhumane act. You wouldn't expect to see a censored photograph on a magazine's article, and we can easily find the same laptop model and re-take a new picture with the screen showing something other. Furthermore, I doubt there are copyright problems for just displaying copyrightable software screens in journalistic fashion. I feel that censorhip in photographs is so offending that it is better for the encyclopedia to not have a photo rather than have a censored photo. Sofia Koutsouveli (talk) 04:52, 20 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, I'd be pissed off only if that was something important censored out on this photograph. :) Let's be straight, anyone can figure out it's a Windows 8 desktop. &mdash; Dsimic (talk | contribs) 07:43, 20 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't call that censorship. But I do object to using that image, as it doesn't actually show what that Thinkpad looks like. Kendall-K1 (talk) 12:04, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

History--Name section, proposal to revert
There are some issues with the "History" section, "Name" subsection: Proposal: Effectively, my proposal is to revert some or all material added at 20:12, 6 June 2013‎. Please discuss any opinions here. Thanks. -- HLachman (talk) 22:47, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Regarding the first paragraph ("IBM began to explore..."), I checked the source mentioned, Business Week of Feb. 1990. There were 4 issues that month, and none of them contained any material supporting anything in the paragraph.
 * The "Name" subsection, as written (with 4 paragraphs), seems overly detailed and tedious in comparison to an earlier version (as was in effect in article version of 10:02, 10 May 2013 through 19:51, 6 June 2013).
 * At a minimum, delete the first paragraph ("IBM began to explore..." up to "...meaningful to customers"), since it is completely unsourced.
 * Better yet, revert the entire "Name" subsection to the single-paragraph version in effect on 10 May 2013 (with the final citation corrected to use web.archive.org -- I already fixed that in the current article), since that version seems to cover the essential facts in adequate detail (with citations for readers who want more).


 * I was unhappy with that change at the time, because it was mostly unsourced and removed some sourced material. I could go along with reverting, but I think it would be better if someone (you?) could check all the given sources and properly summarize, pointing out discrepancies if there are any. I hesitate to suggest that because it's more work and I'm not willing to do it. But I will support you if you want to. You may want to check the talk page archive for any discussion that happened at that time. As I recall there was one or more editor(s) who thought the old version was incorrect, hence the changes. Kendall-K1 (talk) 01:25, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

OK, I reverted the Name section back to the 2013 text, as per the above proposal ("Better yet..."), for the reasons stated above. I did check the Talk page archives and didn't find anything relevant. So, if there is any further work needed (such as that suggested by Kendall-K1, above), please feel free to discuss here... or, just do it! Cheers. -- HLachman (talk) 07:37, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

ThinkPad X100e 'Mini 10'
There was a special edition X100e released as the 'Mini 10' to Australian year 9 students in 2010. From memory there used to be a section about it but it seems to have been removed.

It featured:


 * Intel Atom 1.6GHz Hyperthreaded Single-Core CPU
 * 2GB RAM
 * 10" 1280x720 Display
 * 160GB HDD
 * Webcam
 * Windows 7 Enterprise

Should it be re-added under the X100e section?

121.218.92.97 (talk) 03:23, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Citations needed
I'm going to undo a bunch of applications of this template. One reason is that they are all back-dated two years, so anyone could come along and remove all the tagged material thinking that they've had outstanding citation requests for two years. The other is that this is way overuse of this tag. See Template:Citation needed for proper use. Kendall-K1 (talk) 20:51, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on ThinkPad. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070127021154/http://www.greenpeace.org:80/international/campaigns/toxics/electronics/how-the-companies-line-up? to http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/toxics/electronics/how-the-companies-line-up

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:00, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Samsung acquisition back in 2016
"Samsung Electronics (2016-present)" "The ThinkPad line of business notebooks from Lenovo, until Samsung acquired the brand in 2016.'"

