Talk:GameCube controller

Merging WaveBird in

The WaveBird is just a special standard GCN controller. Does anyone else share my Support position that the page should be merged into this article? Thegreyanomaly (talk) 00:45, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose I can't say I completely hate the idea, but I disagree. I think there is enough specific information on the WaveBird to justify it's own article, and if you compare the two, the WaveBird article is significantly longer, so would swamp this article. Also, rather than simply being a redesign (like the slim versions of PlayStation consoles for example) the WaveBird offers different functionality and is designed to compliment the original controller rather than replace it. It's not like the wired and wireless Xbox 360 controllers, which are marketed as different versions of the same thing - the WaveBird is/was marketed as a different product line. Finally, I don't know if this is an official reason to have separate articles or not, but I would also imagine that the WaveBird is a more commonly searched/accessed article.

Basically, I can see why you think it should be merged, but think that the reasons for it being separate are greater. Alphathon^TM (talk) 01:08, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, a good example of what I mean would be the PlayStation controllers. The original digital pad and Dual Analog for the PS1 have their own articles, while all three versions of the DualShock are contained within the DualShock article, since they are all part of a single product line. The notability of each of the two older controllers is significant enough in their own right to have articles, while the DualShocks are all part of a family. Alphathon^TM (talk) 01:16, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Oppose At first I was for the merge, but Alphathon does bring up good points. They are indeed individual of each other, the difference of being wired vs. wireless being a major (but not the only difference). Also, like Alphathon said before, there is much content in this article that it can stand on its own. Such a merge would lead to a similar downgradee as what happened to the Vulcan article from Star Trek. An entire article wittled down to a paragraph. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 01:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Support. I don't think that they need to be separate. To compare a fictional planet to a real-world device is silly. The WaveBird is an important aspect to the controller's histories, and would be adequately covered because it's a real-world thing. Neither articles are very big, so there's really no point. The reception could be adequately set-up to cover the pros and cons of both controllers and their design evolutions. They're not THAT different. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 06:28, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment Yes, to compare a fictional planet to a real-world device is silly. However, to compare an article about a fictional planet and an article about a real-world device is not silly, since what is being compared is the article, not the subject. Alphathon^TM (talk) 11:19, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

What happens to an article about a fictional planet is not comparable to what would happen to an article on a real-world device. The WaveBird's history is actually ESSENTIAL to the GC controller's history. You're effectively saying that because a plot summary for a planet was trimmed down significantly when merged, that a real-world history would be trimmed down significantly when merged. It's simply not apt. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 17:18, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Thankfully, Alphathon took the words out of my mouth, in no way, shape, or form am I comparing the content of the articles but the result of the merge. Do you not agree that the article would be significantly wittled down? Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 01:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Why would I agree? You ARE comparing them. Why would this be whittled down? Logically, if that's all you're comparing, then no article can be merged, ever, on the basis you present. The resulting article will have all necessary content. We will not remove important historical content while merging. This isn't a fictional character, or a fictional planet, or a fictional species being merged, it's a tool. Comparing the trimming of real-life content to the trimming of in-universe content is absurd. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 05:03, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Comment I don't think the PS1 controllers having different articles is comparable, because the original controller to the analog stick controller to the DualShock represented controllers that added significant function. The WaveBird added one function (wireless). A standard GCN controller and a WaveBird controller play identically (assuming that rumble is disabled or not available), whereas with the PS1 controller comparison that is not at all true. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 07:00, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment If you look at the difference between the Dual Analog and the DualShock (1) (slight change to design, slight change to vibration compared to the Japanese version, removal of third analog mode) they are far more similar than the DualShock 1 and DualShock 3 (addition of analog triggers, addition of analog buttons (done in the DS2), PS button, no digital mode, greater precision analog sticks, bluetooth connectivity, USB connectivity, SIXAXIS functionality). That is basically the distinction I was making - the difference between DS1 and DS3 are far greater than DS 1 and Dual Analog, but the Dual Analog has its own article since it is a separate product line. You wouldn't group two very similar controllers made by different companies together into one article I assume (unless it was an article on controllers in general or something like that) since what separates them is not functionality, but product line and manufacturer. That is an extreme example, but the basic principle is the same. Alphathon^TM (talk) 11:19, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't talking about the DS series, I was talking about the original PS Pad, which does not have analog sticks to the first PS pad that does have them. Analog sticks represent a significant difference, thus two pages are worthwhile. The difference between the DualShock 1 and the analog controller is also more significant that the difference between the GCN controller and the WaveBird, thus it is fair that DualShock gets a third article. The PlayStation example does not work in this situation. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 16:58, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, the difference between the Dual Analog and DualShock is minimal. They shortened the handles, modified the shape of the sticks and shoulder buttons and changed the tech used for vibration. They also removed the third analog mode, but that's essentially a software difference. That is comparable to the addition of RF, removal of vibration and redesign of the shell.

