Talk:Wii/Archive 11

message: It seems this page has mostly disappeared in the last 24 hours. Some has been archived, but I am not sure about all of it. If someone who has done more on this article wants to revert some of it or explain why it was deleted that would be a great help to me. Thanks.  Sir hugo 12:36, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I checked and it is indeed all there. there were 35 topics before I archived, and in the latest achieve there are, well, 35 topics.--DivineShadow218 14:57, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess when I looked at it I didnt realize that the entire discussion had been archived.  I thought you had just archived the oldest topics.  I was just confused when I saw that some topics which had recent posts were archived. Sir hugo 18:59, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Talk Topics 

message: According to Game|Life blog, Wii will store caricatures in the hardware, and later use them in some games. Katsuya Eguchi: Yes. The caricatures will exist in the hardware, as data, as one of several profiles that you could save in the Wii. And if you insert compatible software into the Wii, it will pull up the images that you chose.  http://blog.wired.com/games/index.blog?entry_id=1493873 -- ReyBrujo 06:05, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Huh? Danny 06:30, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Something along those lines was mentioned in the Kotaku http://kotaku.com/gaming/shigeru-miyamoto/e306-video-shigeru-miyamoto-interview-174909.php (interview) with Miyamoto. That's already in the Wii Remote article, because it mentioned how the profiles can be associated with individual Remotes, but I didn't even consider its relevance to the main article. I think I read some other interview about Wii Sports that indicated that the caricature editor was actually in the game software, and only the saved profile is actually in the hardware. The seeming contradiction can probably be chocked up to imprecision of language, but whose? Dancter 06:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, okay, I get it now.  If that's legit, that is awesome!  I think we should wait for a more official announcement from Nintendo (which they'll probably do roughly two weeks after the system launches), before we add this. Very interesting though. Danny 07:01, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Does Nintendo Power count as Nintendo? Their August 2006 periodical says it will be part of the system. Jaxad0127 20:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Could you provide details such as quotations, article titles, page numbers? The problem isn't so much the reliability of the sources, but ambiguity of the statements. It seems clear that there will be a caricature editor, and that the profiles will be stored in hardware, but will the actual editor application be lie in the hardware, like the Opera browser? I don't consider Nintendo Power as official as an announcement or a press release, but it's a pretty reliable source. Dancter 21:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just checked it and it only says there will be a face editor. Page 40, picture caption. Jaxad0127 22:24, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

text: It looks like it's already been put in. Twice. There's even another long quote. *sigh* Dancter 15:11, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caricatures 

message: Opnions please. --Ragnarok Addict 14:41, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, but I think it should be deleted.  Internet memes are contentious articles on WP, and this one isn't even well known. Ladlergo 14:46, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I'm with Ladlergo; this doesn't deserve its own article. I'm not sure it even merits a mention in the console articles. Dancter 15:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not deserving of an article.  Maybe a tiny passing mention in Wii and/or Xbox 360.--The Ninth Bright Shiner talk 15:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I've nominated it for deletion. The concept may be somewhat notable, but I don't think "Wii60" is all that notable. --Optichan 15:31, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it should stay. I mean seriosly a Wii=a 360 costs less than a ps3. Wii60 ftw!!Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 12:21, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Voted delete. We are not an "ad" site, or commercial for that matter. We don't care if it cost less then PS3 etc. Besides, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Havok (T/C/c) 13:47, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Havok, You might not care, but lots of Consumers(aka the important people) do care.Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 14:36, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that most people are capable of doing simple arithmatic. Ladlergo 14:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I dont.Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 20:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Could somebody tell me what Wii60 is? The Wii60 history doesn't show anything, and the deletion talk doesn't reveal anything, and following the deleted page suggestion of searching for Wii60 didn't work.  So what the heck is Wii60? Tophu 18:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wii60]] article 

message: Should we add an article on this? It's a lot more well known than Wii60, or some other stuff I've seen.--Supermariorobot 06:53, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Rumored name, don't add. Try an internet slang dictionary instead. Ladlergo 11:24, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a rumored name, it was a rumored eighth-generation Nintendo console.  I don't really think it has all that much to do with the Wii itself.--The Ninth Bright Shiner talk 18:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Wikipedia is not a collection of memes. Ladlergo 14:33, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Or is it?--The Ninth Bright Shiner talk 18:57, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While I don't like that list, notice that almost all of them are based off of actual objects, even if they're flash videos.  Nintendo ON exists as a rumor and nothing more. Ladlergo 19:07, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah...while I still think Nintendo ON could use a mention somewhere on Wikipedia, you do have a point.--The Ninth Bright Shiner talk 22:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks...I'm glad someone sees things my way. After the publicity ON got, I really think it deserves a mention Supermariorobot 02:07, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Nintendo ON exists, regardless of what some may say about rumors. A incredibly widely-known rumor is definitely worth a unique page, assuming that it is made clear that ON is/was a hoax. By the way, I made the page a while back, which was admittedly not factual enough, which got deleted. Scepia 08:59, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nintendo ON 

message: Game Informer seems to have given more information about Wii according to a post in the Nintendo boards. http://forums.nintendo.com/nintendo/board/message?board.id=revolution&message.id=1260806&view=by_date_ascending&page=1 There are some surprises there (Wii including a PPU? That is something not likely at all), but worth a view. Someone with access to the GI magazine should check if what it is being said there is real. -- ReyBrujo 17:51, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Screw the PPU, a built-in camera! Joyness! Anyway, what country is Game Informer in? Is it exclusive to the US or is it a worldwide deal? Ixistant 18:17, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not sure, but it's published in my city, Minneapolis, Minnesota!! Anyway, I have a subscription to it (and access to their full website.) I'll look into it later. Grandmasterka 03:48, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: A PPU? I'm doubtful as well, but I'd love to see confirmation on this. Not sure if a magazine such as that is enough to include the information in the article (unless it's specifically sourced from Nintendo and not a rumour), but either way it could be interesting. Notice that the poster called it an upcoming issue, though. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 04:00, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Game Informer has an article in Wikipedia and is a notable magazine. Any speculation they include in the magazine can be added, as it comes from a reliable source. Even if they don't say from where their sources are, Wikipedia is not about truth, it is about verifiability. However, I am awaiting to get confirmation about the magazine contents, as all we have now is a post in a board and some gaming sites. -- ReyBrujo 04:09, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A magazine talking about a rumour does not constitute verifiability (magazines post rumours that turn out incorrect all the time). It could be included in the article because Gameinformer is so notable, but would have to make specific mention to the fact that it's but a rumour. If the magazine said it came from Nintendo though, then it could be included outright. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 04:21, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I was not commenting against stating it is a rumour. I was saying that, due Wikipedia policy, we can add a rumour that appears in Game Informer. Because of the same policy, we can't add the exactly same rumour if it appears in Joe's cafe blog. -- ReyBrujo 04:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Aye. Pie. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 04:23, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: "A magazine talking about a rumour does not constitute verifiability (magazines post rumours that turn out incorrect all the time). It could be included in the article because Gameinformer is so notable, but would have to make specific mention to the fact that it's but a rumour. If the magazine said it came from Nintendo though, then it could be included outright. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | "    When did that happen? I must have missed it.Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 14:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I think that we should add the rumours to the article, but specifically state that they ARE rumours and that they came from GI, much like how the The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess article added the rumours that were printed in NGC Magazine (which turned out to be correct) about LOZ on the Wii. Ixistant 18:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to fight you on adding rumors.  "Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation."  Unless GI's source is revealed and can be questioned, it is a rumor and should not be included. Ladlergo 19:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am backtracking somewhat on this. I dislike adding rumours as well, unless they come straight from a Nintendo person (ie. through the Dojo or something). However, it is somewhat expected that an article for an unreleased system may be slightly speculative. But considering how much official information we have from Nintendo to make up the article, I don't see a particular need to include the GI stuff. Unless, again, it's presented as a non-rumour, but by the time such information would be out and verifiable in the magazine, other sources would have it as well. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 21:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Message? I don't understand. Nintendo.com had a message on a site? Dancter 15:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Someone posted it on their message boards. Ladlergo 15:11, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah. But wouldn't Nintendo delete it just the same if it were true? I mean, if it's a secret and all... Anyway, the rumor sounds absolutely ludicrous. It mentions a camera to capture an image for the face feature, when almost everything else out there indicates that the faces are "built" in a software application. It mentions a headset, but Iwata stated in an interview that part of the reason for the Remote speaker was because headsets were too complicated. It also mentions that Nintendo would release officially-branded SD cards ranging from 2GB to 7GB. Have you checked the prices of SD cards lately? How could anyone find this plausible? Dancter 06:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Game Informer 

