This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
IPad 2 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
IPad 2 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of iPad (3rd generation) was copied or moved into iPad 2 with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
{{
edit protected}}
Please redirect to newly created section:
iPad#iPad_2.
Pnm ( talk) 07:20, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
{{Edit semi-protected}} Change "as of September 1, 2010, there were 25,000" to "as of March 2, 2011, there were 65,000" (Source: http://www.apple.com/uk/ipad/from-the-app-store/). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.77.28 ( talk)
In light of Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2011_January_2#IPad_2 and the fact that the iPad 2 will be officially announced in just over two hours, I have unprotected this page. / ƒETCH COMMS / 15:52, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Currently the memory is listed as "1GB or 256MB- still unknown". Why speculate what it is? It should simply be unknown or N/A. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.187.49.145 ( talk) 04:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Is this a totally different product, or just another version. If the latter, can this not just go on the normal iPad page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.157.13 ( talk) 21:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, can't we merge this article into the iPad page. It's not a different product category. There are no seperate pages for different versions for the iPods so why not put this article in the original article? --ⒹylanⓈpronck 22:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dylanspronck ( talk • contribs)
I'm not anymore as a lot more has been added. -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 07:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
I agree that it probably should be unsalted, however if it gets re-created without a consensus being built first then salting would be appropriate. -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 13:09, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
My point is that often there is only one interested party, or editors come and go, and opinions change. What I understand from your comments is that iPad (original) is a protected redirect while this page is allowed to exist, and you have a point there. I agree that subpages by generation should be all-or-nothing. But these stub articles of duplicate content are worthless, and the copy-paste that was the original iPad is even worse. Can I get a third opinion please? HereToHelp ( talk to me) 03:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
That picture with the 3 tablets isn't really showing anything, and you can barely see them because of the glare. I propose either removing it, or finding a better one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.26.142.230 ( talk) 01:09, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
I removed the marketing advertising hype/blurb from the CPU description in the specs table from "CPU: 1 GHz dual-core Apple A5 custom-designed, high-performance, low-power system-on-a-chip" to just "CPU: 1 GHz dual-core Apple A5". Archangel Michael ( talk) 13:30, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
To revise the deletion of iPad 2. It's already launched so it's now more verifiable. The article has now lots of editing and in just a couple days it has really changed. ~~Awsome EBE123~~( talk | Contribs) 21:56, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Okay, everyone, take a look at this diff and the sandbox. Because we eliminate the iPad 2 section (and two paragraphs that include an non-notable incident and prices in India), the integrated article is actually shorter than it currently is. The infobox already has specs for both; it can be shrunk given careful editing. I think that this article has accrued a lot of cruft and become disorganized since listed as a good article last June. This is actually not a big change, and there are more serious issues with iPad (which I haven't really looked at until I made the sandbox). I might go attend to those.... HereToHelp ( talk to me) 02:38, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
I was going to stay out of this since I'm over my head in terms of policy and precedent, but I want to say two things. First, thank you HereToHelp for your patient explanation. Second, I can see both sides of the argument and am no longer sure of the proper course of action; if I was that proverbial uninformed voter who's the sole deciding factor in a tie, I guess I would say merge for now with an incubator somewhere since there will eventually need to be an article. Gonfaloniere ( talk) 23:30, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
I think this is all very premature. We have to realize that, as it was only just released several days ago, the coverage is limited but the potential exists for an independent article. I suggest holding off for a month or so, seeing if there is enough content to sustain a solid article or if merging would be appropriate. I think that there is a lot of information still undocumented at this point and that, if there are significant additions after a while, keeping this separate from iPad would be more logical to keep page sizes under control. In summary, I just don't think we can make a good decision about this right now because information is still emerging. / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:38, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Lets go end this discussion and revise it next month because that it's a recently announced and released product. We will not merge the article until next month and the discussion at that time. ~~Awsome EBE123 talk Contribs 20:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
I'd also like to further argue that there is insufficient content for a separate article by using the sandbox to make comments on the article, in italics. All but at most five paragraphs is either duplicate content (pointed out in comments) or content that is unnecessary (in small text) because we don't need to repeat every detail Apple says. For comparison, iPad is roughly ten times as long as this stub. Granted, we have yet to see reviews and issues, but they can't amount to anything substantial. And to Mono's revolutionary/evolutionary distinction, the best pro-fork argument on the page, I say that it's still the same product in that it still plays media, browses the web, displays books, and runs apps. The end user experience is actually not revolutionary different. HereToHelp ( talk to me) 03:45, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: TonyTheTiger ( talk · contribs) 04:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Please make sure that all content in the infobox is fully explained and sourced in the text.--