Really ? Khaled Khalil (talk) 10:29, 29 October 2015 (UTC)


 * No, this IP vandal has been doing this on multiple articles. Probably time to shut him down. Kendall-K1 (talk) 11:16, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Obvious
"The series was originally designed, developed, and sold by IBM until Lenovo acquired the brand in 2005 after purchasing IBM's personal computer business"

Isn't this stating the obvious? If IBM was purchased by Lenovo why get into detail about each category of computer being purchased? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:540:C001:FFB0:7D32:9C06:2252:8299 (talk) 19:24, 2 November 2015 (UTC)


 * It's technically correct. IBM sold off the ThinkCentre desktop PC range to Lenovo but kept the ThinkPad laptops for a couple of years; it would read better as "after having purchased IBM's personal computer business a few years earlier". -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 21:39, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Batteries
Someone added a line to the lead about the Thinkpad battery authentication problem. It does seem like this and some of the other controversies as noted at Lenovo should be mentioned somewhere. Problem is I don't want to duplicate material that appears at Lenovo, and many of these problems are not limited to Thinkpads. Comments? Kendall-K1 (talk) 16:24, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on ThinkPad. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://thinkpads.com/Genesis3.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110602034544/http://www.lenovoblogs.com:80/insidethebox/2008/07/thinkpad-sl-series/ to http://www.lenovoblogs.com/insidethebox/2008/07/thinkpad-sl-series/

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) 22:25, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Manufactured
Per WP:LEAD, everything in the lead should summarize what's in the article. Right now the article says that some ThinkPads are manufactured by NEC. I suspect the lead should say something like "developed and marketed." Kendall-K1 (talk) 00:34, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Samsung business laptops is replacing Lenovo business laptops, called ThinkPad
Samsung announced the acquisition of ThinkPad in 2017. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:200:5F55:D9F:53B2:E599:3C46 (talk) 18:59, 28 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Is there a link- or is this a spoof? ClemRutter (talk) 19:53, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
 * This is an ongoing hoax. See Talk:ThinkPad/Archive 4 for the last time it came up. Kendall-K1 (talk) 20:26, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Infoboxes
Do we really need all these infoboxes? I would be in favor of removing them. Kendall-K1 (talk) 00:59, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Father of the Thinkpad
I took out the part about Naitoh being father of the ThinkPad. That comes from the publisher of Naitoh's autobiography so we can't really use it without a better source. Kendall-K1 (talk) 19:28, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree, though it's my mistake for picking that source since I have read the term on other websites too. I will restore it with a good source in that case. --MacLC (talk) 20:00, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Please stop putting citations in the lead. And the lead summarizes the article, so it shouldn't contain anything that isn't in the article. See WP:LEAD and WP:LEADCITE. Kendall-K1 (talk) 00:17, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Lenovo Pride Day
I suspect Lenovo Pride Day didn't actually happen. I can't find any references to it other than people asking about it and sources that echo WP. It is not in the cited source (Hamm) as far as I can tell. I'm tempted to remove it. Kendall-K1 (talk) 12:21, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Scare quotes
Can you please provide a page number and full quote for "words of encouragement" and the IBM logo story? I can't find these in the cited source. Kendall-K1 (talk) 01:25, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Article Quality
The latest edit made did not follow quality guidelines and had multiple instances of bad spelling and bad grammar. I will undo this edit if nobody objects because the article quality will be greatly improved. -Marapirone (talk) 11:37, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Advert
This article is turning into a product brochure, with all the infoboxes and sections for each model. It really needs to be cut back. Kendall-K1 (talk) 18:03, 26 June 2018 (UTC)