message: Wii (pronounced "we", IPA: /wiː/) is Nintendo's 7th generation video game console, Nintendo's fifth home console and the successor to the Nintendo GameCube
According to Nintendo, this is a new-gen console (whatever that means), and since it's not competing with the Xbox 180 or PS3, is it really part of the 7th generation era, or a new era? What do you guys think?
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6152265.html (McDonaldsGuy 06:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's called the Xbox 360. And Wii, like it or not, is still a 7th genereation console. Havok (T/C/c) 06:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That's not what Nintendo thinks, they make it quite clear that this is not a next-generation console (and therefore, not part of the 7th generation). It doesn't matter if I like it or not, but I am just going by what Nintendo says. (McDonaldsGuy 08:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  The context of "Wii is not next-gen" is: <<"Next-generation" implies that the console is an extension of previous installments.>> (Iwata) So it's just marketing. Nintendo is trying to set itself apart from the other "extensions of previous installments". By that logic, Wii is indeed next-gen, since it's an extension of the previous installment. Moreso than the PS3 or Xbox360, since it's heavily based on GameCube hardware. It doesn't stop being next-gen just because Nintendo says so. Numbnumb 16:59, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text:  I'd say it's part of the seventh generation consoles, but a new era for Nintendo, who hopes it'll spread/evolve. That's what I think, anyway :) ShaunES 08:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Psssst. The link doesnt work.Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 14:24, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Despite what Nintendo's saying, it's a 7th generation console.  They're not reinventing the wheel. Ladlergo 14:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought Wikipedia goes by facts? I guess we should delete this article because we are getting it all from Nintendo? McDonaldsGuy 05:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hence the future product warning at the top of the article. Jaxad0127 05:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The generation typically refers to the time period anyways, as each of the major companies release new consoles. Besides marketing, there's no reason to not call it 7th generation. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 21:34, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Exactly.  We don't call Xbox 360 second generation because it's Microsoft's second console; we call it a 7th generation console because it is part of the seventh generation of consoles in general. --Maxamegalon2000 21:38, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

text: But Nintendo says it is NOT a next-gen console, so we have to go by what THEY say in order for this article to be 100% accurate. Whether or not it's a marketing scheme is irrelevent. McDonaldsGuy 05:38, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently you missed my point.  I didn't say it was a "next-gen" console, that doesn't negate it being a "7th gen" console.  There is a difference.  "Next gen" = PS3 and Xbox 360 with their 'lastest, greatest' tech (at least to gaming consoles.)  "New gen" = Wii with an entirely new take on (hopefully) mainstream gaming interaction.  "7th gen" = All three simply because they are being released around the same time period.  It's no different than if Nintendo, instead of releasing the Wii now, bowed out of the console game for another five years and released it if/when the "Playstation IV" and "Xbox 720" come out in 2011, it would then be a part of the 8th generation, "new gen" or not.  Again, "new gen" does not equal not being "7th gen". Danny 16:09, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

text:  Good point. I think they're going for a new species instead of a continuation of what already exists, so to speak. Jaxad0127 05:41, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

text: That presumes that Nintendo is not only an infallible source of information, but 100% honest. We should not blindly go by what Nintendo says if we are committed to being accurate. Semantics aside, it is worthwhile to establish these systems in relation to one another somehow, if only to position them in a chronological context. Whatever the manufacturers are saying about not being competitors does not negate this. Xbox 180? It doesn't sound like an argument made with objectivity in mind. Dancter 05:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Im sure Nintendo knows more about their new console than you, and since they say it is NOT next-gen, then why shouldn't we believe them? Should we now, say, take down the Wii-mote section of the page because the Wii-mote might actually be a bomb (I dont mean it, just an example)? McDonaldsGuy 06:05, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm sure Nintendo knows more about their new console than I do, too. That's not the point. Why shouldn't we believe Nintendo when they it's not next-gen? Same reason why we are skeptical when Sony says that they removed vibration from their PS3 controller because it interferes with motion-sensing. Nintendo has an interest in distinguishing their console from Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 by claiming that what they are doing is something totally new, even when it is not quite the case. Sony is also claiming that what they are doing is not comparable to other consoles, and is the only true HD console, in part because of its Blu-ray capability. Should we believe them, and not try to compare PS3 to 360? While we're at it, let's not compare PSP and DS, even though they're both portable game-playing systems, released in the same general time period, with buttons and screens and Wi-Fi and game software that you insert into them to play games. Sony and Nintendo have made statements they're not comparable, so why shouldn't we believe them? Dancter 06:33, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As it has allready been stated, the generation is a marker for when the console is released, not for how "high tech" it is. I re-added the line to the article. I would also suggest people to check the little box on the right at the bottom, Wii is placed next to Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, should it have it's own line? "Not 7th gen since Nintendo dosn't want it to be." (this last part was a joke by the way). Havok (T/C/c) 07:39, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is this directed at me? I agree. Dancter 14:15, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The :'s got a bit to much for me. :P Sorry about that. Havok (T/C/c) 18:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The link works now btw.Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 20:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

