Talk:Android 10

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://app.beebom.com/android-q-beta-now-available-21-devices-12-different-oems. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 07:48, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Move to Android 10

Android 10 redirects to testosterone which isn't mentioned in the article. Surely the OS should be the Primary Target in this case, with a hatnote leading to testosterone?  Nixinova  T  C  19:36, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

It looks like it should be a hatnote for Methyltestosterone. – The Grid (talk) 20:30, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

I requested that the redirect be deleted and this article moved there. Testosterone (medication) will then become a hatnote here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:33, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Android 10 release date

@Walter Görlitz: I think it should be obvious we shouldn't be including a release date based on a paragraph stating:

The rumor today suggests that September 3, 2019 is the official Android 10 release date for the public. This suggestion comes from a pair of tech support screenshots shared by users to PhoneArena this morning. It’s a logical date to release a software update if one wants to hit the first business day of the month? And indeed, the policy WP:NOTRUMOR states: Speculation and rumor, even from reliable sources, are not appropriate encyclopedic content.

And certainly, we especially should not be saying that the final release of Android 10 is scheduled for release on September 3, 2019. as if Google has announced that it is going to be released then.Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:49, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

First, why are you singling me out for a ping? Two additional editors disagreed. Also, the article is on my watchlist and I would see it, and I assume it's on yours which is why I will not be pinging you.

Second, an announcement from Alphabet is not the end-all. Most of the content in most articles is not supported by statements by the creator. If they were, that would be a problem of using WP:PRIMARY sources. In this case, it would be nice to have, but absolutely not necessary.

Third, does the source fail WP:RS? I don't see it listed in the WP:RSN discussions except to support claims.

Fourth, this is not a situation of NOTRUMOUR. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:00, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Fifth, if you think the source is dubious, mark it as such rather than edit war over it. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:01, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Now with a second, RS who make it clear that it was accidentally announced. https://www.zdnet.com/article/android-10-release-date-features-rumors-and-everything-we-know-so-far/ states it's just a rumour, but we will know on Tuesday. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:10, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

The sources state the date is a rumor. How is this not a case of WP:NOTRUMOR? Galobtter (pingó mió) 20:01, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

"However, PhoneArena talked to two different Google support agents who each stated that Android 10 would launch for Google's Pixel lineup on Tuesday, Sept. 3." Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:20, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Bullet list summary of features in lede

I'm not entirely sure it's necessary. While a brief summary might be warranted, the bullet list violates MOS:USEPROSE and the reference should really be reserved for the body. Three separate points. Anyone else find the summary odd? Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:26, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

And it's gone again. Removed by three different editors: [1], [2] and [3]. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:40, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

• The user has done similar edits in the past. It might have been sufficient when the article was new but it's pointless now. 1, 2, 3, and 4. – The Grid (talk) 17:14, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Bullet list does not violate MOS:USEPROSE, refer to discussion here Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 19:42, 5 September 2019 (UTC) ​

So what is the next step here? Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 04:52, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

It was removed and seems to have stayed out,so for now, we just rejoice that it's out. If it comes back, we re-engage in conversation. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:58, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Why rejoice? It was removed for mistaken thought that it violates MOS:USEPROSE. What do you think of following guildelines in wp:lede? Quote from wp:lede:

... summarize the most important points ...

I find a list is the best way to convey the information that people want, which is what is new in Android 10 in a clear and concise way.   Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 13:28, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

You're mistaken. I removed it partially because of PROSE and partially because the editor was not discussing its need for inclusion. Do you know why the others removed it?

As for summarizing, feel free to do so, but those items were not important points, they were new features.

As for following guidelines, we shouldn't create back-links to guidelines unless necessary, and we shouldn't WP:REPEATLINK. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:41, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm confused. What is the point of a new O.S. if it is not the new feature list? Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 18:04, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

There are many reasons for a new operating system. We're talking about an article about that new operating system.

The article discusses the new features, and many existing features. If you are able to succinctly summarize the article, feel free to do so. Making a bullet list isn't the best way. Simply focusing on the new features fails to summarize many of the key points of the operating system. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:08, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Are you saying the article isn't about what's new, but about the entire O.S.? There is a different article for that. If you know the best way, then please do it or explain, otherwise the best way I know is a list.   Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 18:29, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

We're talking past each other. You tell me what this article is about. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:51, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

It is about what is new and interesting in Android 10.   Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 19:19, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

And is Android 10 an operating system or something else? Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:26, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Android 10 is a major release of the Android mobile operating system. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 19:43, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Cleverly avoiding answering the question. So I'll ask it again: is it an operating system or is it a teapot, or is it a receipt, or is it something else? Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:47, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

The description is copy pasted, and edited from the lead and exactly describes what it is. It is exactly answering the question. If it doesn't describe exactly what Android 10 is, the lead should be updated, so that readers aren't cleverly misguided. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 20:22, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

