Talk:Second generation of video game consoles

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:History of video game consoles (third generation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 01:59, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Second generation of video game consoles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071211022532/http://www.thedoteaters.com/p3_stage1.php to http://www.thedoteaters.com/p3_stage1.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:08, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:36, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: This confused me the first time reading this article. By this logic the second generation overlaps the third. Generation is defined as when a console is released. Not by it’s shelf life UltimateGamer9000 (talk) 18:42, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: We define them from first introduction to final discontinuation. Generations do overlap. The second generation is one of the more severe but it happens in other places as well, including the current 8th and 9th generations. -- ferret (talk) 18:45, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: I feel like for the sake of confusion we could have it list 1982 on the main page with a note in the wikitext that the Atari was on shelf until 1992. UltimateGamer9000 (talk) 18:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: But that's not what we denote, here or on multiple other articles about the console generations. Consistency across the articles is necessary, and the note is there to educate people who do not understand the definition in use. -- ferret (talk) 19:15, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: What say we compromise? The third generation page lists the end of the third generation with the emergence of 16 bit consoles, but it also makes note that the last 8-bit were commercially available until 2003. UltimateGamer9000 (talk) 21:50, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that this content is supported by a citation to the book :Racing the Beam and coauthors of the book :Nick Montfort and :Ian Bogost seem to be established content experts with respect to videogame stuff, the 1992 seems to be valid at least for Wikipedia purposes. Of course, other reliable sources or content experts might disagree, but that would need to be clearly established; any interpretations or opinions we have as readers are nothing more than :WP:OR if they can't be supported by citing a reliable source. One way this content could be changed would be to provide direct attribution to Montfort and Bogost as having stated 1992 is the date in their book; that might only be necessary, however, if other reliable sources state a different date. Another way to clarify things would be to move the citation to the first mention of 1992 per :MOS:CITELEAD and :WP:REFNAME so that it doesn't first appear at the very end of the lead section. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:53, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

text: The third generation article is consistent with this one.  It says the end was marked by the emergence of 16-bit systems and with the discontinuation of the Famicom in 2003. All of our generation articles follow this same format, and the second generation is not an exception. -- ferret (talk) 21:59, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: It’s not consistent. The third generation only lists the beginning date in the opening paragraph and only later does the 4th generation and 2003 discontinuation come up. I’m not saying change any info on here but I think we can find a way to format it in a more cohesive manner. We’ve been dancing this dance for 3 years now. UltimateGamer9000 (talk) 22:56, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: No, you've been editing against an established project consensus for 3 years. We're not dancing anything. You just need to accept that Wikipedia measures it in a way you don't like. You understand that it's easy enough to piece together your editing history on various IPs right? You're still blocked on multiple IPs from this page, and block evasion can lead to your account being blocked as well. I suggest you move on from this. -- ferret (talk) 22:58, 25 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The 1992 debacle 

message: This line goes: "Some developers collapsed and almost no new games were released in 1984"
Yet, you go to this page on here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:1984_video_games
and you see over 300! So, "almost no" definitely makes no sense. 2600:1702:3520:2210:AC9D:1CCC:63A6:842C (talk) 13:26, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  What?