Talk:Wii Health Pack

message: I'm not sure why, but the article says that Japanese release is 2007, do we have a source on that? McKay 06:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean, we're going to need verification from an independant source (or two) McKay 06:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Date references

message: Yes, nintendo has made official announcements. The second refence mentiones that they have an official announcement. AFAICT, the original announcement was made in Japanese, and I don't even know where it is. I do know that Gamasutra has access to them, and a translator. They made a post about it. McKay 06:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The 2007 release date still needs to be confirmed though, like on a Nintendo site. TJ Spyke 06:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: TJ Spyke, why are you so against this game? There is plenty of cited evidence that this game exists. There are two cited sources, from Nintendo's own sites, that this game is coming out, and a third that is a translated version of the official release schedule Nintendo sent out. Stop requesting verification for things that are already clearly cited and stop removing it from the Wii template. Zomic_13 12:24, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I reverted your change, but take note, that I really want this page to exist and thrive. Note that he wasn't using the  template, he was using , which links to WP:VERIFY. Wikipedia isn't founded upon principles of truth, it's founded upon principles of verifiability. Just because Nintendo says something, doesn't make it law. WP requires Reliable Sources. Sure, Nintendo says something, but the interpretation of that shouldn't be done by wikipedians, that would qualify as Original Research. WP likes "Secondary sources" people reporting on what Nintendo has said is a secondary source. If the item is notable enough to be included in Wikipedia, someone else would have reported on it. So saying a piece of information needs verification, doesn't mean it isn't true, it just means we need an independant, reliable verification of the fact. McKay 14:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But there is already a cited, reliable source stating the information. No interpretation was done by any Wikipedian (cool word). I don't see why if Nintendo states a fact, especially for something as general as a 2007 release date, it can't just be taken as fact. Zomic_13 15:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Independence. Wikipedia likes having independant secondary sources WP:VERIFY things, even if they get it from the same primary source. Basically, just because nintendo says something, doesn't make it notable, unless someone else reports on it. Nintendo's the kind of company where everything they do gets an indpendant review, but smaller companies (like Softwise) doesn't have the same luxury. Verifiability is one of the 3 core Wikipedia principles. So we have to adhere to it. McKay 17:33, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes, that's good, but wikipedia prefers more-reliable sources (see WP:RS), and more sources that are reliable. Note that we don't disagree with the information, but that we want to have better verifiability. McKay 20:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. I will keep everything you said in mind for future reference. I did add a second source (an article just published by IGN). As a result I also removed the verification needed tags as there are now two completely independent and reliable sources confirming the 2007 release. Zomic_13 22:28, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reggie Fils-Aime mentions Wii Health in this video: http://www.gametrailers.com/player.php?id=17267&pl=game&type=wmv —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.206.4.89 (talk) 21:56, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Official Announcement

message: Is there any kind of paper that has only one side? Seriously now: what was meant here? Did he write on two sides of the paper? Remmelt 16:13, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The original source is clearer about it. What was meant is that Miyamoto wrote on both sides of the sheet of paper. I'll try to reword the statement better. Dancter 16:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

text: As an aside, yes, a mobius strip made of paper only has one side ... Tim (Xevious) 02:57, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Paper