Talk:Samsung Galaxy S8

Talk

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball! This page should be deleted, and, if possible, SALTed until the device is made official in a couple of weeks. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 21:41, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

The page wasn't deleted yet. If we wait until the device is made official, everybody in wikipedia will try to create the article as soon as possible to be the creator of an article that will be edited many times, creation war could start, that means everybody will try to create the article as soon as the device is made official before others were the first to create the article. Everybody including me want to be the creator of an important article like this, I was out of luck when I discovered this article existed. Let the article "existing", real information like specs, reception will be included when device made official. TheWikiContributor (talk) 17:50, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Phablet

@ViperSnake151: Please stop to revert me. According to USA Today, who is a very reliable sources, S8(+) is a phablet. S8 is biggest than Galaxy S7 Edge and Galaxy Note 7 who are phablets : [1] and [2]. [3]. --Panam2014 (talk) 16:29, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Samsung has not explicitly marketed the device as a phablet, only the Galaxy Note and the former Mega are. Plus, going by screen size alone is a very dangerous precedent because the differing aspect ratio changes the meaning of the screen size. Wikipedia has also unilaterally redefined phablet to mean any device with 16:9 diagonal screen size bigger than 5.1 inches, even though the majority of flagship smartphones over the past few years, not branded as phablets, have fallen between 16:9 5.0 and 5.5 inches. That, plus changes in design to minimize bezels, can change the definition of a device (early phablets had large screen bezels, but now we can fit a larger and nearly bezel-less display on the exact same footprint). The S8+ may fall within the phablet size bracket, but the S8 is about the same size, if not a little smaller, than the S7 Edge.

"Phablet" is also a subset of smartphones, so it is not explicitly incorrect not to explicitly call it one. I also dispute your claim USA Today is a "very reliable source". In this case, I'd veer more towards actual technology publications. ViperSnake151  Talk  17:23, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151: The point of view of Samsung is a primary source. Suffice to say that Samsung says something else. Independent sources describe the S6 / 7 Edge and S8 as phablet, so they are phablet. Wikipedia is not a marketing catalog. --Panam2014 (talk) 17:36, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Your sources are two, general interest newspapers. Thus, it is low weight towards the POV you are pushing. Please see this article as well. ViperSnake151  Talk  17:38, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151: The S7 Edge is already a phablet and the S7 article says so. So the S8 is so. And then the source is reliable. And finally, you are not going to have fun modifying the article of the S7 also, and that of the iPhone 6 (s) Plus. it is a pov pushing because my sources are secondary. --Panam2014 (talk) 17:39, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151: There are an editorial conflict. I warn you to do not edit the others articles without consensus. You should open a request for comment. --Panam2014 (talk) 17:44, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@TheWikiContributor: have you got an opinion. --Panam2014 (talk) 17:48, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

PhoneArena supports my assertion that the S7 Edge is not a phablet, because of its overall footprint and narrow build. It is a compact device with a large screen. Phablet is synonymous with large displays, large bodies, and often stylus. ViperSnake151  Talk  18:22, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151:But the Galaxy S6 Edge+ is a phablet. In this case, one can add by way of compromise that these apparatuses are sometimes considered as phablets. --Panam2014 (talk) 18:31, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

There is actually no doubt the S6 Edge+ is a phablet (5.7 inches is definitely within the traditional size range). However, I just noticed that the actual phablet page on Wikipedia did not match the explicit statements in the sources, and how purely basing the definition of a tablet based on diagonal screen size is very problematic due to design advances and other funkiness. ViperSnake151  Talk  18:49, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151:As phablettes are a special type of smartphone, I suggest removing this term from all phablettes, even the Galaxy Note. --Panam2014 (talk) 20:12, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

Your WP:ALLORNOTHING argument makes no sense. ViperSnake151  Talk  20:37, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151:What does not make sense is to decide arbitrarily what is a phablet and what is not, knowing that you exclude models that sources qualify as such. --Panam2014 (talk) 21:02, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