TonyTheTiger (
T/
C/
BIO/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:FOUR) 23:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
{{
Trademarked}}
.Do we actualy need the [[|IPad_2#Online_Order_Shipping_Status|Online Order Shipping Status section? ~~Awsome EBE123 talk Contribs 20:51, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
There are some references left to iPad 2 having 900 MHz CPU (using Engadget as a source for reference). Since I can't edit it right now due to edit protection (which is a proper course of action because of people adding random crap like "shipping times"), it should be corrected to 1 GHz everywhere (the official Apple's specs) and first reference to Engadget should be removed. Engadget based their info (about iPad 2's CPU) on Anandtech's Geekbench results, and Geekbench cannot give the true maximum frequency of the CPU in iPads and often shows different results at different period of time for the same exact hardware, for example: http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/search?page=1&q=iPad2%2C2 Rndomuser ( talk) 00:02, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
The following is from Talk:Smart Cover
A puff piece rewrite of a press release by MacWorld is a tenuous grasp on notability. It would be far better as a section of the iPad2 article... and about 80% of the relevant text is already in the "Smart Cover" section of that article. - Dravecky ( talk) 02:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Discussion now at Talk:IPad 2#Merge from Smart Cover Airplaneman ✈ 04:21, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
The following comments were posted to this page.
A puff piece rewrite of a press release by MacWorld is a tenuous grasp on notability. The Smart Cover article would be far better as a section of the iPad2 article... and about 80% of the relevant text is already in the "Smart Cover" section of this article. - Dravecky ( talk) 02:10, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
In my opinion, it is amazing that the iPad and iPad 2 articles have nothing in them about these devices' support of Flash. Everyone and his mom discussed this subject; an almost uncountable number of reliable sources go into this subject. -- 82.171.70.54 ( talk) 17:20, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
A copypaste tag was added by a user just 8 minutes before his account weas deleted.
Such a tag without any information as to what the user considers has been copy pasted is not of much use. If material has indeed been copy pasted from copyrighted sources, then by all means restore the tag, but at least identify here what has been copied so that it stands a fighting chance of being fixed. DieSwartzPunkt ( talk) 08:47, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
The
The examples and perspective in this section deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a
worldwide view of the subject. (April 2011) |
tag on the ipad with 3g section is redundant as the whole article is (correctly) tagged.
Are their any objections to its removal? 86.181.51.84 ( talk) 13:59, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
The article's body and the summary bar on the right give conflicting information about the operating system version. Is it 4.3.1 or is it 4.3.2? 72.229.242.58 ( talk) 04:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Ipad 2 release date: released in South Africa on the 29.04.2011 (source http://www.apple.com/za/ipad/)
Please change 2011-04-29: Israel to 2011-04-29: Israel, South Africa
Mrsunnybunny (
talk) 11:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
We agreed to let the article incubate. We did; it did not develop. I have moved valuable content has been moved to iPad and am ready to redirect this article there. As I post this for community discussion, I will remind everyone that a notable subject is permitted, but not required, to have its own article.What ultimately matters is how organized and accessible the content is. HereToHelp ( talk to me) 20:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Marcus I'm not sure what you are arguing here. I still don't think the article has any unique content, and a significant amount of time has passed for that to happen. -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 16:31, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Please Edit:
The iPad 2 is Today, May 6th 2011, released in Lithuania, Estonia and in Latvia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spong129 ( talk • contribs) 12:02, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
Uhm, so I don't know how to drive wikipedia, but the page says the 10watt powerplug is 4x that of normal USB... which is wrong. Normal usb (including back to usb1.0 iirc) supplies 5w. Should say '2x'. Their cited reference doesn't say 4x either, just that it's 10w. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.90.145 ( talk) 08:47, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
There should be a picture of the Ipad 2 at the top of the page. Jdrohloff2 ( talk) 02:35, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
I have edited the lead paragraph to include the designer who was fundamental in the creation of the device, some say it was his innovations that saved Apple. I was astonished that nowhere was there any mention in the article of the designer which seems rather strange. Twobells ( talk) 10:33, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Is jailbreak available on iPad 2? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.127.207.152 ( talk) 09:10, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Apple iPad 2.jpeg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 20:32, 4 October 2011 (UTC) |
Why does it state that iPad 3 will be iPad 2's successor? is there anything announced? (Could be an iPad 2s) 194.153.217.248 ( talk) 13:36, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Looks like all we have now is the commercial reception section. Zach Vega ( talk to me) 22:56, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Some of the information in the article is out of date. It says that iOS 5.0.1 is the latest version, and no mention of new OS's and their features is made in the article. Also, the part about FaceTime is missing several new devices. 24.247.142.120 ( talk) 20:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Could somebody please provide a reasonable explanation on why this article title is
iPad (2nd generation) and not
iPad 2?