OK. Continue to play games. My statement that it is an operating system is not incorrect. I still stand by my statement that if you want to summarize it, feel free to do so. I still stand by my statement that it will not remain if it is in bullet points. Any further discussion that tries to be clever or obfuscate an actual discussion will result in prompt and merciless archival of this discussion. Cheers. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:36, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Your the one that is playing games. If you don't think it is an operating system why didn't you say that. Why does the lead say it is an operating system? Why do you disagree with the article? I've been answering questions directly where you are trying to obfuscate. Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 00:28, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Can you read? I wrote, "There are many reasons for a new operating system to which you responded, Are you saying the article isn't about what's new, but about the entire O.S.? There is a different article for that. At that point, I wanted to know what you were at, and you steadfastly refused to give a clear answer. I now know you're a troll, and WP:DFTT applies. Archiving. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:35, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Having a bulleted list in the lead is ridiculous. I wasn't aware of this up to this point, but I will shoot it down too if I ever see it happen. --uKER (talk) 21:44, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Why is it ridiculous? What kind of information do you think this article should convey? I'm of the opinion that most people want to see the list of new features? What information do you think people want to see? Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 00:28, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

What article starts with a bulleted list? Even stand alone lists have to start with a lede that's a paragraph. – The Grid (talk) 22:48, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 3 September 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Given the overwhelming consensus, I don't see a problem with closing a day early. BDD (talk) 18:01, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

---

Android 10 → Android Queen Cake – Codename format like previous Android versions. 2401:7400:6005:4B9:641C:76B6:F0BD:A1A2 (talk) 14:52, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose Previous names were the common product names not their development code names. Android 10 is the product name (see WP:COMMONNAME). Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:05, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose Per Walter Görlitz and Android 10 is the official, common name. – The Grid (talk) 15:12, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
  • It's like how iOS 13 is actually codenamed "Yukon". iOS 13 is to Yukon, Android 10 is to Queen Cake. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:7400:6005:4B9:1:1:6F27:BD39 (talk) 15:41, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
    • No, code names are used when they are in development while product names are used when they are provided to consumers. Walter Görlitz (talk) 15:43, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
      • So, macOS 10.15 is to Catalina? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2401:7400:6005:4B9:1:1:6F27:BD39 (talk) 15:47, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
        • MacOS is rare in the world of operating systems as it has a version that is well-known and a name when it released. The code name used during development is not always used when the product is released, and that is the case—for the first time—with this Android OS. Please read the sources (and sign your posts). Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:07, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose Per above. The name of the product is officially "Android 10" and page name should reflect that. Codenames can be mentioned in the article itself. GoPats (talk) 16:21, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose Per above. "Android 10" is the official name, the code names are already mentioned in the leed. The History section might benefit from addition of those code names, but they were never widely used or reported on. Anton.bersh (talk) 18:34, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose Articles on past releases have always been named after the official name not an internal code name. The official name for Android 10 IS Android 10. The article should remain under this title. Americanfreedom (talk) 19:14, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose: Codename format is officially deprecated by Google and the product is officially known as Android 10. Codenames are no longer used for public branding of Android releases. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:51, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose per above. Rreagan007 (talk) 23:03, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose it is not official name of this version. --Patriccck (talk) 05:50, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose It appears that android / google has changed how it names its releases. No point in trying to name it it something completely incorrect and not used anywhere as far as I know.   Daniel.Cardenas (talk) 18:19, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose Google has changed how it names its releases.--Frmorrison (talk) 22:26, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose. The only article naming characteristic this would help with would be consistency, but that would utterly destroy recognizability since nobody knows what Android Queen Cake is. Android 10 is the official name, and Google's decision to change Android's naming convention isn't something Wikipedia can change. --Veikk0.ma 19:43, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
• Oppose "Android 10" is the (official) name. Android Queen Cake???--Condor3d (talk) 09:07, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Redmi K20 Pro

Only Pixel and Essential got stable Android 10 on release date. Redmi K20 Pro got only a closed beta update. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flashycola (talk • contribs) 07:16, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Android Q Beta6 screenshot.png

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:24, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Important note

Please protect the pages Android Queen Cake, Android Red Velvet Cake, and Android Snow Cone from being set up so that the articles Android 10, Android 11, and Android 12 respectively can be moved to those titles. Georgia guy (talk) 23:52, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

• Is there a way you can protect a title in the article namespace from having an article be moved to it?? That's exactly what I want with these 3 page titles. Georgia guy (talk) 23:53, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 24 June 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Procedural close. Already moved as a technical issue. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 02:43, 25 June 2024 (UTC)

---

Android Quince Tart → Android 10 – This is the only official name. Georgia guy (talk) 20:52, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

• Comment - I made a request at WP:RM/TR earlier. -- AxG / ✉  21:37, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.