text: As opposed to vague and unambiguous, or clear and ambiguous? ;) Ladlergo 21:25, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  ambiguous: "open to two or more interpretations; or of uncertain nature or significance." http://wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=ambiguous Nintendo's definitions tend to be both vague, and leave much open to debate and interpetation. And they like it that way. -- Daniel Davis 21:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

text: That would still be unneccessary as the two terms don't directly relate. Even if they did, we can't ret-con the chronology of 25 years of gaming over semantics. Danny 16:28, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: NOT a next-gen console

message: This is a continuation from page 7, in the Wii Talk Archives.
:::: but anyway, let me just make it clear... I WAS KIDDING. And as far as Daniel Davis's observation is concerned, ironically enough, I saw that episode right after posting this... and the first thing I thought was that someone would say I was copying. Also, I did not intend for this to be in the article, just wanted to say it. Just wanted to make all this clear. aido2002 21:16, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Continuation from pg.7-"Creepy thing with the name..."=

message: While I'm sure someone criticized it like that, I don't think referencing a blog without an alexa ranking it the right way to go about it (also, some of it is self-evident). RN 02:52, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The editor has had a history of adding links to content by John Guilfoil. Dancter 03:15, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  removed criticism edit 

message: Yeah, so that patent Nintendo was just granted for a console messaging service was applied for before the GameCube was even released. The illustrations show an N64. While it's likely that Wii will feature similar messaging functions, just like the microphone rumor, I don't think it belongs in the article. There has been absolutely no confirmation or even hints dropped by Nintendo that this is happening for Wii yet. What does everyone think? Dancter 04:19, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: but it wasn't finalized until June 6, 2006, so if you want, hide it but do not delete it.--DivineShadow218 05:20, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sure, but I'm a little confused. Weren't you the one who said to wait for a confirmation by Nintendo before adding something here, regardless of the likelihood? Lately it seems like you've been adding quite a bit of speculative information. Did something change? Dancter 05:31, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Isnt a pantent that was finalized just a few days ago by Nintendo confirmation enough?--DivineShadow218 05:35, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The reason I figure I would add this info is, one my statement above. Two it does come from IGN, a site that I am indifferent about but won the chance to make the article. And three, some one would have added the same information, I just wanted to put it in the article in the correct format, with decent information from the patent itself. But like I said, we can hide it for now and see what Nintendo mentions about this in the coming weeks.--DivineShadow218 05:42, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Oh yea and four, it kinda makes sense that they would at least put in in the Wii.--DivineShadow218 05:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It just seems to me that many of those arguments are ones you seemed to be dismissive of before. Eh. Maybe I'm the one who's changed. I mean, I've been convinced for a while that I understand how the basic technology principles of the Wii Remote work, and have wanted to add to the Wii Remote article about it, but have mostly kept it out pending outright explicit confirmations. A decent body of evidence can be cited for the microphone rumor, too, but nothing concrete, so I've supported leaving it out. I'm quite conservative when it comes to keeping to what was explicitly stated now. I suspect I wasn't so conservative a month ago when I started working on these articles. Dancter 06:19, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

text: And point-by-point: One, no. Corporations try to patent everything under the sun, often with no intent to ever actually use the patents they are awarded, at least in the way described in the patent. I don't consider an awarded patent an automatic confirmation of any feature for any product. I consider the timing incidental. Two, just because it was decided that IGN would be allowed as an external link doesn't mean that we have accepted their information wholesale. Last time I checked, we're still keeping out those tech specs IGN mentioned a while back. You're right about three. I think I addressed four in my previous paragraph. Dancter 06:19, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just took the liberty to hide it, and once the Wii launches we can delete all the hidden info that does not belong. --DivineShadow218 06:24, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Mentioning the patent, even if the Wii does have something of this feature, seems fairly pointless (many things mentioned in the Wikipedia are patented, but we don't extoll on each and every one). If we were to mention it as a feature, we should do it as such, not giving the patent its own section. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 06:28, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think hiding it was a decent compromise. We'll almost surely have to rewrite a bit when Nintendo reveals everything, but at least we'll have a tentative framework in place. And while I agree that once Nintendo reveals everything, mentioning the actual patent will be irrelevant, it seems just as pointless to invest much energy into editing text that is now hidden. Dancter 06:56, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fer shure. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 07:06, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

text: We have nothing connecting this messaging patent to the Wii. Just because the Patent was just accepted this week means nothing. They applied for it back during the N64 days, and specifically referred to the N64. The time it was accepted means nothing, except that the USPTO finally got around to reviewing it and Nintendo is now free to sue people / demand licensing fees with it. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 06:23, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Agreed. The image on the patent, bafflingly enough, shows Super Mario World playing on an N64 with the round Game and Watch controllers from the 80s- but I didn't see anything at all about the Wii in regards to it. -- Daniel Davis 05:59, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Actually, I'm the one who seems to be the most anti-crystal ball here. ;)  I think that hiding it is ok, but putting it into the article is not.  However, it could have a place on the Nintendo page, if someone were to add a section on patents they hold but don't appear to have used yet. Ladlergo 12:05, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Messaging Service 

message: Woah, I noticed the nice tables and the new photos.  Two weeks ago the list of expected launch titles were not in a neat table.  I also like the list of expected software library.   Thank you everyone for improving this article!  Cheers.  --Starionwolf 05:53, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Layout of article looks different 

message: Removed this from introduction " Some have criticized the Wii controller because it cannot be recharged, unlike the Xbox 360 controller."
The introduction is not the right place for this even if it is suitable at all. Also note that rechargeable AA batteries are freely available.HappyVR 11:16, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a little off topic, but oh well. I dont know how long the charge on a 260 controller lasts, but I do know (from personal experience) that Wavebird controllers (for gcn) last for about 3/4 of a YEAR (This is in the controller I use most, so it has heavy usage, my other one, which is only used for multiplayer, lasts well over a year.)with one pair of AA batteries.  So I doubt people will mind having to change the batteries if they last that long(heres hoping they will).Qwerasdfzxcvvcxz 12:11, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I remember reading that AA batteries would last around 30 hours at Kotaku, but since there hasn't been confirmation, we should wait. However, if well sourced, the comment about not being recharged is good enough to be included. -- ReyBrujo 12:38, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Don't forget, the Wiimote is going to have Rumble and Motion sensing, which was excluded from the wavebird because it would drain the battery. Not only that, but the Gamecube is already a few years old. Imagine how often they are going to have to be changed on a new system people are going to want a chance to play with at any moment of free time they've got. Supermariorobot 16:06, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: rechargeable