The definition of a phablet has become subjective, especially at 16:9 5.5-inch size. I just pointed to articles saying the S7 Edge was not a phablet because, despite its screen size, it was actually small (disclaimer: I own one since my G4 bootlooped. While LG did try making it compact, LG didn't call it a phablet either, but the V10 is more definitively one). The S8+ is another edge case, though I've seen a few sources say it's very close in size to the iPhone 6/7+ (which we do define as a phablet. I do agree with that, given that it actually feels huge because of its horrendously thick bezels). Either way, this is an absolutely dumb dispute and I knew that vendors would eventually find a way to instigate it. ViperSnake151  Talk  21:09, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151:But as the term is not objective and the sources vary, I propose to write on the article phablet that the term is not objective but marketing and as the phablet is already a smartphone, I propose to write on the articles only the term smartphone. What are you suggesting if not to be arbitrary? For which items are left? --Panam2014 (talk) 10:04, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

That's opinion and original research. ViperSnake151  Talk  14:50, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

@ViperSnake151:I do not agree. Why do you decide arbitrarily what is a phablet and what is not, knowing that you are removing the mention for products qualified phablet? The opinion of manufacturers is a primary source and is not to be taken into account, only secondary sources count. The term is problematic so do not use it. --Panam2014 (talk) 14:56, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi, how is everybody doing? :) This looks like a discussion that has gotten quite heated. Has there been established a consensus or decision, or should I put in my opinion as a third party? Keeping in mind I haven't participated in this discussion before, so I have no knowledge on anyone's prior commenting history here. I just noticed that this place is getting crowded with messages, and usually a third person opinion can be the deciding factor if there is harsh disagreement between two parties. Let me know if my thoughts are needed here by {{Ping|LocalNet}}-ing me :) Have a great day! LocalNet (talk) 15:16, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

@LocalNet:Hello. Currently, there is no consensus as to what should be qualified as phablet. Your help is welcome. --Panam2014 (talk) 15:26, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Panam2014: Thank you for notifying me! :) Wow, this conversation is interesting to read! Before I reveal my answer, let me just state that this comment is not intended to "flame" a particular user or viewpoint. I know some people feel bad when consensus doesn't go their way, and I just want everybody to know I am 100% focused on the content, following Wikipedia's guidelines, and sticking to a relevant, peaceful discussion. :) That said, I have read this thread and have a few thoughts on the points raised. First off, I did some research to find out what secondary sources are calling the Samsung Galaxy S8 and S8+, as Wikipedia should be based on secondary sources. What I found was a major lack of the term "phablet" in many major sources (The Verge, TechCrunch, and Engadget). We should therefore be careful about proper balance. The term appears to be dying out. When I finally did find sources, I found that both TechRadar and Android Pit refer to the Samsung Galaxy S8+ as "phablet" or "phablet-sized", while only a single publication, USA Today, ambiguously refers to the S8 as a phablet. I say ambiguous, because it states "phablet-sized 5.8-inch display on an S8 on that is thinner, narrower, and just a tad taller than the S7 that it replaces" (emphasis added by me). I interpret that as referring to the display, not the model, as a phablet, and it clarifies the statement that the model itself is "thinner, narrower, and just a tad taller" than the previous model. Combine that ambiguity with the lack of other sources referring to the S8 as a phablet, and I don't think the standard-size S8 should have the "phablet" title. The S8+ should, as we have sources specifically stating that. If there are any questions or concerns about my comment, feel free to write to me and I will reply as soon as possible! :) LocalNet (talk) 17:37, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Needs more images

I want some more images of the Samsung Galaxy S8, because I believe it would help visual readers with the main features of the smartphone type. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 09:40, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Insecure iris recognition - how much of Samsung's PR to include?