This model was introduced as "iPad 2" in 2011 and it is still referred to as "iPad 2" by Apple:
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201471
Some other model designations have changed since then, e.g. "The new iPad" => "iPad (3rd generation)", but "iPad 2" has always been "iPad 2" and was never called "a second generation" by Apple.
I do understand that (marketing) names do not matter to some people, but I'm wondering why the
iPad Air 2 article is not just named
iPad Air (2nd generation) then ...
PS: This talk page has a lot of outdated conversations in it.
84.173.194.174 (
talk) 14:06, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: move as uncontroversial ( non-admin closure). SST flyer 00:24, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
IPad (2nd generation) →
IPad 2 – See:
Talk:IPad_(2nd_generation)#Article_title_should_be_.22iPad_2.22_.28is_currently_a_redirect.29
84.173.194.174 (
talk) 14:30, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
=
The result of the move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 12:13, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
IPad (2nd generation) → IPad 2 – See talk page – SST flyer 00:26, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on IPad 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:21, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on IPad 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:38, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
IPad 2 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
IPad 2 has been listed as one of the Engineering and technology good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of iPad (3rd generation) was copied or moved into iPad 2 with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
{{
edit protected}}
Please redirect to newly created section:
iPad#iPad_2.
Pnm ( talk) 07:20, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
{{Edit semi-protected}} Change "as of September 1, 2010, there were 25,000" to "as of March 2, 2011, there were 65,000" (Source: http://www.apple.com/uk/ipad/from-the-app-store/). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.7.77.28 ( talk)
In light of Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2011_January_2#IPad_2 and the fact that the iPad 2 will be officially announced in just over two hours, I have unprotected this page. / ƒETCH COMMS / 15:52, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
Currently the memory is listed as "1GB or 256MB- still unknown". Why speculate what it is? It should simply be unknown or N/A. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.187.49.145 ( talk) 04:59, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Is this a totally different product, or just another version. If the latter, can this not just go on the normal iPad page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.157.13 ( talk) 21:24, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Indeed, can't we merge this article into the iPad page. It's not a different product category. There are no seperate pages for different versions for the iPods so why not put this article in the original article? --ⒹylanⓈpronck 22:00, 3 March 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dylanspronck ( talk • contribs)
I'm not anymore as a lot more has been added. -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 07:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
I agree that it probably should be unsalted, however if it gets re-created without a consensus being built first then salting would be appropriate. -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 13:09, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
My point is that often there is only one interested party, or editors come and go, and opinions change. What I understand from your comments is that iPad (original) is a protected redirect while this page is allowed to exist, and you have a point there. I agree that subpages by generation should be all-or-nothing. But these stub articles of duplicate content are worthless, and the copy-paste that was the original iPad is even worse. Can I get a third opinion please? HereToHelp ( talk to me) 03:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
That picture with the 3 tablets isn't really showing anything, and you can barely see them because of the glare. I propose either removing it, or finding a better one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.26.142.230 ( talk) 01:09, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
I removed the marketing advertising hype/blurb from the CPU description in the specs table from "CPU: 1 GHz dual-core Apple A5 custom-designed, high-performance, low-power system-on-a-chip" to just "CPU: 1 GHz dual-core Apple A5". Archangel Michael ( talk) 13:30, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
To revise the deletion of iPad 2. It's already launched so it's now more verifiable. The article has now lots of editing and in just a couple days it has really changed. ~~Awsome EBE123~~( talk | Contribs) 21:56, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Okay, everyone, take a look at this diff and the sandbox. Because we eliminate the iPad 2 section (and two paragraphs that include an non-notable incident and prices in India), the integrated article is actually shorter than it currently is. The infobox already has specs for both; it can be shrunk given careful editing. I think that this article has accrued a lot of cruft and become disorganized since listed as a good article last June. This is actually not a big change, and there are more serious issues with iPad (which I haven't really looked at until I made the sandbox). I might go attend to those.... HereToHelp ( talk to me) 02:38, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