Either way, it really doesn't matter what YOU were comparing, since I was the one who brought up the point. I only did so in order to convey the difference between product line and actual device. The DualShock 3 is far more different than the DualShock 1 than the DualShock 1 is to the Dual Analog, but DS1 and DS3 are both grouped into the DualShock Article as there is common product line. Alphathon^TM (talk) 02:19, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Strong support - the notion that merging the two articles would swamp the resulting article is false. As a non-Gamecube user, it's very easy to see how the two could seamlessly integrate into one article. The Legacy and Legal Issues sections are practically identical, leaving only the Development and Design sections to be merged. Several statements in the Design section can also be removed, such as "Since the launch of the Wii, the WaveBird has seen increased popularity as it can be used to play GameCube games, certain Wii games, and Wii Virtual Console games wirelessly" - any Gamecube controller can do that, so to single out the Wavebird (even in its own article) is redundant. The entire bulleted section can also be converted to prose which will significantly reduce the vertical size of the article. As far as comparison to the PlayStation series of controllers, we're merging two articles into one, whereas to merge the PlayStation series controllers together would essentially result in five merges, the two individual articles, and three distinct sections of the DualShock article. As a minor point, the entire development section of Wavebird is unreferenced, so it's possible much of that info is false, meaning that section could also be shorter. --Teancum (talk) 12:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Comment Fair point about the swamping issue, some of it certainly would be redundant if it were merged (rather than is in it's own right), and converting the bulleted section to prose would certainly help as well (incidentally, it would also have benefits to the WaveBird article on it's own as well).

On the comparison to the DualShock etc I think you may have missed the point - it has nothing to do with the number of merges etc. Having an overarching, all-encompassing, PlayStation controller article would certainly be cumbersome, but that doesn't explain why the DualShocks are all together. I was simply pointing out the division between product lines as it applies to categorisation of products. The DualShocks are all DualShocks. They are also all PlayStation controllers. Both make sense as a useful division. The only way I see that a merging could be done properly is if both controllers were treated as separate, parallel, forks of a whole, rather than having the WaveBird as a sub-version of the original. Both would have infoboxes with all the relevent info and separate development sections etc. The legacy of the WaveBird is far more significant than the original controller, as it brought wireless controllers into the mainstream. Basically, the WaveBird is not a sub-version of the original controller, which the article is about - it is not about GameCube controllers in general, which is an important distinction to make.

As for the referencing, this article is significantly less well referenced than the WaveBird one, so the point is fairly moot. Alphathon^TM (talk) 12:43, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, why do you support the merge? You said that you can see how it would seamless be integrated, but you didn't say why it should. I can see how it might work as a whole article as well, but I don't think it SHOULD BE a single article. Think about why articles are split - either because a sub-section is too long or because it is notable enough to exist in it's own right. I think the WaveBird falls into the second category. Alphathon^TM (talk) 12:57, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

WaveBird is notable, but not notable enough that it needs its own article. If there was a significant amount of content that was only relevant to the WaveBird, and the original article was so big that it could not fit all of it, sure. But both articles are particularly small. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 17:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