LocalNet and I disagree on the answer to the titular question. Would anyone else like to chip in? If so, please WP:MENTION me so that I know you have replied to this thread. Thanks :) zazpot (talk) 21:07, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi there! Thanks for starting a discussion here! For compromise, I'm willing to drop the "rigorous testing" quotation and simply write "Samsung told BBC News that it was "aware of the issue", and stated that "If there is a potential vulnerability or the advent of a new method that challenges our efforts to ensure security at any time, we will respond as quickly as possible to resolve the issue"." Does that sound better/okay or do you still disagree? :) LocalNet (talk) 21:10, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

And then I forgot to do the one thing you asked, haha. @Zazpot: Pinging you now, so you hopefully get a notification :P LocalNet (talk) 21:11, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

@LocalNet: the compromise you suggested is definitely an improvement IMO. Thanks :) zazpot (talk) 06:59, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

@Zazpot: Excellent! I will edit the article accordingly :) LocalNet (talk) 07:00, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Variants table

@LocalNet:

Hi, you reverted my edit for the variants table.

I don't know if you remember, but a few weeks back, I had posted one with very detailed information about LTE bands, country of origin etc, it was a very long table and you reverted it because it was unsourced, justified. I accept that.

The new one that I made was very simplified, didn't contain info that was too detailed, just simple stuff and it was sourced too. All of it could be verified and you reverted it with the reason stating that 'the hardware section states the same information in a shorter format'. I disagree, it doesn't contain any of the model numbers I mentioned, and if you take a look at other Wikipedia pages for smartphones, such as the OnePlus 3T or the Google Pixel, you'll notice they have a variants table as well.

I have a document on Google Drive that I link to people who are confused about the S8 variants, it doesn't look very nice and I have to copy the link every time, the reason I wanted to add the variants table is so that I could refer people to the Wikipedia page to access info that could be useful for people looking to buy a Galaxy S8/S8+ from a 3rd party retailer like EBay or Amazon. 4

I suggest you please reconsider your action and give it another look. I'm not unhappy about the time and effort put into the table since I already had most of the information written down with me, I'm just not satisfied with your reason for reverting the edit.

Murtaza2000 (talk) 08:15, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Murtaza2000: Thank you for starting a discussion! I fully understand your argumentation, and the information is good. However, we have to remember to put all of this in encyclopedic context. To do so, I often think about these things:

1) If I talk to a random stranger on the street, will they, as a general person, understand the information?

2) If we take a person who's never heard of the topic in question before, will the information be deemed important for them to know too? In the case of this particular topic, a smartphone, will a person who has no interest in buying it find it important to know too?

3) Is this information significant enough to be considered important 10 years from now?

4) Are the sources of technical information reliable? In general, news publications don't go into the ultimate details. Some definitely do, but in my experience, most don't.

Let me explain:

Regarding 1) and 2) I'm not sure the information is actually understandable or important enough for the average reader to know. There will always be people who are more (or less) interested in a topic and Wikipedia may be the first place people go to in order to learn, but it shouldn't necessarily be the only one. Will a general audience, including those with zero or limited knowledge of smartphones, understand it? I personally think no.

Regarding 3) 10 years from now, the device won't be on sale and I question if model number information will be relevant. Another no.

Regarding 4) All of the sources in the table linked to a "PDADB" website, which is a website that appears to be fully dedicated to "infinitely detailed" (their words) device listings. Reliable? Probably, so that's a yes.

In regards to OnePlus 3T and Google Pixel, I would personally remove the tables from those articles as well if the decision was up to me. OnePlus 3T network compatibility links to OnePlus' website itself, a WP:PRIMARY source, and the Google Pixel information is definitely too detailed for a general audience. And I hate to pull this card, but that's also WP:OSE.

In regards to what is stated in the "Hardware" section: it states that "The S8 features an octa-core Exynos system-on-chip and 4 GB of RAM; models in North American markets utilize the Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 instead", a very neatly and easily understandable summarization of the processors and their respective markets, even if it drops information on model numbers.

