Talk:IPhone Duo

Page history of iPhone Ultra

@ElijahPepe Please note that the page iPhone Ultra contains substantial page history because of a prior made draft made by @Cosmic840. I'm unsure if we should move that page here instead or just do a copy and paste move. EvanTech10 (talk, contribs) ⚡ 18:03, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Cosmic840 seems to be the only editor on the draft, so a copy-and-paste should be acceptable so long as they are the one doing it. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:09, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Most of its content consists of rumors that should not be used without rewriting. {{R with history}} is enough. Killarnee (talk) 18:16, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Right, I'm not seeing a valid reason to do a history merge if there was only one editor and the content used is minimal. I also concur that rumors should not be included. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 19:32, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

If the rumors are sourced well with reliable sources (as in this case), it makes sense for it to be added into the development section. That's my opinion. EvanTech10 (talk, contribs) ⚡ 19:53, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Added the reason at the article. Also, some of its content was copied from the old page, so we will see what happens. Cosmic-840≈ ● ✒️ 20:35, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

This is fundamentally not the same article as the draft, so I don't see why the history would need to be merged. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 20:59, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Right Cheromaniii (talk) 19:49, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

This was a WP:NOATT situation as the draft was written by the same editor who copied it. I'd like to be able to give them credit for creating the page, but the main reason for a histmerge is to preserve attribution, which is not a problem here, but thanks! ASUKITE 00:46, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 September 2026

Add a section:

Design Preceden In physical form, the iPhone Duo resembles the Microsoft Surface Duo, released in September 2020. See https://news.microsoft.com/surfaceduo/#photo-gallery ~2026-49266-54 (talk) 04:48, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

 Not done: Need a reliable source that says this, otherwise it's just speculation pattersonuwu ^njz (talk) 05:29, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that even after Steve Jobs condemned the use of a stylus on phones, the iPhone Duo is the first to support it 19 years later?

• Source:

• • ALT1: ... that developers have to redesign their apps to accommodate the iPhone Duo's form factor? Source:
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Lego Vidiyo

Created by ElijahPepe (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 6 past nominations.

EvanTech10 (talk, contribs) ⚡ 00:22, 15 September 2026 (UTC).

• Note: This page was created (or moved to mainspace) on September 9 by ElijahPepe, which is six days before this DYK was made, so the article qualifies the "new enough" DYK criteria. I will be reviewing this later in the day once I have the 30 mins or so to do so properly. Hason-LEK-🇸🇬 ● 💬 ● 🧱 ● 🧪 00:50, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

• The following list is taken from Wikipedia:Did you know/Reviewer instructions#Review the article(s) because the DYK checklist template is annoyingly inflexible:

Have you checked...

1. ... that each boldlinked article is new enough?
2. ... that each boldlinked article is long enough? 5741B (text only)
3. ... that each boldlinked article is cited to reliable sources, neutral, BLP-compliant, and copyvio-free? Copyvio <10%. All paragraphs cited.
4. ... that each boldlinked article is presentable?
5. ... that the hook is verified to a reliable source, and that the hook facts appear in the boldlinked article(s)?
6. ... that the hook is under 200 characters?
7. ... that the hook is likely to intrigue a reader with no special knowledge or interest into visiting the boldlinked article(s)?
8. ... that any images are freely licensed, clear at a diminished size, and used in the article? Not applicable
9. ... that the required number of QPQs have been submitted, and that they are valid reviews that have not been used elsewhere?
10. ... that there are no other, more subjective issues?

Hason-LEK-🇸🇬 ● 💬 ● 🧱 ● 🧪 23:08, 15 September 2026 (UTC), last edited 05:47, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

• @EvanTech10: Problems:

• Both ALT0 and ALT1, while interesting, is not cited in the article.
• The sources linked for ALT1 only imply, not explicitly state, the developers' need to redesign their apps. If you want to go with that, perhaps using https://developer.apple.com/videos/play/tech-talks/111461/ (linked in the 9to5Mac article) could work. Or let me suggest ALT2, which is more verifiable based on the Fast Company article:

• ALT2: ... that Apple had to redesign their status bar for their iPhone Duo (due to the new form factor)?

Hason-LEK-🇸🇬 ● 💬 ● 🧱 ● 🧪 05:47, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

• @Hason-LEK-SIN: I have updated the article including the facts about the Steve Jobs stylus and the software redesign. Instead of ALT1 and ALT2, how about ALT3: "...that Apple had to redesign their operating system to accomodate the iPhone Duo's form factor?" (also verifiable in the sources and article) EvanTech10 (talk, contribs) ⚡ 00:07, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

• @EvanTech10: Changes seen with hook sources added and thanked! The nomination is 95% complete once I quickly check through the last criteria (but right now I have IRL stuff to do) Hason-LEK-SIN ● 💬 ● 🧱 ● 🧪 05:47, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

• @EvanTech10: I am satisfied that all the requirements have been met, passing this. Would recommend using ALT0 or ALT3. Promoters, if there are concerns that were not adequately addressed in this review, please ping us. Hason-LEK-SIN ● 💬 ● 🧱 ● 🧪 07:55, 17 September 2026 (UTC)