I was going to stay out of this since I'm over my head in terms of policy and precedent, but I want to say two things. First, thank you HereToHelp for your patient explanation. Second, I can see both sides of the argument and am no longer sure of the proper course of action; if I was that proverbial uninformed voter who's the sole deciding factor in a tie, I guess I would say merge for now with an incubator somewhere since there will eventually need to be an article. Gonfaloniere ( talk) 23:30, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
I think this is all very premature. We have to realize that, as it was only just released several days ago, the coverage is limited but the potential exists for an independent article. I suggest holding off for a month or so, seeing if there is enough content to sustain a solid article or if merging would be appropriate. I think that there is a lot of information still undocumented at this point and that, if there are significant additions after a while, keeping this separate from iPad would be more logical to keep page sizes under control. In summary, I just don't think we can make a good decision about this right now because information is still emerging. / ƒETCH COMMS / 00:38, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Lets go end this discussion and revise it next month because that it's a recently announced and released product. We will not merge the article until next month and the discussion at that time. ~~Awsome EBE123 talk Contribs 20:27, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
I'd also like to further argue that there is insufficient content for a separate article by using the sandbox to make comments on the article, in italics. All but at most five paragraphs is either duplicate content (pointed out in comments) or content that is unnecessary (in small text) because we don't need to repeat every detail Apple says. For comparison, iPad is roughly ten times as long as this stub. Granted, we have yet to see reviews and issues, but they can't amount to anything substantial. And to Mono's revolutionary/evolutionary distinction, the best pro-fork argument on the page, I say that it's still the same product in that it still plays media, browses the web, displays books, and runs apps. The end user experience is actually not revolutionary different. HereToHelp ( talk to me) 03:45, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: TonyTheTiger ( talk · contribs) 04:37, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Please make sure that all content in the infobox is fully explained and sourced in the text.--
TonyTheTiger (
T/
C/
BIO/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:FOUR) 23:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
{{
Trademarked}}
.Do we actualy need the [[|IPad_2#Online_Order_Shipping_Status|Online Order Shipping Status section? ~~Awsome EBE123 talk Contribs 20:51, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
There are some references left to iPad 2 having 900 MHz CPU (using Engadget as a source for reference). Since I can't edit it right now due to edit protection (which is a proper course of action because of people adding random crap like "shipping times"), it should be corrected to 1 GHz everywhere (the official Apple's specs) and first reference to Engadget should be removed. Engadget based their info (about iPad 2's CPU) on Anandtech's Geekbench results, and Geekbench cannot give the true maximum frequency of the CPU in iPads and often shows different results at different period of time for the same exact hardware, for example: http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/search?page=1&q=iPad2%2C2 Rndomuser ( talk) 00:02, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
The following is from Talk:Smart Cover
A puff piece rewrite of a press release by MacWorld is a tenuous grasp on notability. It would be far better as a section of the iPad2 article... and about 80% of the relevant text is already in the "Smart Cover" section of that article. - Dravecky ( talk) 02:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Discussion now at Talk:IPad 2#Merge from Smart Cover Airplaneman ✈ 04:21, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
The following comments were posted to this page.
A puff piece rewrite of a press release by MacWorld is a tenuous grasp on notability. The Smart Cover article would be far better as a section of the iPad2 article... and about 80% of the relevant text is already in the "Smart Cover" section of this article. - Dravecky ( talk) 02:10, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
In my opinion, it is amazing that the iPad and iPad 2 articles have nothing in them about these devices' support of Flash. Everyone and his mom discussed this subject; an almost uncountable number of reliable sources go into this subject. -- 82.171.70.54 ( talk) 17:20, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
A copypaste tag was added by a user just 8 minutes before his account weas deleted.