Too long, didn't read: I fully understand your argumentation, but I believe it's information the average reader and those not even looking to buy the device won't find important to know, which makes it too detailed and suitable for only a specific demographic of readers. Furthermore, I don't think model numbers for this device will be useful 10 years in the future. Might not even be relevant in a month by the time the Galaxy Note 8 is rumored to be announced (sorry, that's speculation on my part, but just to give example of how this is very focused primarily at only this time). A lot of text, but I hope I explained myself in an understandable way :) LocalNet (talk) 10:05, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

@LocalNet:

I read all of it, guess I needed to see it from the perspective of a person with no interest in smartphones and because of the other points you mentioned. Also, when you say 'I would personally remove the tables from those articles as well if the decision was up to me', whose decision is it then? Just asking, are pages assigned a person to manage / moderate them or what?

Sorry for asking here, I'm new to Wiki and it's tough getting the hang of how things work here.

Cheers Murtaza2000 (talk) 18:06, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

@Murtaza2000: Don't apologize for asking, we were all new here at one point or another :)

That was a poorly worded sentence by me, and I apologize for spreading misinformation/confusion. There are no article managers or moderators, and nobody owns any article. But we have something called WP:EDITCONSENSUS as part of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. It states that "Any edit that is not disputed or reverted by another editor can be assumed to have consensus. Should that edit later be revised by another editor without dispute, it can be assumed that a new consensus has been reached". I am actively watching this article and reverted your efforts to add the variants table as it happened, but I did not follow the OnePlus article and at the time of the addition to the Pixel, I was too unsure to do anything. Because the content has been there for quite a long time, they have consensus. I can remove the information at any time with the points mentioned here, which override an edit consensus, but I am going to make exceptions to my own thinking and avoid doing so, at least for right now. (The reason: I'm tired and it's soon night time for me :P I want to be available to discuss if anybody objects)

"I'm new to Wiki and it's tough getting the hang of how things work here". Absolutely understandable! I've been in your situation myself, and there is a considerable learning curve to understanding Wikipedia. I want you to know that my reversions here are not personal and I value your efforts! Even if the content itself doesn't stay, I hope you will :) If there is ever anything you're wondering about, the help desk is a great place to ask! Or if you're very new, I suggest the WP:TEAHOUSE to learn more in a friendly and safe environment :) LocalNet (talk) 18:42, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

@LocalNet:

Appreciate the reply, have a great evening.

Regards Murtaza2000 (talk) 18:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

@Murtaza2000: You too :) LocalNet (talk) 19:02, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Sim card

I find it surprising that this article doesn't say anything about the size of sim card this phone takes – is it standard, micro or nano? Even more surprisingly, there is nothing about the fact that there is a dual sim variant available, see [4]. Can this information be added to the article? --Viennese Waltz 11:21, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

S8 Active stats

Information on the S8 Active variant of this phone is missing. Main differences are that it's got a thicker casing and a larger battery. DReifGalaxyM31 (talk) 19:05, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Need a mention of the pulse oximeter/heart rate sensor on the back

This needs to be added to the inputs and also some text. 152.44.139.235 (talk) 22:02, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

The S8 is a phablet according to multiple sources

SlashGear, Expert Reviews UK, Pocketnow among others refer to the S8+ as a phablet It's screen size and dimensions are larger or comparable to rivals as well Hexadecimal16 (talk) 19:09, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

As always, cite the sources and you should be good to go. — Archer1234 (talk) 19:31, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Also, the Pixel 5a (which is both shorter and narrower) is described as a phablet here on Wikipedia while the S8+ is not Hexadecimal16 (talk) 19:16, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a reliable source, so it cannot be cited to verify a claim. — Archer1234 (talk) 19:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I will cite the sources Hexadecimal16 (talk) 19:57, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

This phone is compatible with 4G but does not mention it in the infobox?

Why is 4G not in the infobox? Opok2021 (talk) 19:17, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

I have added 4G to the infobox, just wasn't sure why it wasn't there. Opok2021 (talk) 19:25, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

سکسی. س س

سکس س س@ 5.126.208.160 (talk) 22:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)