Talk:Motorola bag phone

message: This article needs some work. Lets try and get some sources and more photos, as well as edit the text.
Redrum0486 (talk)
I'm Kinda glad I run across this,it does need some work. I,m Working on frequencies right now. Certain police departments, like Ozark, Missouri, still use these, along with cell phones. Just being nosey.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by EWOKDUNG (talk • contribs) 18:54, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

message: From its inception through 2002, General Motors' OnStar system used Motorola Bag Phone transceiver units for their cell phone component. Google for OnStar GPS hack to see pictures of them. Bizzybody (talk) 07:55, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: OnStar

message: To all concerned,
I started this article back in 2007 out of my love for these old phones. I knew then and know now that it deserves to be here as much as the articles for the Motorola DynaTAC, MicroTAC, and StarTAC phones, for these too were a stepping stone towards the cellular phones of today.
It's now almost 6 years later, and I can't lie, this article in its current state is a basket case. Much of the text is what I originally wrote in 2007, at least a small portion of it is factually incorrect, and the model list is very much incomplete. Why? because there is absolutely no published information about these phones! Many researchers, and Motorola themselves, have published a plethora of information on the DynaTAC, MicroTAC, and StarTAC phones because they each marked a first in cellular phone miniaturization and technology. The car phones and their derivatives, for all intents and purposes, did not. However, they nonetheless play a huge part in cellular phone history, which is why this article deserves to be here, and be composed of referenced, high quality information.
What I've been able to contribute to this article is the result of years of original research, looking through thousands of eBay listings for these phones, recording the model number on the handset, and comparing the physical and functional features to other phones. 
Where do I begin? The date of introduction is wrong. I don't know where I got 1992; I can't imagine making it up. I recently found a bag phone on eBay with the original purchase receipt, dated June 1990. But can you reference an eBay listing? This is one of the problems finding information for this article.
The model list is also woeful. For some of the phones with proper model numbers (2950, 4500, 480, etc.), the only evidence I have of those numbers is the website Motorola 3 Watts, who uses those numbers to refer to those particular handsets. Lord knows if those are actually the model numbers of those phones, because Motorola, frustratingly, released dozens of different bag phones, and most don't have a model name/number on the handset, transceiver, or even the manual! And what's the difference between a 2950 and a 4500? I contacted the aforementioned web site to ask that, and they never got back to me. The only proof regarding what some of the bag phones were called I have is for the 2900, Soft-PAK, and TX400 (which is incorrectly called 480 in the article), which I found on an old version of Motorola's web site on the Internet Archive. I also have a feeling that the "3 button", "4 button", "6 button", and "Series III" phones aren't actually called that. (Most "Series III" phones I see have "AC-250" on the handset, so I have a feeling that is the model name.)
Then there's the International Series. Motorola never marketed bag phones overseas; only transportable and car phones. So should the International phones be mentioned in the article at all?
So this is the problem. So much potential for a wealth of information, but no published sources to provide it. Is there any circumstance under which original research can be used for a Wikipedia article? Can eBay listings be used as references?
Trent021 (talk) 16:35, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I see nothing wrong with sourcing EBay for 1990. It could be worded to 'these phones were sold as early as 1990 and possibly earlier. We also have Template:Update and Template:Expand section. You could also email Motorola for input. They probably have .pdf that aren't online. I think Radio Shack catalogue .pdf are online back to the 80s and they may have model lists and dates.--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:56, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

text: http://www.radioshackcatalogs.com/catalogs/1985/ I couldn't find them in '85 but '86 has them on page 77.  Just change the date in the url. Motorola was probably before Radio Shack so '84 - '85 is probably when their models came out.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:12, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

text: http://www.mobilephonehistory.co.uk/about.html British site but has a contact page.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:16, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

text: http://www.vintagemobilephones.com/ --Canoe1967 (talk) 17:18, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

text: http://www.elessoft.com/2012/11/motorola-dynatac-8000x-the-worlds-first-cell-phone-from-motorola/ Release years by Motorola model.--Canoe1967 (talk) 17:44, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

text: http://www.islandregister.com/phones/phonelink.html Phone museum link page.--Canoe1967 (talk) 18:01, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your response. Because eBay listings become unviewable after 90 days, how could it be made a long-term reference? The Internet Archive doesn't have the page archived, and I'm not sure if they do eBay listings at all. As for the Radio Shack catalogs, I looked through them, and they are all Radio Shack phones (they manufactured and sold their own stuff at that time). I am entertaining the thought of contacting Motorola and seeing if they can tell me anything. Trent021 (talk) 19:07, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: You are very welcome. WebCite should work for EBay. They need funding by January and hopefully WMF will kick some in by then. I have never used it.--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:11, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What to do for this article? 

message: I undid the recent change by 71.57.135.212. If you did in-fact purchase a bag phone in 1988, provide the evidence, and then we can talk. Until then, 1990 is the earliest proven production year. If you can, that would be great, since I personally believe they were manufactured earlier than 1990. I just haven't found any evidence of that yet.
Also, as a heads up, you removed 1990 from the Description section, yet you kept it in the article's introduction, which doesn't make much sense. Take care in making your edits more complete in the future. Trent021 (talk) 05:31, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding recent edit