Talk:Gamate

message: I own one of these things. I have just edited the article with some information based on my own device and game booklets.
I can provide with pictures of my own console or game booklets if necessary.
I've seen the Spanish version of this page and there are a few differences. I'm copying and pasting for anyone who knows more than I do. I've translated it to English for non-Spanish speakers.
# CPU - NCR 81489, 8 bits (BIT WS39323F) in a QFP-100 shell
# ROM 2 KB (UM6116M-2L CMOS static RAM, pin compatible with ROM/EPROM chips)
# RAM 16 KB (2 x CXK5864M-15L chips) of static RAM
# Blah blah blah about the hull, it mentions there are some versions in purple colour.
The rest is (or should be) the same.
Gee, I'm contributing to an article on an antique video game - I feel old already! 190.19.18.200 (talk) 18:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other information 

message: Since there is at least one editor of this article who is having trouble understanding what makes original research and POV commentary what they are, I am posting a little clarification on those two terms. Please note that the articles Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Original research, and Wikipedia:Citing sources should be your definitive guide for these issues, rather than what I say here. If you have not already read through those three articles, do so before doing any more editing on Wikipedia; it'll save you from making a lot of edits that will simply be reverted. If you have read those three articles and still don't understand the issues, well, that's what this post is for.
The easiest way to identify original research and POV commentary is that they have the editor himself as their implied source. Original research is information based on the editor's own findings. POV commentary is a statement of the editor's personal opinion. Here's an example of each:
* POV commentary: "... the obscurity of the device's origin, its demise, and its relatively large catalogue of games, merit objective scrutiny and analysis."
Note that this statement refers to no outside source, and is simply an abbreviation of "I think the obscurity of the device's origin, its demise, and its relatively large catalogue of games, merit objective scrutiny and analysis." Compare that to "Official Nintendo Magazine has praised the Game Boy for having 'got people who enjoyed gaming while sprawled on the couch in their undies to game wherever they liked.'" You can't start that sentence with "I think", since the opinion stated is explicitly that of a notable third party source.
* Original research: "Thus far, all serial numbers fall within a four year period between 1990 and 1993."
Again, no outside source is referred to, and the statement is just a disguised version of "Thus far, all serial numbers that I've discovered fall within a four year period between 1990 and 1993." Compare that to "The Game Boy requires 6V DC of at least 250 mA." It makes no sense to put "I've discovered" in that sentence, since the reference clearly show that the information came from somewhere else.
Now, here's the key part: You can't turn original research and POV commentary into reliably sourced information by throwing a "</ref>" at the end. In fact(excuse the bold lettering, but it is crucial that you get this), original research and POV commentary cannot be turned into anything other than original research and POV commentary by ANY means whatsoever. They are what they are because their source is the editor; the way you present the statements doesn't change where they came from.
The only way you can fix original research and POV commentary is by getting rid of it entirely and replacing it with information taken from notable and reliable sources. For instance, "Thus far, all serial numbers fall within a four year period between 1990 and 1993" could theoretically be replaced by "All serial numbers listed in Super Reliable Gaming Buyer's Guide fall within a four year period between 1990 and 1993."Joe Editor, Super Reliable Gaming Buyer's Guide, p.317. If such a guide really exists, and really has that information in it, of course.--Martin IIIa (talk) 14:27, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The nature of original research and POV commentary 

message: Where did the figure 128x96 came from? Judging from the screenshot of Treasure Hunter, if we assume the graphics are standard 8x8 tile based and the level is composed of 2x2 tile blocks, I count 10x9 blocks = 20x18 tiles = 160x144 pixels, same as the Game boy. Sengokucannon (talk) 18:08, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Screen resolution 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Gamate. 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/20100503234818/http://www.toybase.com.tw:80/h/n1930359.html to http://www.toybase.com.tw/h/n1930359.html
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) 14:14, 7 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Gamate. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.toybase.com.tw/h/n1930359.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110511073905/http://www.videogamegazette.com/gamate/gamate.html to http://www.videogamegazette.com/gamate/gamate.html
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) 02:04, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified