Talk:IOS 10

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (center, color, defense, realize, traveled) and some terms may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

More information Article milestones, Date ...

IOS 10 was one of the Engineering and technology good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 12, 2017	Good article nominee	Listed
June 16, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted

Current status: Delisted good article

Close

Apple Inc. Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apple Inc., a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Apple, Mac, iOS and related topics 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.Apple Inc.Wikipedia:WikiProject Apple Inc.Template:WikiProject Apple Inc.Apple Inc.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Software: Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Software, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of software 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.SoftwareWikipedia:WikiProject SoftwareTemplate:WikiProject Softwaresoftware
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Computing (assessed as Low-importance).

Major issues

This page seems like somebody pasted an article from a website into Wikipedia. It has all sorts of opinions and needs to be revised urgently. --Nicolás Macri (talk) 23:15, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

It reads like somebody pasted an article from a website into Wikipedia, because somebody pasted an article from a website into Wikipedia. I removed the text. Guy Harris (talk) 23:28, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Multiple version numbers in the infobox?

There is currently a discussion of whether Template:Infobox OS should be used with multiple version numbers - for example, to list both a "software update" and "next major release" beta, or to list betas from more than one release stream. If you believe that multiple {stable, preview} releases should never appear in that infobox, or if you believe that they should appear under some or all circumstances where there's more than one beta of the OS in question available, you might want to comment there. (I have no strong belief either way; I'm OK with the main OS page listing only the "next major release" beta, but listing betas from multiple streams if they exist, but I'd also be OK with other choices.) Guy Harris (talk) 08:11, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

"Limited support" in Supported devices

Hi! I'm curious, why do edits about adding "Limited support" to devices in the Supported devices section get removed? I would think that's good information to have. If a device supports the OS, but not all advertised features of it, isn't that valuable information? LocalNet (talk) 19:20, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

"That" / "those" extensions

Hi. If you read the entire sentence, you'll notice the focus is on his opinion of the ability to use extensions rather than the extensions themselves. "Those" doesn't fit in the context if you read the whole sentence. LocalNet (talk) 10:27, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

I.e., the reviewer liked the fact that extensions existed at all; he wasn't referring to any particular extensions. Guy Harris (talk) 18:37, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

B class

Hi @KAP03: What was the reason behind putting "No" on the B-class criteria for supporting materials? Are we missing anything notable? LocalNet (talk) 17:21, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

The reason for putting "No" for supporting materials is that it has been marked as needing an image. -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions}) 17:59, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't even see that the talk page actually states the reason. My bad. Does it need an image, though? We have an image of the operating system. Is it possible that was posted before an image was actually added? Just trying to figure out if have actually fulfilled that task. LocalNet (talk) 18:03, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

[] is the very first version of this talk page edited on 12:27, June 13, 2016 (and it has the needs image tag). A few minutes earlier [] edited on 12:18, June 13, 2016 is the last version to not have an background image (some later versions have a now deleted background image). So it is possible that the needs image tag was posted after an image was already found. I will promote this article to B-class then. -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions}) 18:17, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Yep, I think that's correct. Thank you for making the change. :) LocalNet (talk) 18:21, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

App Store Categories section

AppleFS

Cleaning up some facts

Reviewer: PiGuy3 (talk · contribs) 03:38, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:IOS 10/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Overall this is a well written article.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Spelling and grammar are good, and the article follows WP:MOS
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
There are plenty of inline citations, the citations are reliable, and the support the article properly.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
This article covers all of the important facets of iOS 10
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
There may be a slight overemphasis on the positive parts of iOS 10
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
The article could benefit from a few additional images.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
This article meets all of the criteria.

No Apple support for iOS 10 - say it explicitly?

About this revert from LocalNet. To explain why I added the "source".

"Third-party application support only", means implicitly that there is no support from Apple, e.g. security updates (or features) coming to the operating system. "application support only" means we, Apple, still allow people to sell apps (or give) through our app store, by you "third" parties.

I was a little surprised that iOS 10, a recent version, has no support (what I'm sourcing with the ref, not that you can actually still install new apps), and went looking to confirm it. It seems true that a "major" version upgrade is needed to get security updates, and with it you get new features in iOS 11. comp.arch (talk) 10:01, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

@Comp.arch: Ahh okay, I understand you more now. You were simply looking to confirm it with a source, not disputing the information. I misunderstood. I'll re-add the reference with proper fields. Thanks for coming to the talk page to elaborate! LocalNet (talk) 14:19, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Ok with you adding back as you've done. How about "Unsupported by Apple except by upgrading to iOS 11; third parties still support with applications"? Better idea for shorter text? Info on third parties isn't strictly about supoprt for the OS, does it belong here? Yes, I never give a source for contradictory info (knowingly). And if I believe the info to be false I would probably amended, at least not just added a source for correct info. 15:03, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Technically speaking, "Third-party application support only" is much shorter than "Unsupported by Apple except by upgrading to iOS 11; third parties still support with applications". Furthermore, it's important to note that iOS 10 hasn't gone away after iOS 11 was released. There are still apps out there with support for iOS 9, I believe, so for any device stuck on iOS 10 or not yet having updated, the fact that they can still download and use third-party apps is very important, I think. And regarding your edit, I took another look and realized you didn't change the text before the ref. I actually fully misread your edit. Must've been at a busy and distracted moment for me. LocalNet (talk) 17:17, 17 October 2017 (UTC)