message: Hey, i am a forum administrator on Revo-Europe.com. I previously added the site in the external links section, before being told that you have to go through the proper channels first. Forgive me for my mistake, as i am not very familiar with Wikipedia and how things exactly work around here. 
Basically, i'm trying to go through the correct channels now and explain why i think Revo-Europe would serve its purpose well as an external link.
I'm not sure if you have heard about this site before, but we used to be called Cube-Europe. Here is our page on wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cube-europe
We are in our third re-iteration of our site. Previously, we were N64-Europe, then we became Gamecube-europe. And now, revolution-europe. 
We started off a fairly small fansite. But, as our wikipedia page suggests, things have got a lot bigger. A hell of a lot bigger. Tim Symons, who was formally our director, has moved onto bigger things in Nintendo Europe. We have gained status as a respectable website and are fairly up-to-date with our news, previews and reviews. 
But, this is only half the story. The other part of our success is a thriving forum. It is no coincidence that we still have people visiting our site and forums since the N64-Europe days. Our forum has such a good community. Our servers crashed many, many times when we opened up the Revo-Europe forums, due to the amount of people signing up and visiting us in our "third coming."
I have been visiting the site and forum since the early cube-europe days. I've worked through the ranks and have become part of the forum staff. If there's one thing i've noticed about our site, it is that we are hard working and we are a friendly site who try to please other Nintendo fans. You can see this in our regular features, such as "fireflower."
I have joined many forums over the years, and visited many sites. Revo-Europe/Cube-europe is the only one that keeps me coming back. 
If there's one place that Nintendo fans, or people just generally curious about Wii need to be, it's at Revo-europe. This is why i think our site is worthy enough to be placed in the external links section.
Thank you very much for your time, and i hope you take all what i have said into consideration.
Fierce LiNk 16:59, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If other external links such as the smaller C3 are allowed, why not Revo-Europe? Tphi 17:53, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As he stated he added it without going trough the channels to have it added. Plus, adding your own site is a no no. Other then that, I see no problem with adding this to the section. Havok (T/C/c) 19:37, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much for your fairness and adding our link to the page. Thanks again for your time. :)Fierce LiNk 19:52, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

text: On Spore (video game), it was pretty much decided that we would link only one plain fansite (GamingSteve's, which has an incredibly active forum with no others coming close in that regard), and a Wiki. The External links section there has also been the source of much annoying vandalism and long discussions, but besides the occasional vandal it has settled down. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 17:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that pretty much follows what was decided for Wolfenstein:_Enemy_Territory.  We are still debating including a site similar to the one you are refering to that has probably the best collection of information outside the official sites.  Besides that it was getting a bit crowded. Sir hugo 17:35, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you'll all be rather impressed with the amount of attention given to external links in the most recent archive of this talk page.  If you'd like, we can certainly have another vote. --Maxamegalon2000 21:53, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are right I am impressed.  For some reason I missed that stuff it must have been archived just before I started following this article.  As long as the community agrees then those links should stay but all other additions should be brought here first as we did with this current one.  Thanks Max. Sir hugo 11:45, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links: Revolution-Europe.com 

message: This information has been added twice.  I like Dancter's idea of discussing it here first.  I think if we can find two good sources that show this is true then it can be added.  But it needs to be worded in such a way as to not be "crystal balling" as it was put earlier.  Not entirey sure how to do that.Sir hugo 15:10, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, here's the http://wii.ign.com/articles/712/712283p1.html (source) I've seen.  IGN has said it few times, this article just being the most resent. JQF 17:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Publishers Launch Dates

message: How far will its Wireless range reach? Mine would be in another room if I got one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Eric55673 (talk • contribs) 01:59, 15 June 2006  (UTC)
:As far as I can tell, no mention has been made about the range of the Wi-Fi capability. But if http://www.broadcom.com/press/release.php?id=854744 (Broadcom's press release) is any indication, it should be okay. Considering that it's built-in, Nintendo could stand to receive a lot of flak if the Wi-Fi reception wasn't good. Dancter 02:27, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: As long as it complies to the 802.11b/g standards then I don't forsee range being an issue in the same house.  Most wireless cards for computers and laptops are able to receive the signal from a good distance away from the transmitter.  Your transmitter is where you can gain alot or lose alot as well.  Obviously every Wii will have a MAC and some basic IP routing as well and hopefully the Wii will have a built in firewall that only allows VPN connections to other Wiis and to Nintendo.Sir hugo 11:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

text: It'll likely be very similar to the DS' wireless ability. Jaxad0127 16:03, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I'd assume it would have further range than the DS wireless capabilities, being more expensive and a console and the like.Falco1029 06:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wireless capabilities

message: " On top of everything else, this week industry sources have relayed that - in something of a surprise attack -- "Nintendo is planning to launch Wii before PlayStation 3." The latest word jives with publisher release calendars, whose Wii titles are scheduled in many cases for a mid-to-late October debut or, in some cases, very early November. "
http://wii.ign.com/articles/712/712283p1.html —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.148.120.170 (talk • contribs) .
:Who are these "sources"?  WP is not a crystal ball. Ladlergo 16:19, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We shouldn't care. We do not judge from where IGN picks the information, but we care the main news (Wii will release before PS3) has came from a reliable source, which IGN is. -- ReyBrujo 16:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We are not a news site, and I don't think this should even be in the article. Besides, many things IGN say should be taken with a grain of salt. Havok (T/C/c) 16:29, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: (edit conflict) IGN is a valid reliable source, and information posted there can be included in Wikipedia. After all, the article is using much worse sources than that. -- ReyBrujo 16:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: By that token, it seems the alleged specs IGN reported could be included, as well. Am I understanding this correctly? The addition of this sort of information has been a recurring issue, and I would like to know where all of this falls in terms of actual policy, regardless of which it happens to be. Dancter 17:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't think it's physically or morally possible for individual editors to decide when and when not a source is being reliable. I think it belongs, and could easily be rephrased as "IGN has reported such and such". Kil (talk) 16:49, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Let's not bring morals into this. That just introduces a whole new set of unnecessary problems. And the fact is that we need to evaluate sources; it cannot be avoided. This shouldn't be confused, though, with evaluating individual claims made by the sources, which is a related but different issue. And I do try rephrasing at first. Here's the pattern. Someone will add the latest rumor, asserting it as fact. Then I will try to edit it to establish the proper context for the info. Soon after, someone will delete it outright. Then for every subsequent time it's added, I tend to favor keeping it out, because I figure it's the safer course in the case of a dispute. This needs to be settled. I'm tired of this. Dancter 17:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: While I usually HATE anything resembling CBing, given the pattern of release dates, I'm ok with leaving the info in as long as it's emphasized that it's still dubious.  I'm ok with something like "IGN has reported that industry sources claim that the Wii will launch before the PS3, but is unable to verify reports of a release date." Key words being "claim" and "unable to verify" so that it's emphasized that it's still a rumor, even if it does come from a site that usually gets these things right. Ladlergo 17:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I know you do, and while I am actually pretty averse to crystal-balling myself, I am even more weary of edit-warring. If you've ever witnessed the activity at the article for The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess, I think you'd understand. I've added my edit from a while back. Everyone let me know how it looks. Dancter 18:00, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've used what I came up with and the previously-existing sentence to write something I think is ok.  While it's currently unverifiable, the release dates do fall in line with it. Hope you like it. Ladlergo 18:53, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I like how you're attemting to keep the speculative element out, but it's hard to do without somehow becoming misleading. For one thing, I don't think IGN said anything about the industry sources mentioning October or November, just that Nintendo plans to launch before PS3. IGN is basing the October from the publishers' schedules, and the early November from the pre-PS3 word from the industry sources. Dancter 19:12, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoops, there goes my brain.  How about now? Ladlergo 19:20, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, to be super-picky, the industry sources said "Nintendo is planning to", which isn't quite the same as personally claiming that it's going to happen. But I'm liking the changes. I imagine some will probably want a stronger assertion of "between mid-October and early November", but I'm not one of them. Dancter 19:53, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I don't mean to purport that sources shouldn't be evaluated, really what I'm asking is how IGN in this case can be reliable only sometimes, and who gets to be the judge of when? This article cites IGN several times. Should those references be removed? The Wii release is a future event that obviously can't be factual until it has occurred, and I'm not saying IGN's story should be touted as factual evidence for a Wii release date, just that "IGN has reported that such and such", with proper care given as to not mislead, merits a mention somewhere in this Article's Launch section. I also think editing issues regarding previously sensitive edits are beyond the scope of this specific matter and shouldn't be a deciding factor in its inclusion. Kil (talk) 17:58, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why not? To me, it's the same matter: questionable information from generally-accepted reliable sources. If you can argue that we can't treat IGN as a reliable source only sometimes, then that applies to those other issues. If I'm understanding you, we can't be selective. IGN is either reliable or not. Dancter 18:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: IGN is either reliable or not. - Pretty much. Also, I'm liking that edit. Kil (talk) 18:09, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Okay, but that's not quite why I brought it up. This is a new claim. We had the stuff about IGN hearing this from industry sources, but it isn't currently in the article, having been moved to the talk page for discussion. This claim was that Nintendo said it at a briefing, which is significantly different. It would be a direct confirmation by Nintendo, which carries much more weight than IGN's anonymous industry sources. This is why confirming or refuting it is important. Dancter 22:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sources say that Wii is before ps3 