In my user space, I made a page that should resemble how a merge page would look (User:Thegreyanomaly/GCNWaveBird), as I figure that would influence people for or against the merge. I cut out some of the pointless stuff listed on the WaveBird article when making this. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 03:43, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Based on that version my position is still object. As I said further up, the only way I can see that it could work if merged is if it is treated as two separate entities - two sub-versions of the same thing. As it stands, you have it as the WaveBird being a sub-version of the main controller, and I just don't think that works. Also, as a minor point, your version causes stacking of the infoboxes on wider screens. I'll have a go at producing one later and link it here once it's done, if only to show what I mean by keeping them separate. Actually, if it helps, take a look at the list of PS3 accessories and see how the SIXAXIS and DualShock 3 are listed - that's basically what I mean. Alphathon^TM (talk) 14:42, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Also, I think you cut out too much info when making it. Alphathon^TM (talk) 16:02, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I have created my own version of the page at User:Alphathon/GCNWaveBird. It should be noted that I have also added in the ASCII controller (this) as if the WaveBird should be on this page, it should to. I would tentatively support the use of this version or another version which is similarly split up. Alphathon^TM (talk) 15:58, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I also changed "Legacy" to "Use on the Wii", since that is all it is about other than the wirelessness of modern consoles controllers (which is listed in the WaveBird section separately). Alphathon^TM (talk) 16:04, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Why should we have to merge and make a split up article? What is wrong with a merged-together article that isn't an awkwardly slapped-together mess? - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:44, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

What's wrong with it is that they have different development info and history, different release dates, different colors etc. The info on the two is so different that unless the page is sub-divided it becomes a jumbled and confusing. In my version, there is a sort of overview of all controllers (the layout and functionality that they all share), then the specific features of each along with the infobox. In Thegreyanomaly's version, the majority of the info is relating to the WaveBird (what I meant by it being swamped), and regardless of it's relevent controller is often sort of "disclaimered" to show which it applies to. Things like the legacy have info in them which only apply to one version, such as "Wireless controllers are now standard on all seventh generation consoles: Nintendo's Wii, Sony's PlayStation 3, and Microsoft's Xbox 360." which is basically the legacy of the WaveBird, but does not apply to the wired version. The colours section is basically split into Wired and WaveBird sub-sections as well.

Also, as already mentioned, the WaveBird (and ASCII controller for that matter) (Apparently this is made by Sega, not Nintendo) is it's own entity, and not a sub-version of the original controller.

Anyway, I don't think having it split into sections makes it an "an awkwardly slapped-together mess". Quite the contrary, it categorises the info making it easier to find what you need. If you just want info on the WaveBird why should you have to read through vague sections relating to both controllers? That's actually the main reason I oppose the merge, as it makes specific info harder to find. The only good reason I can think of that the merge is a good idea is to remove the redundancy, such as the legal rows being listed on both pages (which only featured once in my version).

I admit that the into paragraph/overview could use some work, but one that is fixed, I think it is a far better proposal than something akin to Thegreyanomaly's version. Alphathon^TM (talk) 19:51, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

I would agree with Alphathon's version because it doesn't take apart one article to supplement another (what I was opposed to above). It actually makes obvious the fact that the two controllers are separate of each other. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 20:45, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Since it appears there is no consensus, I removed the merge templates and for better or worse, this merge discussion is over. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 19:05, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Lodgenet Variant

There was a lodgenet version of this[1]. Should a section be added similar to the Nintendo 64 Controller page? Rockguy32 (talk) 04:34, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't see why not. Alphathon /'æl.f'æ.θɒn/ ^(talk) 13:42, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on GameCube controller. 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/20080402045314/http://cube.ign.com:80/articles/528/528721p1.html to http://www.cube.ign.com/articles/528/528721p1.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.gamespot.com/news/6104363.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714150419/http://www.nakoko.com/mario-controller-limited-edition_17099_48431 to http://www.nakoko.com/mario-controller-limited-edition_17099_48431
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070715133537/http://cube.ign.com:80/articles/531/531935p1.html to http://www.cube.ign.com/articles/531/531935p1.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://n-europe.com/news.php?nid=4793
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713090239/http://www.japan-games.com/Database/images/Nintendo/GameCube/Hanshin_Tigers/index.htm to http://www.japan-games.com/Database/images/Nintendo/GameCube/Hanshin_Tigers/index.htm
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.gamespot.com/news/6101487.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://n-europe.com/news.php?nid=8123

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:55, 7 January 2017 (UTC)