Talk:Nokia C6-00

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject icon Telecommunications Mid‐importance

WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Telecommunications , a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Telecommunications 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.TelecommunicationsWikipedia:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTemplate:WikiProject TelecommunicationsTelecommunications

Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject icon Computing

WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing , a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology 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.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Taskforce icon This article is supported by Computer hardware task force .

WikiProject icon Brands

WikiProject icon 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

??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article contains broken links to one or more target anchors :

[[USB#Mini and Micro connectors|MicroUSB]] The anchor (#Mini and Micro connectors) has been deleted by other users before.

The anchors may have been removed, renamed, or are no longer valid. Please fix them by following the link above, checking the page history of the target pages, or updating the links.

Remove this template after the problem is fixed | Report an error

CNet comments section

[edit ]

I deleted this section because the comments from CNet admins and C6 Users are strongly disputed. Wikipedia is encyclopedic which requires neutrality. This involves the personal reflection from the admins only. But I can firmly say one thing that the CNet admins are wrong. Symbian^1 should not be spotted as a retarded platform. On the other hand, there is a software called Nokia Software Updater to update the firmware.
Regards,
Claudeemann. --ZirconiumTwice (talk) 01:52, 25 August 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

Em.. Strongly disputed by who? The Reviews of major tech sites such as CNET are a normal part of building an article on tech. If you are saying that CNET is not a WP:RS with editorial control, then please explain why. That *you* don't like the reviews is original research and removing sourced content again without showing how the source is unreliable will be be seen as vandalism. So I'd ask you explain further your strange statements. --Cameron Scott (talk) 06:44, 25 August 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

The C6 users. [1] [2] See Wikipedia:NPOV tutorial. --ZirconiumTwice (talk) 06:53, 25 August 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

We take no account of user generated content - the C6 users are irrelevant in this context, they are not considered a reliable source. Also you seem to have misunderstood NPOV, that requires *us* to be neutral in how we write articles, it does not require us to balance out five terrible reviews with five good ones or if five good ones don't exist, remove the bad ones. Do you understand the difference? --Cameron Scott (talk) 06:58, 25 August 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

No. The Cnet reviewers wrote pros and cons, not only cons. The review you wrote is only on the negative side. It made the article not neutral. --ZirconiumTwice (talk) 07:04, 25 August 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

I'm relying on the summaries at the end of the reviews - getting into the individual pros and cons seems misleading to me. The reviews for the phone are mediocre, so any article is going to reflect that. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:06, 25 August 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

Anyway it's a bit rich having a lecture on NPOV off a C6 owner and someone who has SYMBIAN slapped over the top of the wikipedia logo on their talkpage. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:11, 25 August 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

Do not attack editors, please. By the way, Cnet Asia didn't spot the phone basic. Therefore I say it's not neutral. --ZirconiumTwice (talk) 07:13, 25 August 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

And I never added that, so why you continue to lecture me about it, I'm not sure. --Cameron Scott (talk) 07:15, 25 August 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

I paraphrased the "basic" from the balanced CNET Asia review that wrote "Those looking for a capable QWERTY smartphone without all the bells and whistles.... " Do you think that was inaccurate paraphrasing? Andries (talk) 21:24, 25 August 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

Everything is ok now. --ZirconiumTwice (talk) 01:01, 26 August 2010 (UTC) [reply ]

Memory Capacity

[edit ]

I think the memory section on the left side box is incorrect: I own a Nokia C6-00, and within X-Plore 1.58, the "Total Memory" displays 120.8 MB, which I assume is the RAM; rounded up would be 128 mega-bytes. Also, this memory section mentions NAND.., but isn't NAND non-volatile flash memory, and non-related to random-access memory? So, I wanted to confirm this fact before I change anything. ...perhaps my device is different, with a lower amount of RAM?! Am I wrong? Thanks!

I just confirmed that the RAM is 128 MB: Nokia C6-00 Specifications. I thought that Nokia does not make their device specifications public, but I guess I am wrong.

So, I will be clearing up the details in the article... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.163.141.43 (talk) 02:35, 5 May 2012 (UTC) [reply ]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nokia_C6-00&oldid=1209402750"