Talk:WaveBird Wireless Controller

message: Since the article states that later produced controllers operate on the 2.4 GHz bandwidth, this seems to suggest that their transciever could not be interchanged with that of an older 900 MHz wavebird and vice-versa. The citation for this seems a little vague- are there any reports of non-intercompatibility?67.159.67.164 (talk) 19:09, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The 900 MHz is a false rumour. I'll link my blog post, which has a lot of sources from gaming news websites and the FCC itself. here - Hopefully that clears the confusion. Synnett (talk) 21:34, 25 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: 900 MHz vs. 2.4 GHz compatibility

message: Why no mention of projected battery life? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.22.126.42 (talk • contribs) 07:12, 18 August 2006  (UTC)
: One would imagine that it may be due to the large variance between the battery types that can be used in the Wavebird- two AA batteries versus two NiCAD, for instance. However, if you can find a source for battery life, go ahead and put it in the article. Sourced information is always welcome. Ex-Nintendo Employee 12:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Based on experience, I bought the Wavebird around 2 months ago and is still using the original batteries. This is based on a 1 - 2.5 hours of gameplay 4 days a week. Of course, it was always switched off when not used though. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.33.240.65 (talk) 07:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Well, we could theoretically measure how much watt it drains. And then give figures of estimated life with 1800mA and 2600mA batteries(i have no idea what is common). -anon  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.22.38.140 (talk) 14:03, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Battery life 

message: The PlayStation 3 article has had its share of debates over the naming of the article, and it was determined that common use and tradition dictated that the camelcase spelling was appropriate, according to MoS:TM. I don't think the same applies to the WaveBird, though. It seems to me that, official formatting aside, Wavebird is the more common usage, and more fitting according to the style guide. Unless a convincing argument is made otherwise, I plan to move it back to Wavebird. Dancter 19:55, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wasn't arguing that WaveBird isn't the official spelling. I was saying that common usage and readability may make Wavebird the more appropriate choice per Wikipedia's Manual of Style. As I mentioned, if we were going strictly by official spellings, the PS3 article would be at PLAYSTATION 3 (evidence here), but it was decided that the article should remain at PlayStation 3. In any case, I'm pretty much dropping the issue, as it seems usage of the official spelling is more common than I originally thought. Dancter 14:30, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CamelCase 

message: I see that there are wireless NES controllers on the article, and I remember that I had some Infrared N64 controllers. Should they be mentioned as well? I don't remember what they names were, but they were third-party hardware. I don't think i have them anymore, as they did not work very good :-/ If they should be mentioned, I might be able to look to see if i have them still. Zaybertamer 02:39, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If they were third party controllers, then that would logically place them outside of the Nintendo WaveBird designation and thus not in this section. Ex-Nintendo Employee 02:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does WaveBird actually refer to an entire line of wireless Nintendo controllers extending back to the NES Satellite? I thought it referred specifically to the wireless GameCube controller. Dancter 03:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I haven't seen any evidence that Nintendo uses the term to describe anything except the wireless GameCube controller- they certainly haven't used the term to describe anything prior to it. That's one reason it's called the "WaveBird"- because it's the first Nintendo controller to rely on radio waves for its operation. The Satellite and other NES accessories relied on IR. Ex-Nintendo Employee 06:23, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So why is this article listing it as a model of WaveBird? Dancter 14:02, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's something that should probably be changed. It also currently has Beyond under Models as well, which doesn't make sense. A better arrangement might be having the wavebird info then a short History section detailing the NES stuff and other early wireless controllers then the beyond section.Corbo 16:15, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've started reworking the article, but it's going to take some significant molding to get it right. Anyone who wants to help, feel free to jump right in. Ex-Nintendo Employee 08:15, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nintendo 64 Wireless controllers 

message: The assertion that the WaveBird is the first official first-party wireless controller is false, as the Atari 2600 RC joysticks would be happy to tell you (if joysticks could only talk). See here:  adavidw 10:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm, replace it with "first commercially viable"? I had never heard of this Atari RF controller and from the descriptions it seems to have been more of a gimmick than an actual product 80.218.95.39 19:53, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just don't see how you could assert the commercial viability of the WaveBird without some source proving the lack of viability of the Atari joystick. I know they were an actual shipping product. However, I don't have any information about whether Atari sold 10 sets or 100,000. Even if I did know sales numbers, those numbers would be irrelevant unless taken in the context of the installed base of that particular console. If anyone can find some sort of numbers to cite that obviously indicate the Atari joysticks were a flop, then some sort of reference to "first commercially successful first-party wireless controller" would be appropriate. adavidw 04:21, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  First official first party wireless controller? 

message: How can the Wavebird have been released in 2004 (Development Para 2) while the Platinum version was released in 2002 (Design Bullet 5)?  I would assume that the Platinum version was a modification.  If this is not the case, then it would be more informative to edit the date in the Development section to reflect the platinum version and the bullet point should reflect the non-platinum version. TheodoreLarson 10:44, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Date Conflicts 

message: ref 11 is a dead link... so feel free to fix it.. Mace Windu (talk) 01:27, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Dead Link

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on WaveBird Wireless Controller. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110807190016/http://press.nintendo.com/articles.jsp?id=23255 to http://press.nintendo.com/articles.jsp?id=23255
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: PowerA has wireless Switch controllers based on the GameCube design. These use Bluetooth connectivity and two AA batteries. While I find them neat, they are not directly compatible with GameCube, Wii or the Smash adapter. --LABcrabs (talk) 03:31, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Successor