 * But... what are the chances that anyone is going to actually edit the "infoboxes and sections" so that it will read differently? I guess you wanted it put into pure prose? The only one who is going to make that change it is you. It's been over two years and 0 (zero) has been done, I think in large part that this would mean simply eliminating a lot of information, sweeping away a lot that can't be put in alternative article, like specific model articles. Do you have a judgement about what counts as legit information and what doesn't? It's great to have opinions and I definitely think you have a point, but there is no real motivation for anyone to change the article, and apparently you won't do it, you don't even provide a specific example. Too much of Wikipedia is becoming criticisms of articles on every single article without anyone actually willing to make the changes to make them better. It's become ridiculous. I think you need to be cut back, Kendall. Cuvtixo (talk) 13:56, 28 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Actually I just tried to contact Kendall and find that his account is no longer active. I'm going to remove notices since he's no longer here to discuss it. I also think there's confusion about an article that has a lot of visual data and information density and "brochure" or "advertisement" because a very good "brochure" DOES look like an encyclopedia article. And, usually "advertisement" is something without criticism, but not very much factual information. It's true there's not a lot of negative content, but it is not true that there's not factual information backed by sources. If someone wants to make such criticisms, they should probably explain specifically what is "unencyclopedic". Maybe the -Current model lines- section is not exactly "encyclopedic", but its extremely well done and does contain a lot of information. I'm not willing to remove it for the sake of "not looking like a brochure". Perhaps the "starting weights" in the red section could be cut back, there's only one model that's over 3.5 kg (7.7 lb) and it's definitely an outlier, the chart seems to have been made for much heavier laptops. Most of all I'm just tired of seeing template messages put on articles by people who have absolutely no intention on doing any of the work themselves. If there is some specific issue that you think someone else can address and you cannot, a template might be appropriate. But if there are no good reasons why you cannot make the changes yourself, don't lazily put these gaudy messages up for the sake of your personal standards of taste or whatever. Do it yourself or don't do itCuvtixo (talk) 14:20, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

Source citations
I'm going to remove the recently added "cn" tags pending an explanation of what the problem is. We have citations for both of these statements; "surprise" is in the second paragraph of the "Industrial design" section, and "aftermarket replacement parts" is in the first paragraph of "Reviews and awards". Kendall-K1 (talk) 17:17, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Reference 5 - Richard Sapper doesn't seem to mention Japanese bento boxes at all in this reference. Should probably be removed, or find a better citation, since it is in the first paragraph of the article. Jamure (talk) 03:18, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Lenovo ThinkPad 25th anniversary edition into ThinkPad
I don't see any justification for the 25th anniversary edition to have its on independent page. Any useful content / references can be merged into ThinkPad. Polyamorph (talk) 08:46, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Support wizzito  &#124;  say hello!  08:48, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose. I see your point, but I hesitate to throw my support in for merging here for two reasons: 1) This article is already quite unwieldy. It needs some serious wrangling for it to come up to par in terms of decent Wikipedia quality (clean-up, thinning-out with appropriate splits, etc). I think adding its topic in here, is only going to make that harder. I understand there's not much content there yet to begin with, but that overlaps with my next point. 2) Its subject matter does warrant its own article based-on WP:GNG, and it is appropriate to expand it based-on its coverage. If we follow through with the logical conclusion of that, it should be no problem for it to have its own article. Brian Reading (talk) 22:18, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose as the article creator. I agree with @Brianreading, there are enough sources to expand the article, which I'm planning to do in the feature. I would also like to clean up the main ThinkPad article which is indeed quite a mess. PhotographyEdits (talk) 13:15, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak oppose I think it's interesting to contrast/compare to Twentieth Anniversary Macintosh, which has an extensive Wikipedia article.
 * There are, after all, seven published articles as references here, it's just a matter of someone reading them and making a summary. I think there's likely substance enough for a Wikipedia article. There would probably be a quick overview of the state of PCs at the time, laptops of the time, the significant changes between IBM and Lenovo ownership... Another issue, is if it might be better to merge into ThinkPad T series article, as it's based on the ThinkPad T470, or could there be simultaneous sort of duplicate merge into "Thinkpad" and "Thinkpad T Series"? Until the article gets fleshed out, and justifications for adding or not adding to ThinkPad T series, it should probably remain in place. Cuvtixo (talk) 17:43, 24 January 2022 (UTC)