Such a tag without any information as to what the user considers has been copy pasted is not of much use. If material has indeed been copy pasted from copyrighted sources, then by all means restore the tag, but at least identify here what has been copied so that it stands a fighting chance of being fixed. DieSwartzPunkt ( talk) 08:47, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
The
The examples and perspective in this section deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a
worldwide view of the subject. (April 2011) |
tag on the ipad with 3g section is redundant as the whole article is (correctly) tagged.
Are their any objections to its removal? 86.181.51.84 ( talk) 13:59, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
The article's body and the summary bar on the right give conflicting information about the operating system version. Is it 4.3.1 or is it 4.3.2? 72.229.242.58 ( talk) 04:29, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Ipad 2 release date: released in South Africa on the 29.04.2011 (source http://www.apple.com/za/ipad/)
Please change 2011-04-29: Israel to 2011-04-29: Israel, South Africa
Mrsunnybunny (
talk) 11:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
We agreed to let the article incubate. We did; it did not develop. I have moved valuable content has been moved to iPad and am ready to redirect this article there. As I post this for community discussion, I will remind everyone that a notable subject is permitted, but not required, to have its own article.What ultimately matters is how organized and accessible the content is. HereToHelp ( talk to me) 20:30, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
Marcus I'm not sure what you are arguing here. I still don't think the article has any unique content, and a significant amount of time has passed for that to happen. -- Eraserhead1 < talk> 16:31, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
Please Edit:
The iPad 2 is Today, May 6th 2011, released in Lithuania, Estonia and in Latvia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spong129 ( talk • contribs) 12:02, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
Uhm, so I don't know how to drive wikipedia, but the page says the 10watt powerplug is 4x that of normal USB... which is wrong. Normal usb (including back to usb1.0 iirc) supplies 5w. Should say '2x'. Their cited reference doesn't say 4x either, just that it's 10w. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.90.145 ( talk) 08:47, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
There should be a picture of the Ipad 2 at the top of the page. Jdrohloff2 ( talk) 02:35, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
I have edited the lead paragraph to include the designer who was fundamental in the creation of the device, some say it was his innovations that saved Apple. I was astonished that nowhere was there any mention in the article of the designer which seems rather strange. Twobells ( talk) 10:33, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
Is jailbreak available on iPad 2? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.127.207.152 ( talk) 09:10, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
An image used in this article,
File:Apple iPad 2.jpeg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at
Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
This notification is provided by a Bot -- CommonsNotificationBot ( talk) 20:32, 4 October 2011 (UTC) |
Why does it state that iPad 3 will be iPad 2's successor? is there anything announced? (Could be an iPad 2s) 194.153.217.248 ( talk) 13:36, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Looks like all we have now is the commercial reception section. Zach Vega ( talk to me) 22:56, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Some of the information in the article is out of date. It says that iOS 5.0.1 is the latest version, and no mention of new OS's and their features is made in the article. Also, the part about FaceTime is missing several new devices. 24.247.142.120 ( talk) 20:27, 27 November 2012 (UTC)
Could somebody please provide a reasonable explanation on why this article title is
iPad (2nd generation) and not
iPad 2?
This model was introduced as "iPad 2" in 2011 and it is still referred to as "iPad 2" by Apple:
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201471
Some other model designations have changed since then, e.g. "The new iPad" => "iPad (3rd generation)", but "iPad 2" has always been "iPad 2" and was never called "a second generation" by Apple.
I do understand that (marketing) names do not matter to some people, but I'm wondering why the
iPad Air 2 article is not just named
iPad Air (2nd generation) then ...
PS: This talk page has a lot of outdated conversations in it.
84.173.194.174 (
talk) 14:06, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: move as uncontroversial ( non-admin closure). SST flyer 00:24, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
IPad (2nd generation) →
IPad 2 – See:
Talk:IPad_(2nd_generation)#Article_title_should_be_.22iPad_2.22_.28is_currently_a_redirect.29
84.173.194.174 (
talk) 14:30, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
=
The result of the move request was: page moved. Anthony Appleyard ( talk) 12:13, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
IPad (2nd generation) → IPad 2 – See talk page – SST flyer 00:26, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on IPad 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:21, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on IPad 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:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 08:38, 10 November 2017 (UTC)