message: I added a mention that the wii controller can be used as pointing device - I've added this before but it keeps dissapearing - I assume it's relevant.HappyVR 10:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the 'Wii-mote' seems to be essential to the proper functioning of the Wii console and it could be argued that the remote is an integral part of the console. Also the subsection on the controller already contains info on other aspects of the controller - peripherals, distance of operation, industry figures comment.. So I would think it makes sense to have both of the two primary functions (of the controller) mentioned?HappyVR 21:53, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Right, but not as a category for the article, which is was. Jaxad0127 22:04, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You must mean Category:Pointing devices - I've added that as a category to the 'wii remote' article - I didn't know it had been used as a category in the main wii article.HappyVR 22:16, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It was earlier. That was the focus of my first comment. Jaxad0127 22:42, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: pointing device

message: I can defer my opinion for now that it's just plain silly to only list the franchises and not the anticpiated individual games that are coming to the Wii, as it strikes me as not giving proper information in the article (i.e. "Wii will only have re-hashed franchises.") But what I cannot do is follow the two invisible comments that we shouldn't link the Zelda franchise listing to "Twilight Princess".  Fortunately, someone else beat me to the punch on correcting this rather odd decision (odd, considering TP is one of the most anticipated games, if not the most anticipated game for the console.)  Just because TP is coming to Wii and GameCube doesn't make it not a Wii game (especially when considering the control differences.)  That's like saying the Xbox version of a multi-console title/franchise can't count as an Xbox game cause it's also released for Playstation (Tomb Raider, Need For Speed, Sonic, etc.)  In other words, it doesn't make any sense! I'm not sure who or whom has made this decision, but if you can come up with a really good reason why this is beneficial to the article, then at least only put in the message once.  Doing it twice is simply not neccessary and is frankly, kind of rude. Danny 16:50, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you on everything. Any game on the Wii should be considered a Wii game, even if it is on other consols. The Wii version of TP will not only have a radically different control scheme from the GCN version, it will also have a new item (iron boots) and a new dungeon (the one show at E3), not to mention a fairy. Jaxad0127 17:15, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wait, wait, the iron boots are inboth versions I believe, and so is said dungeon. The fairy is just there as a part of the control scheme on Wii. Scepia 09:03, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Zelda: Twilight Princess

message: I fail to see the point of including information on the trademarks registered by Nintendo, when we have little idea what they're actually for. Yes, I've heard the speculation that !!M refers to the IM feature described in that patent that got approved recently, but speculation is all it is. While we're at it, why don't we include the other Wii trademarks Nintendo has registered, like "Wii Active 24" and "Wii Alive 24"? Haven't heard much about those ones. Dancter 04:38, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  trademarks 

message: Surely it should be Nintendo Wii rather than plain old Wii ?  We've already got Nintendo GameCube, Nintendo 64, so surely this needs a similar name? --Oscarthecat 21:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How many times are people going to argue this? We've debated this over and over, and we stuck with "Wii". -- VederJuda 21:59, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Yes, as VerderJuda said, it's been discussed. See the talk archives and whatnot. Wii was kept because it's the title used by Nintendo and their marketing, just as they used the full "Nintendo Gamecube" when advertising and referring to that console. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 22:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's why the old Wii/Nintendo Wii move request survey is archived separately from the rest.  We've been through this issue almost as many times as people have made silly jokes about the Wii name. ;)  --Stratadrake 00:13, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

text: Fair comment, didn't spot that. Apologies! --Oscarthecat 21:38, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name is wrong 

message: removed this " At another briefing, Nintendo stated that the Wii would launch before the PlayStation 3, which is launching on November 17, 2006." ok - if there was such a briefing (a press briefing I assume) where is it? - Let's put this in if and when it is confirmed.HappyVR 12:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct, the Wii will most likely be launching around November 6th in the US, and it being half the price of the PS3, it should draw even more customers. If you need a citation, look at the list at the bottom of this page.--Jak 17:10, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: wi launch before ps3

message: removed 'citation needed' tag from this - the interview transcript (and I assume the video interview) - makes it clear that connectivity is possible (but 'they' haven't decided how or if they are going to use it). Additionally - both have WiFi - of course they can connect.HappyVR 12:57, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: ds wii connect

message: The article is 50KB in size - it needs to be trimmed, likely into some sub-articles, and also examined for trivial information. Rebochan 17:13, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that this article is at least half the size of the other 7th gen console articles, it's not that bad really.  We already have separate articles for several key features of the Wii (Wii Remote, games list, Virtual Console, WiiConnect24, etc.) if we do too many than readers will have to jump to 10 different articles simply to read about Wii.  However, I personally think the ref list has gotten out of hand.  Stuff I've read about refs on Wikipedia state that if you're going to have a lot of them, then perhaps the Harvard method isn't the best choice.  Maybe there's a way to streamline them or else maybe we should switch to one of the other methods. Also, the messaging service, if confirmed, is lengthy enough to warrant its own article, perhaps we should place-hold the info here on the talk page, rather than leaving it up as an invisible future additon? Danny 17:40, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The messaging service already has it's own article. At least it did, I can't find it right now. Jaxad0127 17:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

text: That (below) is way to long to survive in the main article - also I've commented it out as it interferes with the talk page headings - if anyone knows of a better way do that. Honestly the instruction manual would be shorter.HappyVR 18:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Length

message: Given that this info is not officially confirmed by Nintendo, it is still speculation.  However, given the likelyhood that "!!M" has to do with "Wii" it will probably be confirmed.  But, the length of this section is a third the size of the whole Wii article, and thusly warrants its own article when/if Nintendo confirms it.  I am placing it here for now until we get such a confirmation. When/if that happens a small blurb should be added to the main article, with a direction to the !!M article. Danny 17:49, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: ===Messaging Service (!!M)===
Nintendo was granted a patent with the U.S. Patent Office for a "messaging service for video game systems with buddy list that displays game being played." A trademark registered by Nintendo of the name "!!M" (which looks like the name "Wii" upside-down, and resembles the initialism "IM" commonly used for instant messaging) has been speculated to be associated with this feature.
The patent document reports an instant messaging service that isn't exclusively proposed for any one game system, and which would share messages, user accounts, and buddy lists across different systems. One might guess it could be used to send messages between the Wii and the DS, or even for future Nintendo consoles and handhelds. 
Nintendo further details a buddy list, similar to Xbox Live, that lets you see what activities in which your buddies are engaged in. The user and his/her buddies can then communicate with each other on an individual basis and private chat sessions can be set up. These chat sessions are typically text-based, but it also possible to set up voice over Internet sessions between two users.
Before a user can add another user to his/her "buddy" list, the new buddy must approve the addition. Thus, the messaging service notifies the new buddy to request the new buddy's approval for addition onto the user's buddy list. Access is granted or denied only after the new buddy accepts or declines his/her addition to the buddy list. If the buddy accepts, his/her username remains on the buddy list. If the buddy declines, he/she is removed from the buddy list.
=====Block List=====
In the event that a user does not wish to be notified of a request to be placed on some other user's buddy list, the messaging service client enables the user to access the network server to add the name of that other user to a Block List listing the usernames of those other users that he/she does not wish to hear from. 
=====User Preferences=====
The messaging service client enables a user to set and modify certain preferences at any time. 
=====Profile===== 
The user can set a preference to determine whether:
# Everyone can see his/her user profile
# Only buddies can see his/her user profile
# No one can see his/her user profile.
The administrator of the messaging service may also provide certain limitations on the access to user profiles by users of the messaging service in order to protect user privacy. 
The profiles may also specify how much information may be provided to any or all buddies on his buddy list. This specification may be made by a user, a user's parent or guardian or an administrator of the messaging service. This feature may be provided to, among other things, protect the amount of online information that is available to others about children. Thus, for example, a user may specify in his profile that a particular buddy cannot see what the user is doing. That is, the user my specify that a particular buddy may know that the user is online, but not be able to determine the activity in which the user is engaged. The user may also specify that a particular buddy can know only certain activities in which the user is engaged (e.g., playing a particular game or games). 
=====Access===== 
The user can set a preference to determine whether (1) everyone can search for him/her, (2) only allow buddies to search for him/her, or (3) no one can search for him/her. The administrator of the messaging service may also provide certain limitations on searching for other users in order to protect user privacy. 
=====Status===== 
The user can set his/her status to be:
# Available--able to send/receive messages
# Invisible--online, but not able to send/receive messages
# Busy--online, able to send, but not receive messages. A user can, for example, broadcast a message that he/she is online but does not want to be interrupted. A busy icon may be used to notify others that the user is online, but does not want to be bothered. A user can also be invisible; such a user is online and can determine what his/her buddies are doing, but the buddies don't know that the user is there. 
=====Rules===== 
A user can create a list of rules that can be selectively turned ON or OFF. For example, a user may have an Auto Reply rule that can be turned ON or OFF. When the user sets his/her status to busy, the Auto Reply rule may be invoked to generate a personal auto reply message that automatically informs a message sender of the user's status. 
=====Alerts===== 
Alerts may be audible and/or visual and include: 
*Message Alerts that alert a user when a new message is received 
*E-mail Notification Alerts that alert a user when his/her mailbox receives a message. That is, a user's e-mail service may be configured to send a notification to the messaging service client when an e-mail message is received by the e-mail service. The notification may include an identification of sender. The user can set a preference determining whether the messaging service client generates an audible and/or visual alert upon receipt of such a notification. In response to the alert, a user can if desired launch an e-mail client to read the e-mail message.
*Buddy Signs On Alerts that alerts a user when any buddy (or some particular buddy) signs on. 
*Buddy Signs Off Alerts that alert a user when any buddy (or some particular buddy) signs off. 
*Reminder Alerts that remind a user of some event or activity (e.g., "Television program X starts in 5 minutes.")
 
If the article really gets to long it will be easy to cut down - lots of 'fluff' in there. However for now I leave it as it is. - It isn't that bad in terms of length.HappyVR 18:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I like the box to differntiate it from normal talk, thanks! Although, it's "exploded" off the right in my browser (Netscape). Is it just me?  If not, is there a way to format to keep it contained? Danny 22:53, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortuneately, those boxes are just glorified pre tags, so no. Jaxad0127 23:00, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: !!M Placeholder

message: Carrying on from a few different discussions - I couldn't help thinking that what is REALLY needed is an article "Wii games". Yes I know there already is "list of Wii games" - but it is just that - a list - not readable and no good except as a sort of index. I'd like to just start this myself - but I haven't really made myself an expert on this subject, can't keep up with what is/isn't 1st/2nd/3rd party/launch title/not a launch title etc. It's a topic that definately needs a separate article (assuming the Wii gets off the ground once it's released) and obviously this page would link to it. Seems it would solve many problems. Expect the volunteers to gain some sort of inner reward. Please help.HappyVR 19:09, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea, but really, many (most?) of the games have their own articles, so I'm not sure what the purpose of what could basically be an expansion of the games list would serve. Though, maybe once it's out we can have stuff like "[insert title] was the smash hit at the Wii's launch" and "[insert title] failed to catch on with non-gamers" and so on.  So yeah, maybe it'd make a good article, but it still falls under the same problem we have now where we can't predict the future, and best guess, Jan 2007 would be the soonest we'd know how all this pans out.Danny 21:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: the article - length and games an other things

message: I know Nintendo said we might "recognize the pedigree" of Excite Truck but have they ever actually said it's a franchise continuation of Excitebike?  They even use a different naming convention. Danny 21:11, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I say franchise - same people (nintendo), both have excite in the name - plus as you said - Nintendo themselves made the link to 'excitebike'. Definately a continuation of the 'excite motorvehicle' franchise.HappyVR 21:35, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: On the one hand I agree, however, at their e3 confrence they said they had three 'new' something or others (I forget the term Reggie used) and then proceeded to display Red Steel, Project Hammer, and Excite Truck.  They never directly said anything about Excite Truck being a continuation of Excitebike, "Excitebike" was never even spoken, just the 'pedigree' comment/hint.  Thay's why I'm confused.  Maybe it's just like their "new gen" thing, it doesn't really mean anything where continuity is concerned, but it'd be nice to have some clarification if anyone has any sources. Danny 22:44, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: http://www.gamenikki.com/g3/previews/wii/Display.php?id=8 (gamenikki.com), http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=64857 (euromgamer.com), http://uk.cube.gamespy.com/revolution/excite-trucks/707573p1.html (gamespy.com) all refer to 'exite' or 'excitebike' franchise and helpfully nintendo's own e3 coverage states "Excite Truck builds on a classic Nintendo franchise"  http://e3.nintendo.com/news/nintendos_console_takes_the_next_leap_in_video_gam/ That's convinced me.HappyVR 11:09, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Excite Truck: new game or franchise continuation?

message: I think we should revamp the Launch titles section. As it stands, the six confirmed are a footnote; we give no distiction between expected and confirmed launch games. We should either only list the six confirmed launch titles and mention that its not the final count or keep only the six in the table and list the unconfirmed below after an explaination (similar to how the software library games are handled down the page.)--Dr. Eggman3 19:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading Launch games 

message: I was scanning though the web and came across http://www.joystiq.com/2006/06/23/nintendo-wii-mockup-next-to-stuff-lots-of-stuff/ (This) Joystiq article... It is not a great article, but the mock up pix are awesome. My question is, do we include a link in the article? --DivineShadow218 02:40, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Pictures are good, but I can't justify inclusion (my opinion)HappyVR 14:37, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interesting link 

message: I removed a link (no useful info there as other editor User:Dancter suggested). The DS can connect wirelessly to Wii, we already have a video interview confirming this (ref no.35 http://www.kotaku.com/gaming/shigeru-miyamoto/e306-video-shigeru-miyamoto-interview-174909.php). DS has WiFi, (not bluetooth?) so it must be WiFi. Is this ok.HappyVR 14:37, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not disputing that Wii and DS can connect wirelessly, but I haven't found the information that confirms that local Wii-DS connectivity works through Wi-Fi, and not the proprietary wireless protocol that is used for direct DS-DS connectivity. I am under the impression that DS units cannot connect directly with one another via Wi-Fi, and must use the proprietary local wireless to connect in the absence of Internet connectivity. I presume that Wii can connect with DS directly, without the need of an Internet access point. Which leads to some questions. I remember hearing rumors a while back about Wii having Wi-Fi routing capability, which I don't believe have been confirmed. I also remember rumors about the DS being able to act as a Wi-Fi repeater hub, which I believe were proven incorrect. In any case, I don't think the question of how local connectivity between Wii and Nintendo DS works is conclusively answered. Dancter 15:17, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Check out the article called Ni-Fi. According to this, and the link off of it (Darkain's website, he's a fairly respected homebrew developer person), Nintendo's proprietary communications whatchamacaller works on-top of Wi-Fi. It replaces TCP/IP (layer 3), but still uses 802.11b (which only defines layers 1 & 2). It would not be inaccurate, therefore, to say that the DS will connect via Wi-Fi. ;) -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 18:06, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks! This clears up quite a bit of the confusion I've had concerning Nintendo DS wireless. Dancter 19:23, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: DS connectivity

message: Do we really need these sections, first off the 2 Announced titles are already linked in the franchise section. As for Reception, shouldnt that just be cut down and added into maybe the first section and not have it own little section? --DivineShadow218 18:56, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You've removed Super Mario Galaxy + Super Smash Bros. Brawl. Where in the article do they remain referenced?  Surely they warrant a mention the Wii article? --Oscarthecat 19:05, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, I've now spotted them, shown in the article as Super Mario and Super Smash Bros., which link to the appropriate Wii game. --Oscarthecat 17:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Other Announced Titles and Reception 

message: I removed all references to 'competitors reactions' in the controller section. Just to see if there was a consensus that its better off out. The arguments for removing are long and complex so I won't start listing them here. Obviously if everyone disagrees with this removal meaning I've totally misjudged what is right for the article I'll just accept I was wrong.HappyVR 21:37, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed; obviously, they're going to say it's bad.  People from Sony and Microsoft aren't going to say anything positive about it, so it's not really giving any info people don't already know. -Unknownwarrior33 15:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: controller - competitors reaction

message: It's been added three times by now.  http://s7.invisionfree.com/wii_play (Wii Play) is merely a forum, and should not be re-added.--The Ninth Bright Shiner talk 05:35, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree. Unless someone from Nintendo is an active member, that is. Jaxad0127 05:40, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Uh...I still don't think that would qualify it.  Wii Play is a forum where people discuss stuff about Nintendo.  It's not like someone from Nintendo would give out inside information on a common forum.--The Ninth Bright Shiner talk 05:52, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wii Play 

message: There's a new section 'sensor bar' been added. I've made it a subsection of the controller section since without the controller the sensor bar is irrelevant. I've also removed edits stating what exactly the sensor bar does - these statements may not be correct - is it known that the sensor bar is also the bluetooth reciever?HappyVR 12:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I cleaned it up a bit. You should probably check up on it and see what you think. -- Masamunecyrus(talk)(contribs)  12:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Your much better at writing than I am, Thanks. Not sure if 'senses' really needs to be in 'quotes'.HappyVR 12:40, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You can take out the quotes, if you want. Maybe Wikipedia isn't the place for puns. ^_^ -- Masamunecyrus(talk)(contribs)  13:01, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Tragically such nuances of language are lost on one such as me - the sensor that senses - this could take weeks for me to come to terms with.HappyVR 18:47, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

text: I think the sensor bar section should not be included in the controller sections as the sensor bar is part of the system and, although it helps to revieve data from the remote, is not part of the remote. It does not ship with controllers when they are bought at a shop. I think that this should be included with its own heading in the hardware section as it is as much necessary to play games as the system is. (ItIsMe 00:54, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sensor Bar

message: Can we, or is there any reason why we can't have Wikipedia:Semi-protection policy on this article? Bearing in mind the number of minor reverts that have to be done - and that semi protection doesn't stop anyone actually editing the article. It might make 'them' think a little more before they type.HappyVR 22:05, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure what the policy is on this either, but I'm getting tired of seeing and/or fixing stupid little edits like changing all the mentions of Wii to something more "interesting". Saying there's three USB ports. And most recently adding a bunch of random asterisks to the launch titles section indepenedent of the facts. Heck, outside of this article, in general, there should a "blatant vandalism = automatic block" rule or something, this place is too open for juveniles (and the juvenile-minded) to mess with for kicks. Sorry, but my time is precious, I shouldn't have to spend it fixing the jollies of those with too much time on their hands. Danny 22:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've already requested it - don't think this will be refused. Hopefully having to type a username and password will cause more people to think a bit more seriously. (see Wikipedia:Requests for page protection).HappyVR 22:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We can hope, but reading through the policy on this, it sounds like it could be a longshot at getting approved. Danny 22:31, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't know.  It falls somewhat under the category of anon vandalism, and not under any of the listed categories of when not to request semi-protection.  --Stratadrake 04:12, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Semi protection

message: A while back, I included something in the article that mentioned Wii's use of a friend code for online play/lack of a standard interface being similair to that of the DS, and it was removed. I was wondering why, as both of these seem relevant. http://revolution.ign.com/articles/707/707865p1.html (This) is the article that I cited for information. I don't want to edit the article without knowing why it was taken off before for obvious reasons. -Genus
:Don't know exactly why it was taken out. The reference seems fine to me, and if it was mentioned with your contribution.... I suppose one problem could be that you stated that it will require friends codes ala the DS (interview doesn't state exactly what capacity they're used in). Also, saying that it has "no standard interface" is a bit vague. Xbox Live!, at least on the Xbox 1, doesn't really have a standard interface per-game either (though many look the same since they are based off of sample code); I suppose they were trying to ask about a Dashboard or Xbox Guide interface thingie, but didn't do a good job of it. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 06:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Online Play 

message: can you connect the wii to your computer and save stuff to it because if u could couldnt people like download emulators and games to the wii for freehow do u make your own question thingy Oomblag 02:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just like I just did. Use == Heading ==. Just look at the above examples. As for the other part, there's been nothing announced. It's not likely that Nintendo would willing let people upload pirated games to their Wii though... -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 02:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes. With 2 usb ports, you could easily attach an external hard drive to your PC, download whatever you wish, and put it on your Wii. Providing, of course, you could get around the numerous piracy blocks Nintendo will put in place. Also, it do esn't take a console/PC uplink to play pirated games. Look up modding and go http://www.gscentral.org (here) if you're curious. Also I just cleaned up the heading/analgous user tags--Super Genus 03:33, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wii Predessors Question 

message: Whenever I read the line "The console is confirmed to have a stand-by..." in the intro it sort of bugs me for some lame reason, because it makes it sound like everyone was spectulating on that feature and we finally got confirmation at E3.  In reality, it's just another feature. --Joeblack982 09:21, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Too right. Just an example of verbal diarrhea. I've cut it out.HappyVR 13:15, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  im bored and decided a line bothered me 

message: Removed the part about the " appears to have a significantly longer cable than the power or AV cables." - no doubt this may be true, but it the length of the cable really relevant and is it verifiable - how long are the av cables for instance? - they can be quite long.HappyVR 13:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sensor bar

message: I just thought I'd post a reminder that this page should probably be archived at the end of tomorrow. It's become gigantic in size. -- Masamunecyrus(talk)(contribs)  15:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Archival 

message: Mindwraith cited a http://www.gamespot.com/features/6100639/index.html?type=tech (Gamespot) link that said that Nintendo officials were avoiding referring to Wii as the successor to the GameCube.  Technically, as Wii replaces the GameCube on the shelves, then it would be the successor, wouldn't it?--The Ninth Bright Shiner talk
:Maybe so, but your opinion would be original research.  Wikipedia requires verifiability for facts.  See WP:V  Morton DevonshireYo
:I removed it. Whether or not Nintendo considers it a successor or not is irrelevant, just as it was for the Nintendo DS with the Game Boy line. Best to leave out the issue of "succession" altogether. Dancter 03:42, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless they're planning on the continued marketing of the GameCube alongside the Wii (like the DS and GBA), which I doubt, it is still the successor.  If Nintendo is actually saying this, then that's very misguided, but worthy of mention. If not, then it has no place in the article. <sarcasm>If this is true, then perhaps we should have a "Bold statement" section, including: "We're not in competition with the 360 or PS3", "Wii is new generation, not next generation", "Wii will not simply succeed the GameCube, it's a whole new thing, like the DS™", "'The's' are irrelevant, you will be assimilated", and "Wii will change everything".  Not to mention, "This is future-proofed tech--..." wait that's Sony.</sarcasm> Danny 19:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just noticed the date of that article; it was 2 years ago. They were probably watching their words in case they did plan on on a seperate DS-like release rather than a replacement.  The info is non-notable for now.  If Wii isn't replacing the GameCube, than why is it backward-compatible? The simple answer is, it is the successor. Danny 19:37, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Not the successor to the GameCube" 

message: Ok I removed this:
On the front of the machine resides a second flap that, when opened, reveals one SD card slot in the middle and a "SYNC" button.http://gonintendo.com/?p=3302 Nintendo has not officialy revealed the exact uses and functions of the button, but it is widely believed that it "syncs" the Wii Remote to the system which means to "register" it to the system. So if you were to sync your Wii Remote to your system, you'd have to sync it again if you want to paly it on another Wii system. This function is to prevent bluetooth confusion if multiple Wii units were in the same room.
I accept that the sd card slot is under the flap, as for the rest we probably need some sort of verification. 
It also probably needs rewriting.
Finally - what was it doing in the controller section??HappyVR 04:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, that text ending up in the controller section was me. I was trying to sort out all the recent changes made in the article, and must've misplaced that paragraph in the process. I guess I just saw the words "Wii Remote" and automatically put it in the controller section. I didn't like it anyway, and am glad you removed it. Speculation and anonymous rumors don't belong in the article. Dancter 04:19, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well half of it is sort of related - but that's the bit about the sync button - which seems to be unsourced at the momeny. However the sd card slot is definately under the slot - will find the reference for that if it is needed.HappyVR 04:26, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The SYNC buttons would allow the Wii to detect any compatible wireless devices in the immediate vicinity; controllers, Nintendo DSs' and other Wii systems. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ItIsMe (talk • contribs) .
Here's the picture, keep in mind it could very well be false. http://www.justpause.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/06/wiiflap.jpg. It was actually retrieved from a series of following links from the Kotaku page, getting to revogamer.net which when translated by Google had an article that linked to the picture. Scepia 06:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: removal - sd card slot and button

message: There should not be citation for the release in Q4 2006, or that the Wii was a smash success, or that the controller was revealed at TGS 2005. The $60 per next-gen game citation is not needed. Both are common knowledge and don't need any citations (and possible linkspam) as they are common knowledge. I will remove the citations said and others that aren't needed again. They make the page rather ugly and choppy and are commonly known - E3 stuff should be cited if it is public like this info. Scepia 07:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excessive citation 

message: It seems strange that the intro mentions the "wii connect 24" yet fails to mention Nintendo's "Wi-Fi" connection, nor does the intro talk about how this is Nintendo's first legitmate go at an online service that attempts to "rival" Xbox live. 
It also fails to mention the Virtual Console which I think is a rather important feature of the console.--Joeblack982 11:05, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The intro seems good as it is (opinion)HappyVR 13:01, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  add online features to intro