Wikipedia

Talk:Wii/Archive 22

< Talk:Wii
Latest comment: 17 years ago by 212.146.47.250 in topic The urine thing (again)
Archive 15←Archive 20Archive 21Archive 22Archive 23Archive 24Archive 25

The urine thing (again)

Latest comment: 17 years ago163 comments52 people in discussion

Sorry, I really don't want to drag this up for the fifteenth time, and I guess the wording will do as it is, but surely I can't be the only person who finds the so-called consensus on archive #14 completely unsatisfactory? There was a discussion that basically involved one person against several, and the vote was closed within a day, before even that one person had the opportunity to vote, thereby giving the impression of a 100% consensus. Surely that's no basis to say that the matter has been resolved, because it clearly hasn't?--Victim Of Fate 15:16, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

It had already been discussed before that too. There won't be any urine mention in the article, end of story. TJ Spyke 00:16, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
That's just not good enough. The comparison between the noun "wii" and urine was big news in the British games press, there was no bigger gaming story after the name was announced. There is no other noun that is pronounced the same way other than "wee", a word for urine, and all the other examples like "we" and "wee" as in small aren't nouns. If you go to Britain and say "I want a wii", everyone will assume you wish to urinate. Many major respected business sites (GamesIndustry.biz for example) immediately commented on the name's link with urine, and speculated that Nintendo would do badly in the UK market because of it. Had this been an AMERICAN rude word which Nintendo had accidentally referenced (the Nintendo Poopi? the Nintendo Jerkov?), there would have been no doubt that it needed to be at least mentioned in the article, there wouldn't even have been a vote about it. But because it's an issue confined to the UK, it's almost impossible to get the largely American moderators on here to even believe it's an issue. You can have vote after vote on any issue and always get an American majority to reject a non-American point of view, but that's a political action, it's not the way an encyclopedia should be run.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 212.146.47.250 (talk) 16:31, 15 January 2007 (UTC). Even if he did vote, the outcome would have been 10-1 against it. The voting did only last 16 hours though. Do you think we should mention it in the article, Victim Of Fate? Maybe something like this - "Because 'Wii' is also a homophone of a euphemism for urine, many junior high boys and other immature people giggled upon hearing its name." Is there a way to say that without stereotyping junior high boys? Jecowa 00:56, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

No, I think it should say something like "...pointing out phonetic similarities to the French word 'oui' and a common playground term for urine in English." I really don't see what's immature or unverifiable there, and I don't see that it's unimportant either.--Victim Of Fate 14:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't imagine you need an extra opinion, but bothering to mention urine would seem rather immature and unnecessary. (not to mention, not notable) Bladestorm 01:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Even if we mention it, heaven forbid anyone wikilink it (ordinary word with no relevance to the article's context). He is correct, though, that the last strawpoll didn't exactly live very long. If we are to do another, we should give it its official "day in court" and wait the official five days before drawing a consensus. --Stratadrake 02:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

(And as a person who likes to edit first and ask questions later....)

This straw poll is useless. First, someone explain how not mentioning any reference to urine is supposed to square with Wikipedia is not censored. Secondly, what use is a vote? This is about consensus, and it ends with compromise. There is no compromise here, there is no end of story, there's nothing that will keep all parties satisfied, which is why it's being brought up again. "A negative word in English" is silly and vague. It's the language of school marms. It absolutely begs to be edited and be put out of its misery. I changed that wording and inserted a reference to pee, and although I didn't see the "do not add urine note" because it was several paragraphs above where the actual edit was, I apologize for ignoring that the issue was in contention. However, the idea that we influence the language in this article from the usual straight-forward style of prose that is a staple of WP (afterall, this web site featured History of erotic depictions on its front page, complete with a thumbnail of a oil lamp depicting doggystyle sex) because snickering junior high kids might laugh at the word "wee" is, at the least, not consistent with WP's style. hateless 04:15, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

One quick postscript: If the issue is that "wee" is not referenced, then "a negative word" should be excised completely. hateless 04:17, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
What's the point in putting "a negative word"? It's absolutely ridiculous, either insert a piss reference or remove the stupid phrasing altogether. "A negative word" - It sounds like censorship. - hahnchen 05:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree that "a negative word" sounds silly, especially considering that Wikipedia is not censored. What's so bad about the word "pee"? Dionyseus 06:14, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Tht was put in as a compromise to te immature people who had an obsession with urine. TJ Spyke 23:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
I take exception to the phrase "obsession with urine". Thinking that the article should contain a single line informing that a large number of people criticised the name because of its similarity to a common euphemism for urine is not being "obsessed with urine".--Victim Of Fate 07:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

A wee survey

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the debate was No consensus.

Can we have one last strawpoll to end them all? Give it the full five days and list your statements -- try to back them up with NPOV, logical reasons (because "stupid" or "lame" are not logical arguments). --Stratadrake 02:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Question: "Wii" is the name that launched a thousand jokes, many comparing it to urine. Do we mention the urine reference?

  • No - mentioning (and citing) the general criticism is enough; most people will draw the urine reference on their own, we don't need to point it out for them (and heaven forbid trying to wikilink it, plain ordinary words should not be wikilinked). --Stratadrake 02:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Hell No For the reasons stated here and every other time this idea has been shot down. This is the last time this question will be asked. TJ Spyke 02:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No per reasons stated by User:Sir hugo in the discussion found at Talk:Wii/archive14. He said, "This is childish humor that should not be included in WP. I consider it vandalism and stupid, it hurts the article more then helps it. By the way, this can be four year old humor even if an adult finds it funny, it just means that adult has the sense of humor of a child which alot of men do." and I couldn't agree with him more. // Sasuke-kun27 02:56, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No - I don't want to be repetitive, see the above reasoning.--Farquaadhnchmn(Dungeon) 02:58, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No It doesn't add any value to the article. It's not mentioned in the article for the pronoun we so why should it be mentioned in the article for the Wii? There isn't even an article for "wee". This is wikipedia, not urbandictionary.--220.237.2.185 03:00, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No - It is not especially notable. The only reference to urine that may be appropriate in the article would be in trivia section, or, if it's mentioned on something like Saturday Night Live, the popular culture section. Jecowa 03:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No- This shouldn't even be an issue at this point. Let it end already. RobJ1981 03:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No- Nobody wants it already! It's immature, adds nothing useful to the article, and really is getting annoying. [1] [2] FyreNWater 03:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes if sourced. Whoever wants to add information about these childish comments, he will have to find the references per our verifiability policy. As far as I know, there are reliable sources which I found back when the name was announced. However, since I am not interested in having a long term conflict with susceptible editors, and people wanting to add a reference to the jokes are usually a) Sony or Microsoft fanboys; b) anonymous ips; or c) new accounts; I am confident the article will stay clean from that information. -- ReyBrujo 03:32, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No In my experience this is dying down. The Wii has been out for three weeks now, and people are used to it. So, at this point, people came, laughed, got over it. So, my answer is NO. --Purplepurplepurple 03:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes - Urine is already refered to in the Wii#Name section. I don't think we need to mention the word "urine" in the article, but I don't see why we shouldn't change the phrase "a negative word in English" to "wee." "Wee" means more than just urine, by the way. It also describes the Wii's small size. Jecowa 04:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No as per comments above. Hongshi 12:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes - if we're going to mention that it sounds like a "negative word in English", then it seems ridiculous and uninformative not to mention what that negative homophone is.--Victim Of Fate 14:20, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes. As long as it is properly referenced, than why not? Many reputable sources mentioned and discussed the name, so finding sources shouldn't be a problem. The phrase 'a negative word in English' is vague and seems to be breaching Wikipedia is not censored. I am also unsure as to why WP:CONTEXT is being used as an argument against linking 'wee' here. Linking the word is essential to understanding its meaning. Furthermore, Wikipedia editors do not get to pick and choose which bits of relevant media coverage go in the article. This article isn't about putting a positive spin on the Wii, but detailing the facts. Facts are, there was negative press about the name. Dancing around the word 'wee' is tantamount to pretending it never happened. Hammer Raccoon 16:27, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes I completely agree with User:Hammer Raccoon's statement. Dionyseus 16:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Absolutely Not. It doesn't have even the slightest bit of relevance to the machine and it would reflect worse upon Wikipedia than Nintendo if we were to include such childish piffle. - NP Chilla 16:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Heck No Kofi Annan's first name, when said by a New Yorker, sounds pretty much identical to "coffee". However, there is no mention of that in the article. Why? Because it isn't a matter of censorship, it's simply the fact that a few childish jokes do not create notability. (Bladestorm-Can someone sign this for me?) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.88.47.226 (talk • contribs)
  • Weak No It serves no purpose, however if written maturely it would not hurt the article. Bradibus 21:29, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No - references to urine merely open the door to further edits which would compromise the quality of the article. Just64helpin 21:42, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes The inconsistency here is hilarious: the French word oui is explicitly stated (and wikilinked, no less!) yet the English connotation assumes the vague phrase "several words in English." As a proud owner of the Wii, I'm slightly ashamed that many editors heavily invest their collective time in protecting the system from any criticism. The truth is (as acknowledged by Fils-Aime) that when Nintendo revealed the name change, the name was ridiculed across the press. Do you know what word the media compared it to? It was wee! And do you know the most common interpretation of the word? Because I don't want to poke fun at the console's name (anything but that!), I'll just say that it had to something to do with some sort of bodily function which shall remain nameless. It kills me how you guys are referring to other editors as immature. --Tristam 21:39, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No - I see no need to mention it in the article, unless it becomes far more notable as it is only school children that seem to be giggling about the name, and that in my opinion is not encyclopedic Golden Dragoon 01:33, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
    Comment: are the editors of Engadget, Joystig, Kotaku, etc. children? Scepia 05:23, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
    Joystiq has bloggers only :-) -- ReyBrujo 05:31, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
    slash the blogs, I could give probably 25 sources for this. and don't tell me to "prove it". you know it, I know it, the Wikipedian people know it. Scepia 01:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - are college kids school kids? cause we had a wii pun contest at my college which i got second in. they were all completely inappropriate and i i posted what the winner was i would probable be banned from wikipedia for being offensive or something, but we all laughed our collective heads off. J.L.Main 03:17, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes - see User:Tristam's comment above. to say that Wikipedia users made this up or something is simply untrue. Engadget, Joystiq, Kotaku, IGN, GameSpot, I could go on and on, made reference to it. Scepia 05:21, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes per ReyBruyo, Tristam. jaco♫plane 05:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes per Hammer Raccoon and Tristam. It's immature and stupid yes, but it's a fact that it's mentioned by many people. It does add a little value to the article because it is an example of one of the many jokes made about the name. Just add that one sentence in a mature way. - Face 20:14, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Of course the jokes and puns are childish, but what people don't seem to understand is that when the BBC and Engadget reference the 'puerile jokes', IGN comments on some readers 'phallic designs' of the Wii, The Guardian mentions the 'weak puns' and gamesindustry.biz acknowledges 'wee' means 'to urinate', it becomes notable enough to mention. Hammer Raccoon 20:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes Unfortunately, I have to say yes. It is fact that lots of people, including the mainstream media, made a lot of comments, direct or otherwise, regarding the correlation of 'Wii' to 'wee'. However, this is not meant as a license to be juvenile. A well-sourced, maturely written mention of the humor that was derived from the name, is in order. "Durr, huh-huh, Wii means pee, lol" is not called for. But, not putting it in the article at all is "hiding it" IMO. Danny 21:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Just a comment, just like to point out that even 'wee' doesn't solely refer to urine. To me, it always meant, "small". (As in, a wee lad?) There's also "wheee!" (As in, something that you shout when rolling around in your chair across the computer lab) Would it really be appropriate to list every bloody word that it can sound like? (And, again, I can provide several citations likening the sound of Kofi (as in Kofi Annan) to 'coffee'. Still not in his article though) (~Bladestorm)
Reply to comment... I realize there's more than one correlated word. The point is, which one did everyone pick up on the most? It sure wasn't 'whee' or 'oui'. I'm not advocating perfunctory potty humor here, but the (rather large) reaction to the name is culturally significant in direct relation to relaying information about the Wii. Danny 23:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
How is something that has been widely reported in the mainstream media irrelevant? And can anyone come up with an arguement against including the reference to 'wee' other than "it's childish". Wikipedia isn't here to pass judgement on what the press reports. Hammer Raccoon 00:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - Hammer Raccoon is correct. Did you guys miss Stratadrake's suggestion? Try to back them up with NPOV, logical reasons (because "stupid" or "lame" are not logical arguments). TJ Spyke's argument follows a vague "reasons stated here and every other time this idea has been shot down." Stratadrake's justification excepted, all of the above are in violation of Wikipedia:Assume good faith and fail to realize (or pointedly ignore) a use/mention distinction. Some "no" votes don't provide any reasoning at all, even beyond the standard "it's immature/stupid/lame/etc." To quote RobJ1981, "This shouldn't even be an issue at this point. Let it end already." In another "no" vote, SYSS Mouse uses Nintendo's justification for the name: "live with it, sleep with it, eat with it, move along with it." To reiterate a point: this has nothing to do with editors criticizing the Wii's name, but it has everything to do with maintaining NPOV and reporting what the media had fun over for a week, rather than tiptoeing around what exactly was said in hopes of distancing the Wii from its more negative connotations. You can accuse us of being PS3/Xbox360 fanboys all you want, but if you glance at the userpages of nearly EVERY yes voter here, you'll find a "This user prefers Wii" userbox. To continue, no user has addressed my observation over consistency with the name comparisons. As a final note, no one here is the sole arbiter of Wikipedia, this article, or even this discussion; as such, nobody present has authority in deciding whether this question will be asked again, or whether such a poll will be conducted again. --Tristam 01:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Yes - Edit: - It is childish to distort the story simply because the topic makes you uncomfortable. You can't say "members of the press, online communities and game developers initially reacted negatively to the name change. " without explaining why this negative reaction occurred, and the #1 reason is the urine connection. Nor can the reactions of children be dismissed, given that they are a major part of the market for the Wii. It needn't be dwelt on, but there is no debate that IS what the public reaction was. Urine is part of the story. Algr 01:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No - what is the motivation behind this? I am under the opinion that Wikipedia must strive to maintain a certain encyclopedic standard. This is why such childish crap would never be allowed in other unfortunately named articles (e.g. Bangkok). ˉˉanetode╦╩ 01:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes - there are plenty of media sources to back up the connotation. Yes it's childish, but that makes it no less verifiable or notable. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 06:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes - Let's not let childishness get in the way of documenting widespread childishness. A few citations should do the trick. --Maxamegalon2000 06:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • YES - saddly i must agree with these childish people who want to stick a referance to urin in every artical they can. this is verafiable fact and has been experianced first hand by every person here. it is a ligitamite part of wii history. even if it is childish and vulger.J.L.Main 06:45, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Nay - A product's name doesn't really have much to do with the actual product. I find it kind of irrelivent. If you really want to point out how wacky it is that the Wii sounds like a word for urine, then make a category or list or something. -Ryanbomber 13:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - See, it's this kind of thinking that made me bring it up again. Nobody's saying that we should point out how wacky the name sounds. Nobody's saying that we should make fun of the console's name. All we are saying is that when the console's name was announced, a lot of people (inluding reputable news and games sites) commented on the fact that the name sounds exactly like the word 'wee', and this is a notbale point that is worth mentioning in the article, particularly as there is already a section on the Name. Are you suggesting we get rid of the Name section on this and other articles?--Victim Of Fate 14:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Did you say this before? Must have skimmed over it for some reason. Anyway, it's a good point and one that's good enough to convince me. I personally think it's moronic, but I guess it DID happen, so I'm changing my vote to Aye. -Ryanbomber 16:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes - Initially against, I'm going to have to agree that "several words in English" is not informative enough. It's one thing for the console's name to be confused with "wee" meaning "small," which is innocuous, it's entirely another for the name to be confused with "wee" meaning "pee". If you're going to mention the controversy over the name, I think it would be remiss to leave out "wee" meaning "pee". --PsyphicsΨΦ 14:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No - No, never, nada, hayır, non, nein, nee, oxi, não, nyet, i-ie, bu. Get that?
  • Strong yes - To avoid being repetive: just what Tristam said. 85.166.229.190 17:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Anyone notice that the source linked in the article for the "Some wished Nintendo had stuck with 'Revolution'" mentions the "not unexpected urine jokes" in its introduction? Why would anyone care that there's a phonetic similarity to the French word for "yes" anyway. That's not what caused an uproar.--PsyphicsΨΦ 17:43, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Definitely Yes - This was a MAJOR point of contention within the gaming press when the name was first announced, and it deserves to be mentioned. Just because it is "embarrassing" or "silly" does not make it any less notable on Wikipedia, especially given its extremely widespread discussion on the internet and elsewhere. Its actually silly how its pretty much censored in the current revision ("several words in English"), which instead prefers to mention its similarity to the French word "oui" - a claim which is completely unreferenced and I have NEVER heard mentioned as a problem. As a relatively impartial observer on this (I don't play console games much at all) it seems to me that there is a strong reek of bias about this from fanboys who don't want to see their favorite console "embarrassed" -- Grandpafootsoldier 09:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Comment: Shouldn't you have read some of the discussions before making baseless accusations? Who said it was embarrassing? And it was directly cited in the discussion that "oui" was mentioned. Shouldn't you have read before commenting? Do you even know what the points being covered are? Bladestorm 09:43, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
You can't really blame him for not reading hundreds of comments about this lame topic. - Face 15:29, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Discussion

Now that I'm into this anyway, I decided to enter 'Wii urine' at Google to find some much asked 'sources'. You want sources? Here you go:

News articles referencing directly to the Wii<->urine jokes:

Some blog mentions:

Other mentions:


Well, that's it for now folks. Forgive me that I don't include the thousands of forum/blog posts and many other jokes, and not all about urine. - Face 18:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Hold up there... if you want to include the urine references, then you have to include the other references as well. I think you're ignoring that half of the problem. Quick show of hands people, who here has seen or heard the word, "wiitard" or "wiitarded"? Hmmm? Google had 19,000 hits on wiitard, and 20,000 hits on wiitarded. Starting to see the problem? And don't forget that 'wee' isn't exclusively a urine reference. It's a word for "small", and sounds like, "whee". And the only way to list urine references non-neutrally is to also start talking about how it sounds like "small" and "whee" as well. If you don't, then it loses all neutrality. And you'll have to include "wiitard". See the problem? If you start acknowledging every bloody joke anyone has ever made, then it starts padding the article with outright stupidity. And seriously, I absolutely demand that you also include the reference to how 'coffee' sounds like 'Kofi' in the Kofi Annan article. I can find hundreds of thousands of hits on that one, so I absolutely demand that you include it. If you want to be consistent and neutral, then everyone who supports the urine references must include the kofi/coffee references as well. Otherwise you're revealing your own lack of neutrality. (What's good for the goose is good for the gander) Bladestorm 03:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
If you have secondary sources for "wiitard" and "wiitarded", "wee" as in small, and "whee" being used to mock the console's name, then by all means I think we should mentioned them. I feel like the same should probably go for "Kofi" and "coffee" if you can find reputable sources that show Annan to be mocked for his name in this manner. I don't think anyone here's insisting that "every bloody joke anyone has ever made" be mentioned, only the one(s) given extensive coverage. --Maxamegalon2000 04:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I can easily provide several sources for "wiitard". But do you think it'll match notability requirements? Are you people forgetting that not everything that's verifiable is necessarily notable? It should be pertinent with respect to the article's subject as a whole. If you include wiitard, "wee"-as-in-small, and "whee"... you're going to end up with a whole paragraph or two. Do you really think that homonyms merit that much attention? Every childish joke any putz could possibly come up with? Just because it's verifiable, that makes it notable? Bladestorm 04:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
The only person I've heard calling people "Wiitards" is TJ Spyke. Anyway it's not necesary to list every word, that would be too long. At most mention the top three. Wee don't evven have to mention any name it's called. We could just say, "The Wii has been the subject of many jokes comparing it to urine" like the main source article says. Jecowa 04:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
But why urine specifically? Again, do a bloody search. "Wiitard" yields over 19,000 hits. And tell me, when are you going to mention the kofi/coffee thing in the Kofi Annan page? And when are you going to edit the Uranus article to include your-anus? What lends notability to one but not the other? Bladestorm 04:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Because we have reliable sources utilizing the urine reference. Most uses of Wiitard are in forums, which don't really count. Also, see the Google search for wii urine OR pee OR penis, which garners a whopping 1,140,000 results, or just wii urine OR pee, which gets 684,000. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 04:54, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
First off, reliable sources substantiate verifiability, not notability. That said, wii spaghetti yields 384,000 hits. Don't rely on google for everything. :D And again, when are you going to modify the Uranus and Kofi Annan articles to prevent you from being inconsistant and non-neutral? Bladestorm 05:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Nevar! Relative to its media coverage, the Wii wee references aren't too small. Relative to the body of literature, astrology/astronomy/otherwise, accumulated on Uranus, the anus references are pretty light. Same of Kofi, and all his news coverage. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 05:11, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind me skipping the :'s. Getting very wide. :) So then, first off, do not equate "wee" references with being solely urine references. As far as "urine" and "pee" are concerned, combined they register 684k hits. So, you want to look at it relative the overall coverage? Fine. Compare that to 189 million hits for 'wii'. That'd put it at... what... almost 0.4%. Hmm... interesting... That'd mean that the hits alone mean a resounding no. But let's ignore the numbers. Please, by all means, give me your rationale for why you think it's notable? In terms of being necessary for understanding what the 'wii' is? Hmm? Tell me why a person reading about the 'wii' would be confused right up until they saw the word, "urine"? And while you're at it, tell me the cutoff for what should or shouldn't be included? (wee for small? wee as a homonym of 'whee'?) Bladestorm 05:37, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

You're jumping between using Google as a source, and not using Google. We have sources. The big S. The Vish S. I'm really not incredibly dead set on including the reference (no where near how I'm sounding here :P), but there you go. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 05:50, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

That sounds 0.4% stuff sounds good. The name section mentions the good things about the Wii's name. Shouldn't we include criticism of the name to keep the neutrality balanced? Jecowa 06:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, I hadn't read it as being overly "positive" as such... I mean, "kidiness", the fact that fans liked "revolution", and such was mentioned... If you still feel it's unduly positive, then by all means, that should be addressed. Tell me, what did you think of my suggestion of simply saying that it's inspired several puns and portmanteaus, both good and bad? (Or, perhaps making reference to the existence of several homonyms? It is neither positive nor negative, and also doesn't put undue focus on any specific homonym) Bladestorm 06:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that sounds good, but I don't know how to work that into the section the way it's currently laid out. Oh, that second one fits better, though. "Some wished 'Nintendo had stuck with 'Revolution,' making reference to the existence of several homonyms." I'm kind of confused on what exactly we were voting on above. Are we voting to exclude this statement entirely "pointing out phonetic similarities to the French word 'oui' and several words in English." or are we just voting whether or not to change "several words in English" to something like "a slang word for urine?"
As far as I know, we're voting on whether or not to specifically mention "urine". I don't imagine anyone would strongly object to dropping the reference to "oui". And I think most can agree that it's necessary to acknowledge that people are having fun with the name in general. (I just don't think it's appropriate to pick a single specific interpretation of a single specific word and declare it absolutely necessary) Bladestorm 07:03, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Algr brought up another interesting point. While although the "Uranus in fiction" article does mention some references to the obvious jokes, you'll notice that the main article on Uranus does not include those stupid childish jokes. Because it's trivial. You can find far more "uranus/your anus" jokes than "wii/wee" jokes very easily, and yet, they arent' mentioned in the main article. Know why? Because that isn't of the same level of notability and pertinence as the other information in the article. So, if you support including urine references in the wii article, then you're obligated to support mentioning anus jokes in the uranus article. Because it's more easily sourceable, has more cultural examples, and is more well-established. Just keep that in mind. If you support mentioning urine jokes, then you must support including wiitarded, kofi/coffee and uranus/your-anus jokes as well. Because all are easily documentable. (And both the kofi/coffee and uranus/anus jokes are more prevalant than any wii/urine references) Bladestorm 04:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
"wii urine" brings up 290,000 Google hits. "uranus "your anus"" brings up 11,900, and ""kofi annan" coffee" brings up 440,000, though a quick look makes me think they aren't all related to his name. One of the things that may be different about Annan, though, is that his name wasn't created by a corporation for a new product, but that's more of a discussion for Talk:Kofi Annan. --Maxamegalon2000 05:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Well, thanks for at least addressing Uranus and Kofi Annan. However, a couple things to keep in mind: First, there are dozens of different ways to phrase the "your anus", "yeranus", "uranus"(but pronounced differently), etc... But heck, I can actually cite an episode of Futurama that specifically touched upon the subject (to stop that stupid joke, it was eventually renamed... to Urectum). Can you cite a mainstream tv program that mentions the wii/urine thing? Google hits aren't really evidence of anything, other than the existence of a spelling. Also, there's no reason to assume that all hits including wii and urine are making the same point either. (otherwise, "wii spaghetti" shows that spaghetti must be mentioned as well) As for Kofi Annan's name, he was given that name by someone. The fact that it was by his mother/father instead of a corporation is immaterial. It's still a name given to him. And is citeable. And I'm not going to bring it up on the Kofi Annan talk page, because I think it's a terrible idea. However, every person who supports mentioning urine in this article, but not Coffee in the Kofi Annan page, or sphincters in the Uranus article, is revealing their own lack of neutrality. Notability should be consistently applied. Support it for one, support it for all. Bladestorm 05:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
You not only ignored what I said (or have no yet read it), but haven't read/understood WP:NPOV. Personally I was really just using the Google results to point out how little used "Wiitard" is, since you used the figure of 19,000 results to say that it's just as notable as any other silly usage of the name. It's the actual sources that I'm primarily concerned with. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 05:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Bladestorm, I would definitely say that Wii's "3 MB GPU texture memory" was not mentioned on TV. in many ways, the internet is more influential than TV. Wii = urine and other things (I won't say exclusively urine) was certainly mentioned... um... on every gaming website, so to speak. I don't see 100s of big-name posts about Kofi = coffee. Scepia 05:41, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Mind if I ditch the :'s again? First off, that doesn't really, in any way, illustrate that examples that do make it to tv are less-than-notable. That said, did you follow all of those hundreds of thousands of links to see the context of each kofi reference? And perhaps most importantly, EXACTLY! YOU WON'T SAY EXCLUSIVELY URINE! The fact is, there are numerous possible homonyms and portmanteaus that have sprung up as a result of the name. Saying that is just fine. But the only reason to focus on any single specific one is stubborness (or an unhealthy preoccupation with urine). Here's a thought, "wiimote" is a portmanteau that has stemmed from it, but as you know, I don't think that's necessary for understanding the wii as a whole. "wiitard" has been used to describe both nintendo fanboys and in at least one case, someone who wasn't so good at controlling the wiimote (As in this case). The wii itself, being so small, can be described as "wee". When I've said, "I want a wii", I've been directed to the bathroom (as a joke). When telling people about the wii, it's not uncommon for them to proclaim, "wheee!". The point is, none are more notable than the others. Some get more hits. Some are used more. Some get more hits solely because they're cheaper, easier, or more childish. However, I don't think it'd be appropriate to list them all. And yet, any subjective method for picking and choosing would be just that: subjective. Simply put, while although I'm fine with acknowledging that people have had fun with the name, I think it's entirely appropriate to say that it's inspired numerous puns and portmanteaus. Bladestorm 05:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Are you a kidding? I can't believe you even mentioned Kofi Annan, yet alone thought it pertinent to ask others why they hadn't addressed your stupid point. "every person who supports mentioning urine in this article, but not Coffee in the Kofi Annan page" - Let's just back up here, do you really think mentioning a coincidence that you've just coined up above, is tantamount to commenting on a much reported name change? If you can cite articles commenting on Kofi's hilarious clown name, then yes, it might be worth discussing. I can't even believed the user above mentioned Google hits on the Kofi, when he should have just told you to shut up and that your argument was absolutely flawed.
You absolutely fail to understand the arguments presented above, if you think that the inclusion of a urine reference means that any random Google "Wii spaghetti" should be included. (another asinine example from yourself) The whole argument above relates to the fact that there are numerous reliable sources which commented on the wee reference in light of the Revolution/Wii name change. Here's Personal Computer World's take, Gamesindustry.biz's take. Unless you come up with similar such articles for Kofi Annan and Wii Spaghetti, then it's pointless to even mention them.
Uranus is different, it's different, because unlike your other pissy arguments, it has a point. Why isn't it mentioned in the main article? Well, I think it's because its pretty well covered in the Uranus in fiction article. But I wouldn't mind a passing reference to the trivia in the Uranus in fiction article in the main one. What we don't have for Uranus though, which we do have for Wii is a whole section dedicated to the renaming of the console from Revolution to Wii, and its reaction. I somehow doubt that the newspapers at the time of Uranus's discovery reacted negatively to the naming due to the "your anus" reference possibility, or that the astronomer had to publicly defend its name. Even the Forbes article linked from the current paragraph mentions toilet humour connotations.
I really can't be bothered about this. I don't care if its mentioned, what I would like though is some consistency, why is oui mentioned? Why even detail the negative responses if you're not going to elaborate on them why? Is it even that important? And what I really can't stand, are crock of shit arguments like those presented above, exacerbated by your incessant demands that those ridiculous arguments are countered. - 172.189.89.233 06:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
May I remind you to be civil? Otherwise, your comments will just be blanked. (Anonymous entries calling people "retarded" are typically deemed vandalism)
But anyways, I didn't coin the coffee/kofi thing myself. It was an annoying jerk I heard on tv a while back, and just happened to be the first example to pop into my head. So, anything about me coining the term: irrelevant. The "wii spaghetti" reference was just to show that numbers alone mean squat. If you took it to mean anything other than that, well, then, not my fault. As for Uranus, read a bloody talk page every now and then. The only reason there is a "Uranus in fiction" article as a separate article is because the editors found that material too stupid to include in the "real" article. Try to read before you comment.
I never suggested that "oui" was pertinent. To be honest, I don't see the point of it. I don't personally think that any specific homonym/portmanteau should be named, because then you need to list them all. So, your point about kofi: wrong. Your point about spaghetti: wrong. Your point about Uranus: wrong. In other words, you should have good points, or at least a civil tone. Without either, you won't be getting any more attention. Bladestorm 06:13, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually, his point about coffee/Kofi is still valid. Whether or not you coined it, you're bringing it up now. Basically, it seems to me that we need to establish the answer to the following questions:
  • Does the name rhyme with 'wee'?
  • Did people comment on this?
  • Was the amount of comment widespread enough to be notable?
  • Are there suitable sources that we can cite?
  • If yes to all of the above, should it be included in the article?
It would be useful to know exactly which hurdle those against including it think that it falls down at.--Victim Of Fate 10:01, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
Your point about Kofi: irrelevant, Your point about numbers: irrelevant. You decided to ignore the various sources criticising the Wii/Wee connection and instead focused your argument on Google hits by bringing up your own brands of spaghetti. As interesting as you feel this tangent is, you're not addressing the point at hand. Same for the Kofi Annan thing, I have no idea why you even mentioned it, let alone expected a response to such abhorrent nonsense. Do you still fail to see the difference, between one annoying jerk on TV and various reliable references? I don't even need a civil tone when my "good points" absolutely crap over your irrelevant comments, that you still fail to see how your points have no input to the debate absolutely fails me. Maybe you are as you seem. - 172.189.89.233 16:31, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
(I'll address 'anonymous' first) Holy crap, have you ever considered reading an argument before arguing against it? I mentioned that the kofi/coffee thing was on tv only to illustrate that your assumption that I made it up was incorrect. However, if you look at my original point concerning it, there are hundreds of thousands of hits supporting adding that stupid joke to his article. And no, I'm not overly concerned with Google hits. I use that as an example to counter people who think that google hits are relevant. You can find google hits to support several bad ideas, and actual rational logic deserves a consideration.
You do need a civil tone, because if you keep getting so rude, then your comments will be blanked out. If your points are so weak that they can't exist without being littered with insults or attitude, then they have no weight whatsoever. Incidentally, before praising your own "good points", you might want to consider having at least one first.
Maybe you should try reading mine. Have you finally agreed that your point on Kofi Annan is absolutely irrelevant to the conversation? Instead of addressing the main point over the Kofi thing, such as lack of sources, you've gone off on another of your funny tangents regarding who invented it. Google hits are largely irrelevant anyway, unless they come from reliable sources, which incidentally your store brand spaghetti fails. Do you still fail to see this? Do you still fail to see the difference between your obtuse farcical arguments from the counter-arguments raised? Unless you come up with multiple reliable sources for your Kofi/Coffee craziness or Wii spaghetti, then no matter what tangent you attach to them, they still fail to address the arguments presented.
We already indicate that Wii sounds like we, and rightly so, being that it's "very verifiable". Why don't we indicate that it sounds like wee as well? There are multiple reliable press sources over the Wii/Wee homonym, this alone suggests its notable enough for a mere mention in the article. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.212.53.15 (talk) 19:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC).
Arrrgh! Not this again! K. This is the last time I'm saying this to you. Nobody would ever support including references to jokes on Kofi's name on his talk page, because they aren't notable as far as the man is concerned. Relative politics and such, it just doesn't warrant a mention. Ain't pertinent. You can verify they've been made, but that doesn't manufacture notability. People can find documentation to prove that "wee" jokes have been made, even in abundance. But nobody's proven notability. If every bloody verifiable joke is automatically notable, then that snowballs to all of wikipedia turning into one massive joke. Get it? No? Too bad. The ony reason I mentioned spaghetti was as a direct commentary on the fondness that some people have for quoting google hits. Google hits prove very little. Doing a search on wii and spaghetti proves this. Nothing more, nothing less. I wasn't using spaghetti to prove that urine is irrelevant. I was using spaghetti to prove that google hits don't hold much weight. This I have proven. Deal with it.
You make the mistake to say that the verifiable existence of such jokes automatically makes them notable. This is not so. Furthermore, you made no attempt to address where one should draw the line in terms of what should or shouldn't be included. If you really want to include everything that can be verified, then that'll mean a paragraph or two. You'd have to address each meaning of "wee" (people who solely associate it with urine have some sort of unhealthy preoccupation with human waste). You'd also have to include wiitard. Is it stupid? Of course. But it's verifiable. You'd also have to include references to "we" in the sense of "we" puns (as opposed to simply a pronunciation guide). Heck, you'd even have to leave in that stupid "oui" reference if anyone could find a single source for it. (and I sooo would like to see that one gone) In short, unless you address the exact method for deciding which terms to include or not, you really aren't providing much of a solution. My solution is easy. You chose to ignore it entirely. That's your prerogative. But I think I'm done with you, your condescending tone, your insults, and your refusal to actually address issues directly. Bladestorm 20:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
I've addressed the points, you may continue to ignore them. Multiple reliable sources infers the notability, and you have that for the Wii/wee homonym. This is what we don't have for spaghetti/Annan analogy which you seem to be so fond of. I doubt that you're going to find multiple reliable sources which comment on the phrase "wiitard" and how that was spawned from the console name. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.212.53.15 (talk) 20:42, 14 December 2006 (UTC).
Now, as for Victim of Fate: There are a few problems.
  • First off, nobody's done much to discuss notability other than the fact that it's verifiable. That doesn't automatically manufacture notability.
  • Second, there are several words that you could make the same argument about; the question becomes, where do you draw the line? Wii has been used for "we" (Wii have a problem? Very verifiable.). It's been used for "wee" as in small. It's been used for "wee" as in urine. There have been portmanteaus (and more will come, I'm sure). It's been used for wiitard (in entirely different contexts). It's been used for wiimote. There are several possible things to point out with the name. There are only two options: Pick one, which implies that there's only a single significant pun/portmanteau, or include them all. If you include one, then it's a slippery slope to have to include them all. If you include them all, then you're up to a paragraph or two, when none of it is really significant for understanding the wii as a console.
See the problem? It's one of those things that just snowballs. Even if it is to be included, I'll have to expect people to include: Clear notability rationale that does not rely solely on the fact that you can find people using it; but rather a rationale stating how urine (but only urine) is necessary for knowing what a 'wii' is. A clear argument saying why only one pun/portmanteau should be included, to the exclusion of all others (except, of course, for people who feel that all should be included; in their case, I expect a rationale for using so much space talking about puns in a hardware article). Bladestorm 17:55, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

"Wiitarded" is not a valid comparison because thousands of words have had " -tarded" appended as a suffix. But when was the last time a commercial product had a name so closely resembling a body function? Particularly a product who's target audience is prone to make such connections. Similarly "Uranus"'s jokes appear in it's closest equivalent to an "audience reaction" section, as does Wii's. If you want do discuss the audience reaction, at all, then you must discuss what actually happened.

Can "body function" be a compromise? Lets see... Algr 18:29, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Please do edit the segment in the Wii article until a consensus is reached. Just64helpin 18:43, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
That isn't a valid reason for saying that "wiitard" isn't a valid comparison. The fact that there's a precedent for such jokes hardly means they don't exist. And I don't see your point in terms of uranus. That said, no, referring to "bodily functions" is pointless, as it still suffers the same problems: It includes nonencyclopedic immature humour, and it arbitrarily chooses a single pun/portmanteau, to the exclusion of all others. I still say it should simply make some sort of mention that many fans vastly preferred the old name of Revolution, and several homonyms/puns/portmanteaus(however you want to phrase it) abounded. (Or to simply include the reference to the "kidiness", or simply say that several jokes were made) That way, you aren't ignoring that it's happening. You aren't arbitrarily choosing a single joke and obsessing on it. You're maintaining the audience's reaction while not drifting from the point of the article. It just seems more logical to me. And there isn't even a whiff of censorship, as all jokes/etc are treated equally. Bladestorm 18:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

It is important to note the distinction between verifiability and reliable sources. (By the way, can we drop the whole Kofi Annan thing and focus on the problem at hand. Too many variables people...) Now, several reliable sources have been listed above reporting the 'Wii'/'Urine' business. So far, no sources at all have been produced mentioning 'Wiitard'. The reason users are pushing for 'urine' to be mentioned and not every other homonym is because these references can be backed up by reliable sources. Hammer Raccoon 23:30, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, what specifically are the "urine" sources proving? That somebody has made the jokes? Because a "reliable" source for a joke has a pretty low standard. If so, then here: Urban Dictionary, wiitard nation reference, Wikipedia's entry, In the comments, In the title. Keeping in mind that, if what you're trying to say is that people have made urine jokes, then all you need to prove is that people have made wiitard jokes. (I'm not going to list the other tens of thousands) Bladestorm 23:46, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
You know what the best part about this whole debate is? The very same footnote used to cite developer criticism about the name change includes a quote from developer Ernest Adams which reads "Nintendo has just named its console in a way that sounds like a slang word for urine." Bladestorm, I have to assume you're unfamiliar with Wikipedia's notability guideline: A topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the subject itself. Based on these guidelines, the urine comparisons qualify as notable; your Kofi "coffee" Annan does not. The same goes for Wiitard; if you want to prove a point, avoid self-published websites, a relatively low-profile gaming blog, internal references/tertiary sources (i.e., Wikipedia's entry), and websites that allow anyone to submit and edit entries (i.e., Urban Dictionary and Wikipedia). --Tristam 05:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
So, tell ya what, I'll address each of the included references.
  • First one, a gaming site of questionable reliability. (the point of the article was to say that they were going to change their name, and had questionable sources. The fact that it hasn't changed raises concerns of reliability)
  • Second one, in addition to mentioning "oui" (which means we'd have to keep that in as well, ugh), is just several people's personal comments, hardly more legitimate than anyone else's. But even if they were, the two acknowledgements of the possible connection to 'urine' are specifically to minimize the significance of that connection. That is, they agree with me, and believe it doesn't affect the impression of the system as a whole. So, either it's unreliable, or it agrees with me. Either way, it doesn't prove notability.
  • Third one, merely a quick note speculating that it could have a negative reaction, without documenting the slightest bit of actual reception at all, and it also mentions "wee" as in small. (I believe the second one did as well) So, this source did nothing to further the argument for including a urination reference. And, even if it did, it'd also require including other homonyms.
  • Fourth one, doesn't acknowledge urine at all in the article itself. The only vague urination reference is merely a UK slang referring to them changing the name at all; nothing to do with the actual choice of name.
  • Fifth one, includes an example of childish comments, but in the article itself, establishes that any possible urine connections are entirely irrelevant. In other words, they prove my case, not yours, in that they explicitly deny any significance (and thus notability).
  • Sixth one, closest to criticism so far, but they don't actually say it. You have to infer it. A single implied (but not explicit) reference doesn't make a case.
  • Seventh one, where to begin with this... Well, first off, it also uses "oui", "wee" as in small, and "whee". If it's reliable, then you need to include all three. See it snowballing? But, besides that, the article was copy&pasted from elsewhere. Personally, I think that you need to cite original sources, not second-hand, if you want to consider it reliable/notable, not copy&pastes.
  • Eighth one, an online petition... um, yeah... that's far less reliable/notable than the ones I cited for "wiitard". 'nuff said.
  • Ninth one, ditto. (Incidentally, the first page doesn't mention "urine", but does mention, "The wii is gay because Tomis gay." Nice work. Nice to see that this is what you consider reliable and notable. Nice.)
  • Tenth one, doesn't actually talk about the naming issue. All they say is, "In a break from all the urine based jokes for Nintendo Wii, more scans for Zelda..." Um... that's it? Just a joke at the top of an image page? Not an article? Or even an editorial? Holy crap, you consider this a reliable and notable source? Sorry, but wiitard in one of the sources sooo ranks higher than that. (keeping in mind that I don't support "wiitard" either)
  • Eleventh one, just used for a tagline. They admit they used toilet humour to compensate for being late in reporting, and because they needed a hook. That is, they prove the choice of name itself was entirely immaterial to the point of the article. That is, it's a non-issue here. So, this one fails as well.
  • Twelfth one, um, why is this one here? They don't say urine at all. They don't acknowledge any possible urine references in any way. All they have is good things to say about the choice of the name. They didn't see any significance in bothering with immature jokes. In other words, this "source" works solely in my own favour. And I can't see why it was included in the slightest. Go ahead, read it. You can find some comments in the 'comments' section, but the same is true of "wiitard". And I thought we weren't going to count any sections where any schmuck could freely post? Something about that lacking notability?
  • Thirteenth one, forums do not count. In any way, shape, or form. If blogs/articles that people actually read don't count, then entirely freely-open threads/forums don't count in the slightest.


So. I actually did it. I followed all thirteen links.
And not a single source actually supporting its inclusion. Nothing to prove its notability. If you were going to hide behind those sources, shouldn't you have read them first?
Some of them support me. None of them support including the reference. And even those that could possibly support it (if you severely lowered the bar, used your own interpretations, and made it entirely subjective) would just as strongly support including "wee" as in small, "oui" for yes, "whee" for fun, and even wiitarded. And, frankly, I don't think that any of those are valid in the slightest.
So, in the total absence of a single valid source. And in the total absence of a single argument supporting notability (aside from tristam's entirely good-faith attempt, which lamentably relied on sources that worked against his own argument)... what is the bloody problem with simply stating something to the effect of it having inspired several puns/homonyms/portmanteaus/however-you-want-to-phrase-its? Bladestorm 07:06, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Bladestorm, read your own comments. You have just acknowledged that all seven news sources mentioned urine at roughly the same level of prominence that we feel is appropriate for the article. None of them "support you". None of them say "even though we just reported this story, it would have been better if we had suppressed it, and not told you the real reason people don't like the name." We are not here to tell people what they should and shouldn't think about. We are here to report on what is actually happening. The article is currently false in its suggestion that the protests are about the "sense of 'kidiness' " the name gives. No one really believes that, so why report it that way? Algr

If instead of Wii, Nintendo had given their machine a name that sounded like "Nazi" or "9-11", would there be any thought of striking "Nazi" from the article? No one here seems to be questioning that the "urine" connect is the main reason why people are protesting. So what this boils down to is that we are just too embarrassed to report the story properly. If this is the case, then rather then giving false reasons for the protest, we should strike the whole section as being beyond wikipedia's abilities. - - I think that Nintendo did not do this by accident, but is in fact using some very sophisticated marketing maneuvers here. In this case, the first impression is not what counts, because this impression was made months before anyone could buy the console. Instead, it works in Nintendo's favor because when people finally see the Wii in stores, their reaction is "What ever happened with that silly name?" And they then go to look at the console to find out how the old story ended, and start playing with the wiimote. Nintendo guests the last laugh, much like what happened with the Titanic movie. Algr 17:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Oh please, tell me you're kidding. I mean, where the heck do I begin with that? First off, tell me precisely which sources you think prove your point. I've already proven mine; your responsibility to prove yours. As for nazi... oi... and no. I question whether the urine connect is the main reason why I'm protesting. Granted, I don't like the urine reference. But, if you mention that one, then you also have to mention wiitard, wiimote, "wee" as in small, "whee" as in fun, and "oui" as in yes. And I don't want that much crap filling a hardware article. Unfortunately, much as I might like to, the whole section can't be scrapped, because some of the information is still pertinent. While although I suspect that these feelings have largely faded, there was an initial sense of disappointment from people who thought "Revolution" was a much better name. That needs to be included. There are a buttload of puns/homonyms/portmanteaus. That fact should probably be mentioned as well. However, they all deserve the same treatment. I think that means stating that they exist, but not bothering to list every (and thus any) bloody one. On the other hand, saying that puns/etc. have been made still needs to be verified inline. I don't give a flying crap what those linked sources are. I don't care if it's linked to the "wii is urine, that's all it is, so there" homepage. Here's the situation: Picking a single reference implies that the others don't exist, but even if the current sources were reliable, they'd support at least 5. Not including any of them in-text keeps on-point. There are puns. That's pertinent. People have had fun with the name; entirely true. First thing I thought of when I heard the name was "wheeee!" and groaned. And then remembered how small, or "wee" it is. And groaned. And then I told somebody that I want a wii, and their reply made me groan. These things happen. They're relevant. But bothering with 5 or more bloody puns in a hardware article puts undue attention on it. Just say that they exist. Include whatever friggin' sources you like. What is so wrong with that? What's wrong with being consistent and neutral? Bladestorm 19:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I direct to; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranus and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranus_in_fiction#Humor. You'll see that the both sides of this are present on Wikipedia. Do the same in regards to this. "Wii Humor" hell you can even use "Wee humor" as a listing in it. PBaker 22:52, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

You don't need to direct me there. We already know about that. But notice that it isn't in the original Uranus article. It wasn't deemed notable, and was shuffled off to a separate article entirely for precisely that reason. (they talk about it in the talk page for one of the two) Anyways, I'd rather come up with a better solution than breaking part of the info into a second article. Still looking for general comments on my last comments/questions. Bladestorm 23:06, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

I can't be bothered wording this properly so here we go:

  • Several reliable sources have been produced noting that 'Wii' sounds like a slang word for urine.
  • Some sources not meeting Wikipedia's reliability standards have been produced for the "buttload of puns/homonyms/portmanteaus".
  • What puns should be referenced: the one we have lots of reliable sources for, the ones we don't, or none of them?

Incidentally, and quite hilariously if you ask me, the wikinews story linked to in the article says this: "In the immediate aftermath of the announcement, the name recieved much critisism for sounding too much like "wee", an English slang word meaning urine." No messing around there. Hammer Raccoon 13:05, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

The result so far

Its now 16 December 2006, 16:15 (UTC). I've counted the votes so far and it seems like a draw for now: 

18 for
17 against

I've counted the two votes from the two IP users who voted 'No' and 'Heck no' and the 'Weak no' from user Bradibus as one vote against. IP votes usually carry less heavy.

Should we keep this strawpoll open for a little longer? - Face 16:18, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Honestly don't bother - it's a waste of time - relevant issues are easily settled in a few lines. The ridiculous amount of space taken up by this question just highlights it's trivial nature. The same argument applies to 'Wiimote', 'Wii vs the Wii' etc.87.102.4.180 17:00, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I say close it. The poll has been good in that it has shown that the issue at hand is not as clear cut as many might of thought, but there is no way that any kind of consensus will be reached by voting. Discuss, don't vote. Hammer Raccoon 17:09, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
I leave for about a month and another urine reference argument pops up? You people infuriate me, since this has been archived. Case Closed, next time someone comes and asks again, I'd tell them to STFU. And if this isn't acceptable, just blank their comments, heck, even if Jimbo Wales comes in and tells us what the name should be, tell him to STFU or blank his comments.
The only thing we get out of this is another argument with the same results, and more reason as to why WP:LAME is there.--Signor 07:58, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Oh drop it. WP:OWN. Besides, new discussions can and often do happen; there are no restrictions on re-nominating articles for AfD, for instance. We're definately not hitting a consensus either way, but that's no reason to censor discussion. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 08:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Exactly. This will continue to be brought up, and I think it's been established that no consensus has been reached yet. Are you saying that because there's no consensus, we should just do things your way?--Victim Of Fate 12:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
I understand most of you are getting angry and tired of this, and frustrated that the strawpoll, miraculously, ended in a draw. But if we don't solve this now for once and for all, another discussion will be brought up in a few weeks, with other members getting involved.
I may have an idea for a compromis: we do not mention urine jokes, nor any other jokes about the name Wii. Instead, we provide links to websites who do mention them. How's that?
I have edited the name section and, in my opinion, improved it. I've tried to put it as decent if I could: "The name launched thousands of jokes and Photoshop parodies, comparing it with several other known words." I have included many of my sources I stated above. Enough urine jokes there! ;-)
This way, we do not mention it, but we point at it. - Face 13:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Better. Much better than mentioning 'oui' and not 'wee'. "Several other known words" still sounds a bit iffy though. If I think of something better I'll be sure to mention it. Hammer Raccoon 18:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
I'd say it's much better now; and it's a legitimate way to get rid of "oui". Obviously, I'd prefer if it was phrased slightly different, as I agree that the current phrasing is just slightly iffy. But I'd still say it's a massive improvement. Bladestorm 19:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm not English actually, forgive me my limited grammatical knowledge. Feel free to alter that sentence if anyone knows something better. Btw, thanks user Just64helpin for improving some of my other sentences! - Face 21:10, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I realize this is trivial, I realize that it's juvenile, and I really don't care that much, but it really seems to me like censorship and a lot of pseudo-apologetics to justify the censorship. I think that "oui" and "wee" (as in small) are rather innocuous and not worthy of uproar, however "whee!" adds to 'kidiness' and "wee" (as in pee) makes the machine a target for ridicule. Regardless, the compromise of "phonetic similarities...to other words" is fine, and I hope this will end soon. --PsyphicsΨΦ 18:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia provides the information, including information that will be ridiculed. Scepia 05:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Maybe I wasn't too clear in what I said above. I agree with you. Maybe that will frame the reading above. --PsyphicsΨΦ 13:48, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Proposed compromise: "... similarities to words suggesting bodily functions."

I think that would moot the point of the compromise, which is to describe the objection without actually subjecting the reader to the crudity. It returns us to the original position with all its objections. We won't get a consensus like that.Algr
I see your point, switching vote to no. Scepia 05:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  • no because the proposed statement is way too ambiguous and readers would not neccesarily understand what "bodily functions" are, and wouldn't know about the real thing, urine/etc. Scepia 05:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
What if the words "bodily functions" linked to Urine? Algr
or better yet, we stop denying the facts and covering them up as bodily functions. Scepia 05:56, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  • No - So we're trying to keep people from having to be "subjected to crudity"? That's censorship. What's wrong with the word "urine"? It's a medical term, isn't it? --PsyphicsΨΦ 16:58, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Sheesh! I'm on your side here. The only thing wrong with "urine" is that a bunch of people are opposed to it. Right now the article is just wrong. But isn't a tactful description better then meeting stubbornness with stubbornness and having an unending conflict? Algr 04:28, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
(Off topic) Please, take a bit of care when writing things like "the article is just wrong". Some people tried their best to write an article meeting the needs of a large audience.
MaxDZ8 talk 05:35, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Sorry, Algr. Not trying to come at your throat, but if we're going to come out and say we're changing the word to skirt crudity then we're admitting to censorship. That's the point I was trying to make. --PsyphicsΨΦ 14:14, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you'll see much support for this suggestion. It's much too vague for starters, and linking to urine without mentioning it would just be censorship. Personally, I can't see how the wording in the article as it is can get much better. There's no way the word "urine" will ever be put in the article with such stubborn, uncompromising resistance, and using a wording like the one suggested just makes it sound like we're dancing around the word "urine" again (which of course we are). Best compromise for now is to just link to the articles stating what we're apparently loath to say. Hammer Raccoon 12:41, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Raccoon, you want to remember the policy on "assuming good faith"? Start remembering it. Now.
It's the pro-urine editors who have been far more stubborn. And calling the people who simply want consistency "stubborn" and "uncompromising" is downright insulting.
You can't specifically mention urine without also mentioning wiitard, wiimote, 'wee' as in small, 'whee' for fun, and 'oui' as in yes. You haven't got a choice in that matter. It's one or the other. Specifically mention one, or specifically mention them all. Your attempts to pick a single one, and focus on that, in spite of that absolute lack of evidence, citation, or even logic to do so, is the direct and sole cause of the debate. It was never because I 'loath' urine. It was because it's entirely inconsistent, and entirely lacking in neutrality. Stop accusing other people of your own flaws. Stop accusing bad-faith.
The current phrasing is good, not because it doesn't say urine, but because it doesn't single out any single word, to the exclusion of all others. Remember the complaints about how it only mentioned 'oui'? That's solved. If it only mentioned urine, then there'd be problems with why it didn't mention 'whee'. Reluctance to butcher the very nature of neutrality isn't the same as stubborness. And any time you find yourself so vehemently opposed to the idea of being consistent in an article, perhaps you should ask yourself what your problem is, before you start attacking others. Same goes to you, algr. Start being consistent.
  • The distinction is obvious. Wii=urine appears in several real news sources. Wiitard does not; any word can have -tard appended, so it has no connection to the Wii. Fun & Whee are Nintendo's intent so including them is reasonable. And no one is complaining about oui. I just heard an NPR story that used "Wiimote" exclusively, so yes, it to belongs in the article. As for "Bad faith", our side WON the urine poll above and I am still trying to satisfy the concerns of the other contributers by suggesting this compromise. Algr 04:00, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
(Yeah, I know, this sounds insulting and grouchy, too. But I'm getting tired of being accused of stubbornness and such by people who are far more guilty of such things) (~Bladestorm)
y'know, it's easy to accuse the other side when you're on the defense. we're arguing to get something included, you're arguing to leave it broken. not everyone is aware that "negative meanings" are really urine, and so on. the average person might think "oh, they're talking about wee, as in small". WP is not censored. please, start being consistent with policy. Scepia 21:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me... do you guys want to count the votes again? Because I'm getting more No's than Yes's. Of course, there are two things to keep in mind when tallying. First, votes aren't supposed to matter anyways. They're never binding, and editors keep touting "concensus" over "voting". Secondly, I'd count everybody's vote equally. And if you count all votes equally, it seems that there are more no's than yes's. Am I miscounting? Or are you claiming a non-existant victory, people?
Next, give me these citations. You think there are citations that clearly elevate urine above all others? No problem. Cite them. I went through all 13 previously included links, and broke every single one. Even the ones that came close to being applicable also supported wiimote, 'whee' as in fun, 'wee' as in small, and 'oui' as in yes. And the ones that came closest to making actual urine connections were weaker than the wiitard references I previously cited. If you want to say they're all invalid, then that's just fine. But you can't choose weaker sources that support you over stronger sources that conflict with your views. Incidentally, a recent ign headline implied that wiimotes are dildos. I take it you want to include that as well? No? I should hope not.
Either way, you aren't really helping, because you're ignoring the point.
My problem isn't with the word, 'urine'. As such, "bodily functions" doesn't help at all. My problem is with elevation of any single term when all are equally valid/invalid.
Being more obscure in your giving special treatment to a single word still isn't even remotely similar to treating things equally. Singling out a single word in a confusing fashion is still singling it out.
The current phrasing is the best we've had so far. Insisting that a desire to be consistent and neutral is 'stubborn', 'censorship', or absolutely anything negative at all is insulting. And seriously, count those votes up again, because I'm seeing more no's than yes's. Am I missing something? (~Bladestorm)

Yes, you are missing something. The vote shows that there's no current consensus on what to do. It shows that it's not the case that those wanting to include a reference are not a small minority, and that the issue is therefore still up for debate.--Victim Of Fate 11:43, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Apologies Bladestorm, the uncompromising resistance I was referring to are the many 'no' voters above who barely stated any reasoning behind their argument other than "it's childish" and "no one wants it". The fact that only one 'no' voter (yourself) has bothered to continue arguing their cause suggests to me that there will be no reaching consensus with these other users. Furthermore, I do not believe the 'yes' voters have been stubborn. We have presented, what we believe, to be valid sources showing the predominance of the urine jokes over other puns. If you are questioning the validity of the sources then look at this BBC article and this engadget article both referencing "puerile jokes" (maybe that's a catch-all phrase we could use instead of listing all the jokes/puns). And as for my stubbornness in opposing consistency, please look at this diff where I support the recent changes to the articles wording. (Oh, and I count more no votes above as well, but it is true that IP votes don't carry as much weight, and you'd need a clear majority on such a contentious issue as this to come to any kind of consensus. Even then, votes aren't binding.) Hammer Raccoon 11:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Hammer, I'll say it now: I really do appreciate you addressing which links you think really stand up. Unfortunately, I'm not entirely seeing them as being very strong in terms of *just* urine. For example, I'm sure that puerile jokes includes urine references, but it could also refer to several others. They don't explicitly state it, so it doesn't quite make the case. (delightfully good reference to highlight the significance of the original reaction to not calling it 'revolution', though. Can I assume that, in the second link, you're talking about in the comments? Because the comments do make that kind of connection. But there are two problems there. The first is that I was shot down for citing examples of 'wiitard' that could've been made by just anybody. The comments section is just that, since anybody can post there, so it's of the same level (or of slightly lesser value) than a couple of the wiitard references. Also, the comments also use the other homonyms.
That said, thanks for actually discussing the specific citations. I'm so tired of these other people just saying that there are citations, without backing it up. For reference, I'm not saying that everybody who voted 'yes' was the problem. Just the people who claimed victory on the poll, in spite of having fewer votes in their favour. And Victim, that was what I was talking about. Algr claimed to have more votes, when he actually had yes. I didn't claim that everybody agreed with me, but... Algr and Scepia were claiming that they had won the survey, and anybody who can count can see that just isn't so. I think the survey really only served to prove that polls in wikipedia are really only good for getting basic feedback. Anyways, I think we're good with what we currently have. If you think of a slightly better phrasing Hammer, then that's just fine and dandy by me. I just think we're onto a good style of solution. (~Bladestorm)
I understand your concerns. It's not up to us as editors to determine what is and is not controversial in the article. I believe we all understand that the phonetic similarity to a word for urine (if not the only controversial part of the name) adds the most controversy. So, in order for "urine" to be mentioned (esp. as controversial) what is needed?
  1. A reputable source (or more than one?) has to mention the joke?
  2. There must be critical or fan reaction to said joke?
  3. Something else?
The first two references are not necessarily good for what we need in this. The third reference mentions specifically that "the name is unlikely to go down well across the large swathes of the English-speaking world - including the United Kingdom - where "wee" is a very common children's slang phrase for the act of urination." It continues, saying that "wee" as small is at least 'appropriate' (and thus arguably innocuous). One doesn't necessarily need to note fan reaction if there are no sources, you can mention the media's reaction to the name. The fourth reference mentions the urine reference in its title ("takes piss"?). The others I agree are throwaway -- petitions, blogs, and forums. I understand the burden of proof is on us as editors, so in order to help us understand each other and build consensus, could you, Bladestorm, as the most vocal critic of its inclusion, explain what is needed for the urine reference to be included in the article? I can rescind my support of its inclusion if I agree with what you understand the policy to be and why what sources we've found aren't supported by it. I believe it's noteworthy, but if there are no sources to back it up, I understand leaving it out. --PsyphicsΨΦ 16:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Just a reminder, you can't use the fourth one. While although they're probably having a bit of fun, they're basically just using the expression, "taking the pi%%". It seems to be more common in the UK than in north america, but it's still a pretty common expression. The third one only speculates about possible problems with fan reception of the name. But, as speculation, they're only guessing at how people will react, not commenting on the actual reaction itself. Also, they also mention 'wee' as in small. So, if it's support for including one word, then it's equal support for including the other.
To be honest, I don't see any way to include urine without also including wiitard, wiimote, 'wee' as in small, 'whee' for fun, and 'oui' for yes. I'm sure you can, if you look long enough, find citations to make the urine connection, but you'll also find equally good ones for the others. And I very seriously don't want to be listing all of them, because then you're devoting a whole paragraph to puns, in an article dedicated to a piece of hardware. That's why I like the current solution. It treats them all the same. It acknowledges that they've been made. It provides a link to at least one example to demonstrate that it's happened. It doesn't take up undue space. It doesn't pretend that only one joke has been made. In that regard, it doesn't cover up any information.
But that's my opinion. I still have to answer your question. If you want to include it anyways, then I suppose what I'd require for a citation is some sort of an example that specifically and directly references the urine jokes, in a way that doesn't explicitly minimalize them (ie. an article saying that urine jokes mean absolutely nothing isn't a good citation), but still of a level of notability and reliability that I couldn't also find comparable citations supporting any of the other puns.
That is, probably a proper published source (obviously, electronicly published is fine), that includes a direct criticism of the name, explicitly because of the urine connection. And it should be something where I couldn't find a comparable article saying the exact same thing, but with, "wheeeee!" And, if possible, more than one citation fitting those criteria would be pretty nifty.
BTW, this is absolutely NOT directed at you. You've been civil, cooperative, and just plain positive. But I just want to point out an ign headline, here. "New Nintendo Strap-On Penetrating Europe". Just because someone pokes a bit of affectionate fun in a headline, that doesn't make it a 'real' criticism. Unless, of course, we're going to include references to wiimotes being dildos in the wii remote article. Bladestorm 17:12, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Understood on the fourth one. The third one could be an example of media criticism of a "urine"-sounding name, but granted it would be weak for a discussion of reception. For now, until better sources can be found (and I don't have time to look), I'll rescind my support. --PsyphicsΨΦ 17:27, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Firstly: I quote from Bladestorm's comment above: "what I'd require for a citation is some sort of an example that specifically and directly references the urine jokes, in a way that doesn't explicitly minimalize them (ie. an article saying that urine jokes mean absolutely nothing isn't a good citation)". No one here wants to write in the article "The Wii has a silly name therefore it is a terrible console." Similarly no respectable gaming magazine/website or other potential source is going to write off a console based on its name alone. However, sources might criticise the name or mention audience reaction to the name. These sources are perfect for what we do want to write about in the article, that there was a negative reaction to the name. Secondly: The engadget article I quoted above mentioned how they weren't going to sink to the level of making "puerile jokes" - I was not referring to the comments when I cited that article. I reaffirm what I said above; the sources don't necessarily have to criticise the name themselves, just mention that there has been a reaction to the name. Thirdly: We can absolutely include urine and not wiitard. Are you telling me people reacted negatively to the name because it sounded like wiitard? And while I'm on this point: Bladestorm, what do you personally believe caused much of the negative reaction to the name? Was it the fact that it made the Wii sound small. Was it that it made it sound kiddy? Or was it that it sounds the same as slang for the act of urination? Hammer Raccoon 14:20, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, no... It's true that sources don't need criticise the name themselves, if all you want to show is that there is a reaction, and that there are some sorts of jokes... but if you want to list a specific one, then absolutely yes, they do have to spell it out for you. That said, everybody knows the primary source of criticism for the name. And it isn't urine.
The primary source of criticism of "wii" is that it isn't "revolution". That was it. (at least, initially) People liked, "revolution", and they were disappointed for a while when it was changed to anything else. And I'm not saying that a respected magazine has to say, "the wii is crap, just because it might sound like urine to a 5-year old!" But a source saying something akin to, "urine jokes entirely miss the point, and will have zero impact on the console at all," certainly aren't good enough. And if the only sources you can find are of the same level as ones that use other words, then that puts them as being equal in verifiability.
And, I think I addressed your question in terms of what people first criticized, but since I may not have fully addressed it, I'll add to it. No. Not urine. For anyone I told the new name of the wii to, the first reaction I always got was, "wheeeee!" (But, notice that not even that is a criticism. It's a joke.) And, just to check, I don't need a comment on whether or not you think it's applicable, if you don't want to get into it, but did you at least notice the example I cited where wiimotes are likened to dildos by a respected source? You need to be reasonably careful when deciding which jokes to include or not. (~Bladestorm) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.88.64.22 (talk) 15:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC).

Why this discussion will never end

I went through all 13 previously included links, and broke every single one.

I participate in Apollo Moon Landing hoax accusations and have dealt with wikipedians who have "broken" every bit of NASA evidence that there was ever a moon landing. Bladestorm, you need to understand that simply convincing YOURSELF that your arguments are superior is worthless. EVERYONE thinks their arguments are superior. If you think that half the participants in this discussion are simply going to go away because you've declared yourself smart, then you deserve to be stuck in this discussion forever.

I've been trying to find new alternatives that satisfy more people. You keep arguing that including "urine" would mean including other words too. Then include them. They are NOT all equal, but I've given my opinions on them above. Algr 09:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Fascinating... Really and truly fascinating... I went, step-by-step, through all 13 links. You never gave direct arguments for why any of them were valid, to the exclusion of other words. And yet, you think that a general clumsy criticism is somehow a good way to counter a detailed account and rationale? Hmm. Yup. Definitely interesting. So then, here's where we currently stand:
I've gone over all 13 links, stating why they don't support that bloody reference to the exclusion of all others. Nobody has once directly countered those. Until they do, they can all be considered "broken". (That is, there are arguments against them, and a total absence of specific arguments supporting them.) I don't say I'm right just because I've convinced myself. I'm saying that if you want to pretend to have citations, then you need to list (and be prepared to defend) at least a single one. Since you haven't/can't, you don't have any.
I do not support including all' of them. Because now you'd be talking about urine, small, wiitard, wiimote, yes, and fun, all in an article about a freaking game console. Not a single one of them is necessary to understand what a 'wii' is. Knowing that people were making jokes about it, and especially knowing that people were initially upset at the change from 'revolution', those are actually relevant.
Why will this argument never end? Because I'm willing and prepared to go step-by-step through any and all arguments. I won't shy away from anything. My money is where my mouth is. However, the same can't be said for the people pushing for urine references.
So, where do we currently stand? A survey that has more votes against mentioning urine than for. Clear and direct arguments against singling out any specific pun/homonym/portmanteau. A total and absolute absence of defended citations supporting urine references. In short, to any reasonable person, the case is closed. Survey says no references to urine, which can be interpreted as no single words isolated as though they're alone. Clear and logical arguments say no single words isolated as though they're the sole references made to homonyms/etc. Common sense dictating that including all of them would be downright silly. (seriously, does anyone actually want to mention all of them?) We have an argument that's essentially closed, and yet we're still arguing.
That is what I'd call the reason this argument won't end. You refuse to actually address issues directly. You refuse to defend a single citation. And yet, you accuse others of being the cause of the problem. Give it up. Just give it up. And, incidentally, likening my arguments to those of paranoid conspiracy theorists is hardly civil. (~Bladestorm) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.88.64.22 (talk) 09:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC).
"You never gave direct arguments for why any of them were valid"
There are TEN PAGES from at least three people up there explaining this to you, and you couldn't hear a damn thing. And then you write this as though no one had said anything! This is EXACTLY like the moon hoax arguments. It is like a trial where you can't convict unless you convince THE DEFENDANT that he is guilty. You demand infinite proof, and dismiss anything that doesn't agree with you as "questionable". Algr 10:35, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for proving me entirely right.
There were 13 links initially provided, one after another.
I addressed every single link, one after another.
Nobody directly addressed a single specific criticism there.
I don't demand infinite proof. You want to see an editor acting on good faith? Look at Hammer's response to my challenge. He provided two specific links that he thought were valid.
Now look at your response: "You demand infinite proof". Wrong. I demanded some. You provided none. I asked for specific links that you thought proved your point, you provided none. That's your fault, not mine. I was specific, you threw general accusations. Read it over for yourself. Absolute fact. Deal with it.
Seriously, look at Hammer's response, and look at yours. See the difference? That's all the response you get until you start trying for real. No more, "The reason this argument will never die is because of blahblahblah" crap. Stop it.
And, incidentally, stop with the moon landing references, they're pathetic. Providing 13 links without a single explanation isn't "proof". If someone thinks the moon landing was faked, you don't show a starless picture to prove they're wrong. That'd be stupid. You explain why there aren't stars in the pictures. See the difference? No? I don't care anymore. Start discussing. Stop accusing. Or leave it to someone who's actually willing to cooperate (eg. hammer), who may not completely agree with me, but is at least making a genuine effort. (~Bladestorm)

I'm not going to make any edits, or even log in here, but I'll say this, in my experience in the UK, Australia and NZ the new name can mean urine - its one of the first association or meanings that people below 40 will think of. Now I can't cite this, and you have argued this to death, so i'll leave it at that - but I for one wish Nintendo had thought this through, it totally changes the way i see this console, and I'm a Nintendo fanboy - sure it doesn't stop the console from being good, but it just smacks of Nintendo being lazy and not adequately testing the name - and this was the main controversy amongst people I knew at the time of the news lesson. Juan—Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.109.245.209 (talk • contribs)

Except the name is not "Wee", it's "Wii" and it's pronounced like the word "We". It's just immature people on the internet who have the maturity of middle schoolers. Besides they seemed to get it out of their system months ago. BTW, remember to sign your posts. TJ Spyke 08:28, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Allow me point out, TJ, that "Wii", "wee" and "we" are homophones and and therefore pronounced exactly the same. Now, I know discussion on this topic has stagnated somewhat, but before any kind of a compromise is even hinted at there needs to be a change in attitudes. I can't vouch for North America, but in England and Wales "wee" is a common word meaning "to urinate". Yes, it is probably used more by children than adults, but everyone knows its meaning. When the new name for the Revolution was announced I can nigh on guarantee that the link was made between "Wii" and "wee" was made by almost all in the country. Some discussed this on the internet. Newspapers and games magazines wrote about this reaction. Hell, so did the BBC. The reason they didn't explicitly state "'Wii' = 'wee'" is because everyone that article was catering for understands this meaning. What else could "puerile jokes" mean? All this leaves me bemused as to why the negative reaction surrounding the name's similarity to a word meaning "to urinate" is being left out of the article. The people mocking the name may have been immature (although seriously, if they called it the Nintendo Willy would you expect 'mature' people to pretend they were above the bloody obvious mocking that would receive) but there was enough of them for institutions like the BBC to note their grievances. Also, if Bladestorm believes mentioning "wee" would also mean mentioning "oui" et al then why the hell don't we do it? Why are we so concerned with conserving mere kilobytes of text? So please, someone explain to me again why we can't report the facts about the negative reaction to the name? Hammer Raccoon 20:36, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Latest comment: 17 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

In, for example, Germany, it is illegal to own nunchuk. Also (as I recall), they can be owned in the UK but must not be publicly visible outside of a martial arts training dojo. Admittedly the nunchuk controller hardly resembles a real nunchuk, but I am curious about any legal/popularist reaction to the "nunchuk controller". (Remember the "Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles" scandal in the UK?)
138.243.228.52 16:19, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Um... I'll admit that I'm not familiar with the TMNT scandal in the UK, but I'm going to venture a guess... did it have to do with the fact that Michaelangelo used nunchucks/nunchuks/nunchaku/however-they're-spelled-these-days? See, that's the thing... the 'nunchuk' controller is only called so because it's tethered to the wiimote in a fashion which makes the complete assembly vaguely resemble the concept behind a nunchuk. However, it is, by no means, mistakeable for a weapon. There are cellphones these days named "Katana", but I'm pretty sure you can conceal these phones without fear of being arrested. Nunchuks, referring to the real thing, are illegal in far more than just Germany, but there's no way any cop will look twice if he sees a wiimote and connected peripheral. (At least, not until some stupid kid tries to use it to garrote someone and then ruins it for everyone) (~Bladestorm) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.88.47.226 (talk) 19:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC).
I think it was more like the word "ninja" was to violent for kids. Jecowa 20:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the slightly confusing original post. The UK turtles scandal (in no way connected to nunchuk) was the percieved violence of the word "ninja" and the series content in general. Anyway, thanks for the clarification.
138.243.228.52 00:56, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, it was the BBC who made the decision to rebrand TMNT as TMNHT in the UK, so if Nintendo haven't made the decision to rebrand the nunchuck, I don't think anyone will force them to.--Victim Of Fate 12:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
There is a section on the Ninja Turtle censoring. It says senses with Michelangelo's nunchaku were edited out. It's kind of strange that nunchaku are violent weapons, but Leonardo's katana are peaceful as a flower. The section ends by saying the censoring laws were abolished at least three years ago, so Nintendo's nunchuk should be okay in the UK now. Jecowa 18:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Sales numbers

Latest comment: 17 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

it says wii has sold 50,000 units in Europe and the source for that says its sold 50,000 in the uk and all the other sites say 50000 in the uk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.132.67.233 (talk • contribs)

I've made the correction. Just64helpin 17:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Clarification, 105,000 units have been sold in the UK. 325,000 have been sold world wide.

Correction: 325,000 have been sold in Europe in the first two days of launch source. Accurate worldwide sales numbers are not yet available and frankly I'd wait until next year to report anything.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.233.16.105 (talk • contribs)

According to http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3156178, 2006 sales in the US is 1.8 million units. The sales stats for US should be updated. David.tenser 07:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

See #Sales Update! and #Sales figures for America for a discussion of those sales figures. As GameSpot points out, while the IDC numbers may turn out to be close to those of the official NPD sales report,[3] right now they are only rough estimates based on preliminary results, and not a confirmed sales figure. Dancter 10:05, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
But isn't it safe to say that worldwide Wii sales is at the very least 2M+, and not 1M+? David.tenser 02:09, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
I have no doubt they are, but the CONFIRMED numbers we have don't add up to 2 million. Europe and Australia numbers are usually released only by the companies, and NPD numbers are only released once a months (December numbers will be released next week). Japan is more reliable since those numbers are publicly released every week. TJ Spyke 02:35, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
Fair enough. Sorry for the discussion noise. David.tenser 21:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Prices in Colombia

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Wii, the Colombian people, were having the Wii in stores since November 19. But there appears to be little or any info of the Wii and accesories' prices in Colombia and Latin America. Not only the first world has the right to be prioritized. 200.21.238.118 23:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Most of us don't live in Columbia or have that info. Do you have any sources that have this info? You can also be bold and add it yourself. TJ Spyke 23:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Three things: 1) The prices in Colombia and other countries in Latin America used to be there, however those prices were removed and i haven't found in the history of the article when and why that happened. 2) The official price is $1'099.000 Colombian Pesos which is about USD 450. 3) Columbia is an state of USA, Colombia is a country in Latin America, too bad this misspelling is too common. Johann Sinuhe 21:17, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, Nintendo has no subsidiary in South America, so maybe that was why the Latin American release dates were erased. There are no release dates for Latin America, stores import their consoles when they want (several Wiis are already imported), and they price it how they want. For example, I saw Wiis in online stores being priced at 750 dollars, simply because there are too few Wiis. Too bad that Nintendo ignores us like that. Japan became a first-world country after a bomb wiped out everyone. We Argentinians only managed to get two dictatorships and 10 million of poor people since WWII. 21:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

E-mail/Wii-Mail

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I dont know if im just totally missing it, but the article seems to be lacking any information concerning the fact that Wii's can send and recieve e-mail as well as picture attachments in the form of jpeg's with those e-mails.--Azslande 00:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Try Wii Channels. I don't think it has everything, but it does talk about the picture e-mail feature.--Farquaadhnchmn(Dungeon) 00:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually everything is in the Wii user manual, it isn't that hard to figure out.

Archive

Latest comment: 17 years ago7 comments5 people in discussion

Oh, dear... has anybody seen how goddarned huge the table of contents is?!?? This talk page definitely needs to be split into an archive or two! --Luigifan 12:23, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

You can't archive and blank the Talk page while there are multiple ongoing discussions! Sockatume 13:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
I don't think this is quite how you archive a page. I just blanked the redirect so we could get at it. I'm not exactly sure what to do here. If someone could sort this out, that'd be great. -Ryanbomber 13:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
At this stage the only way this can be corrected is a page move, and in instances where the target page already exists I think we'll need an Admin to do that. Sockatume 13:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Archiving process was me. I used page-move archiving (which also archives the page's history), which is standard procedure. Side-effect of a page-move archive is a few-minute interval where the Talk page is nothing but a redirect to the archivepage; the overall disruption is minor. Though next time I think I'll copy over the archived topics before I start pruning the older ones (rather than copying + pruning simultaneously). --Stratadrake 13:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Wait with archiving until this damn wee survey has ended. - Face 18:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
In retrospect, yeah, I guess that would have made more sense. *shrugs* --Stratadrake 23:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Requests for comment

Latest comment: 17 years ago14 comments10 people in discussion

There is an apparently unresolvable dispute about terminology. The nature of that dispute is captured pretty well in the "Should Wiimote be mentioned" section. 06:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Statements by editors previously involved in dispute
  • ok, Wii Remote is the correct name, bu i haven't heard anyone say wii remote in everyday conversation for months. as just about everyone calls it by the incorrect name i think it diserves to be mentioned in the artical. User:J.L.Main 19:04, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
  • The only people i've seen call it Wiimote are people on messageboards. It's mentioned on the Wii Remote that it's unofficially called that. No need to mentione the wrong name anywhere else. User:TJ_Spyke 00:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
  • The term "Nintendo Wii" seems to be more common than "Wii" in retail marketing (for clarity if nothing else), and referring to the console with a "the" is common grammar for mass-produced items (as contrasted to a company or group name, such as Apple or Microsoft). As for the Wii Remote, I agree with Jecowa's last statement in that the nickname "Wiimote" is already mentioned in the Wii Remote article, but for sake of factual accuracy needs little to no mention in other articles which refer to it. User:Stratadrake 04:15, 2 December 2006
  • It is factually accurate that "Wii Remote" is the official name. It is also factually accurate that "Wiimote" is more common than "Wii Remote." Jecowa 05:46, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Sorry your wrong. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_%28common_names%29 Clearly states that the common name is to be used and whilst it talks about the page titles as a special case, it does not make a distinction against titles of things used in a page. It's been demonstrated that its common name is Wiimote. Placing the hidden text about not changing it without consulting the talk page was presumptious because this dispute has not been solved. It is a fact that according to Wikipedia guidelines the title of the section and the title of the separate article should be Wiimote, with the official name mentioned in the text of the article. Ajmayhew 14:07, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • The solution is simple, next to all mentions of Wii Remote, put in hidden text the following: "Do not change this to Wiimote, see discussion." User:Dionyseus 06:09, 2 December 2006
Newer comments (from RFC)
  • I'm sorry, but doesn't it at least deserve a mention in the article? If no other reason than for clarification of the distinction between the two? I believe that the word wiimote, which I believe was coined by Matt Cassimisina at IGN Wii, has had a profound effect on many people's perception of Nintendo PR and Marketing. In fact, I remember an interview with Perrin Kaplan, VP of Big N's Marketing in the US, where she specifically said that someone had made a slip during a speech and had called it a Wiimote, making the joke that Matt had done some marketing spin for them. LavaHot 09:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
  • Remember that Reggie, NoA's president, has called it the Wiimote on occasion. It's not the official term, and it shouldn't replace Wii Remote in the article, but I think it deserves at the very least a nod. -Ryanbomber 12:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
It has received a mention in the Wii Remote article, there's no need for it to be mentioned in the Wii article. Dionyseus 17:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
yes, so you and TJ keep saying, and each time to no avail. you are like a broken record player. the counter argument is that it is important enough to be mentioned in both places. but i'm done with this for now. this stupid argument already got me banned for 24 hours. from now on i'm focusing on the pages i created and making them as informative and well written as possible. i hope this gets resolved soon. so long a fair well.J.L.Main 20:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
And your reason for including it has not been convincing. TJ Spyke 23:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • It's impossible to conclusively prove which term is more common (there's a world outside the internet). "Wii Remote" is definitively the product name. The most common nickname for the peripheral is relevant and notable in the Wii_Remote article, but not in the article for the console itself. Bladestorm 06:32, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • a mention of Wiimote takes 2 words. it is not going to blow up the page if we mention the extremely common name, used by multiple officials at Nintendo. it's not like we're calling the console the Nintendo Wii - that would be bad - we are naming the quite common nickname. WP is all about information, not about denying facts. Scepia 22:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Bladestorm is right, the nickname is mentioned at Wii Remote and that is more than enough. The only officials i've seen use it is Reggie, and in a offhand comment. TJ Spyke 23:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
The Wii Remote section in the Wii article is a summary of the Wii Remote article. So it's more of an issue of Wiimote being significant enough to be in the summary. I think so. You don't, I guess. -Ryanbomber 12:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

More Vandalism

Latest comment: 17 years ago6 comments6 people in discussion

I reverted some more stupid explicit vandalism. I really do think semi-protection is an option here, as one of the most edited articles on Wikipedia. 86.146.72.238 14:12, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Good work, but it's fine now.Cameron Nedland 05:52, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
It's not fine any more; someone added the comment, "Best damn console since Atari" at the top of the page. I can't find where it is in the edit page, not even searching for it in Microsoft Word. Can anyone find its source text and remove it? Autumn Forrester 16:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, that was here, and it was reverted seconds later. That's more than an hour ago. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 16:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Every time the protection drops, the vandals come out of the woodwork. Can't we just leave it protected? Rees11 18:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

The problem is, one of the central tenets of Wikipedia is that it is editable by all. Semi-protection is usually only used for short periods of time, and for good reason - many edits from anonymous and newly-created users are perfectly legitimate, and make the encyclopedia a better place. You can always request protection at WP:RFPP, and argue for it to remain protected for a longer period, though I don't think the level of vandalism since the last unprotection is high enough to justify protection right now (others certainly may disagree, though). —Krellis 18:40, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Wii picture

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I am so going to replace that washed-out pic with one that's better tomorrow. -- Chris is me 18:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

"Wii console"...

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Have you ever noticed how often "the Wii console" is used instead of just "the Wii" now?
It seems terribly redundant and unnecessary. The wii is a console. For comparison, look at the PS3 article, which says "Playstation 3 console" once, and doesn't even say "PS3 console" once; as opposed to a whopping 24 times in the wii article. It isn't necessary. Any objection to changing most of the instances to just "the Wii"? Bladestorm 22:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps I overdid it, but I changed all instances of both "the Wii" and just "Wii" to avoid mini edit wars over "The Wii" vs. "Wii". I'll try an alternate phrasing. Just64helpin 22:16, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Nice job. Seems fine now. Bladestorm 22:38, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
The consensus here is to change most of the instances, not all. Just64helpin 14:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Wii Release date in Italy

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Ciao The page is protected or semi-protected. so i leave you here my imput. The release date in Italy was different because on 8th was national holydays was on 7th like in australia on newz and the official price is 10€ more than the rest of europe 259€ we have 20% of tax :( I hope that you upload the page ciao ciao and sorry for my English

I've added the release date to the box at the top Makar1 22:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

slot loading

Latest comment: 17 years ago6 comments6 people in discussion

Anyone know how they do it? I know know one knew how they were going to do it before it released, but it slot loads 8 and 12 CM disks and as far as I knew, no one else has been able to do this before.

This is actually a significant point here. Just before the wii was released, I'd heard that it was the first slot-loading drive to be able to accept different sizes. Is that actually true? Or just non-techy tech-show people getting their facts mixed up? If so, it's worth mentioning. Anyone happen to know either way? Bladestorm 20:34, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
Hello? Anyone there? An answer would be nice.--Signor 08:01, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Uhh yeah, we're here. We aren't all disc drive experts. I can't find anything covering how a normal slot loading drive works, let alone one that can accept multiple sizes. I'd assume it just moves the internal parts that hold the disc depending on what it perceives the size as being (using something near the front that is spread apart different distances depending on what size of disc the user inserts). But, like I said, I don't know where to look for solid information. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 08:08, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

You should ask somewhere on wikipedia:reference desk maybe the science or computing section - it's not a wii specific question. Good luck - I don't know how they do it but can only guess. Maybe you should search for "slot loading drives how it works" and see if you can apply any answers you find to make it work for two sizes of disc.87.102.13.235 15:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I thought all slot-loading disc drives could take 8mm discs. All my slot-loading computers take them. Are there really computers that can't? Jecowa 19:00, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

My Sony DVD player accepts 8cm discs and that has the same slot loading type drive the Wii does, so the Wii most definitely isn't the first to be able to do this.86.139.66.22 13:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Slot Illumination

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

and remains on if the WiiConnect24 "Slot Illumination" setting is set to "Bright" or "Dim"... The slot's light is only on when you turn the Wii on (for a split second), or get a message. Nickr95 12:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

The slot light illuminates when the Wii checks for new firmware when you are already online e.g. Shop Channel. Makar1 21:54, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
My Wii lit blue when I got the update for the Forecast Channel. I woke for school one day when I saw it and i was like OMG! Lol.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.3.164.35 (talk • contribs)
Quote from manual - WiiConnect24 can let you know when it has received data by making the wii console's Disc Slot blink. Makar1 16:45, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
well no actually. your slot probably illuminated from recieving an email from nintendo informing you that it is availible when you next update Scotty.n 10:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

sd slot

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

"Also, to utilize SD slot, a software update must be downloaded, so game saves cannot be transferred to or from a system which has not been connected to the internet." Is this true, does it apply to any use of the sd slot or just games saves.. 87.102.4.180 16:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I think thats game saves because my sister was playing with her photos when she got her wii and she hadent gone online or anything SIDEKICK 08:01, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

it's possible newer systems have updated firmware that allows SD usage. when did your sister get her Wii? Scepia 08:45, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
I beleive SD Photo use is right out of the box. SD copying of channels and game saves is with the update. (although not having a stock Wii to test on I can't verify) Webrunner 16:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Best-selling game

Latest comment: 17 years ago13 comments9 people in discussion

Isn't Wii Sports technically the best-selling game? After all, Super Mario Bros. was put as the best-selling game for NES, along with Super Mario Bros. 3.The Legend of Miyamoto 19:09, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

We don't have a reference for Wii Sports to be the best selling game, though. -- ReyBrujo 19:44, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, Wii Sports is sold with every system in the Americas and Europe, and websites with JPN sales charts like the-magicbox.com show that it has sold far more than Zelda in Japan, where it isn't bundled with the system. - Subsurd 20:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it should count since Super Mario Bros. 30+ million sales included being bundled with the NES. We just need a source though. TJ Spyke 22:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
our source is the sales figures for Wii in every region but Japan. no need to cite the obvious - Wii Sports is sold with Wii, obviously. Scepia 22:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Unless the game actually is charged a price for, other than being included in the wii, we cannot say it is best selling considering it is included with the systemQuatreryukami 20:02, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Why not? Super Mario Bros. and Super Mario World were bundled in with their systems (NES/SNES. Although I realize both were also sold separately). Be default, everyone outside of Japan who buys the Wii also buys the game. Add in the fact that Wii Sports is the #1 selling Wii game in Japan, and Wii Sports is the best selling Wii game. TJ Spyke 23:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
I have to agree with Quatreryukami ... sort of. If the game is bundled with the system and not offered separately, it winds up the most-selling game almost by default, so on the one hand, the comparison isn't really valid to begin with, but on the other hand, you do wind up with a lot of people owning a copy of the game. --Stratadrake 01:53, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
I'm sure they will end up selling the game by itself, like they are in Japan. TJ Spyke 01:55, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
still, don't you think Zelda would be in front? at least for the first while. Scepia 01:57, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Outside of Japan, probably. Zelda games tend to drop in sales quickly in Japan (they will start strong and then drop dramatically after a few weeks). TJ Spyke 02:08, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
i'm gonna say its not really sold as a game, its more of a bonus thing. is there reference for how many wii sports have been sold anyway? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.114.214.59 (talk) 21:38, 19 December 2006 (UTC).
If they ever start selling it seperately in North America and Europe, then it should be considered as the top-selling. But not now. Everyone getting a Wii will be getting Wii Sports at this time. Super Mario Bros was bundled with the NES and sold seperatley. --Optichan 22:02, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Region-Unlocker

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I just found this: [4], just a FYI, because I couldn't find the "region locked/unlocked" debate in the archives here on the talk page. Aetherfukz 23:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Some Trivia

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

"Wii" sounds like: - "we" (english) - "wie" (german for "how") - "oui" (french for "yes")

Maybe someone wants to add that to the article? 130.83.161.17 20:00, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I would leave such things out of the article entirly. There's already the Nintendo quote which states that Wii sounds like we and emphasizes on the aspect of two players playing together. And if you put in "sounds like wie in german" there will be an uprising from the people who want to put in "wii sounds like wee!" again. There isn't any reference on the XBox page that XBox sounds like Ex-Box in english, and Ix-Box in german, because it is not neccesary. Aetherfukz 23:26, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Hey, "Xbox" rhymes with "text box"! That would make a lovely addition to the Xbox article! Just64helpin 17:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
he was saying how the name meant the same thing when pronounced the same in different languages...not that it ryhmed- as there would be hundreds of possiblities Scotty.n 10:05, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

name section

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I don't see why the name section is so long - it's just a tradename - not the meaning of life.87.102.4.227 19:02, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

I think its good for now no need to trim it SIDEKICK 07:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

VG Charts

Latest comment: 17 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion

While based on the claims made in their forum,[5] this would be better than the NexGen Wars data,[6] the statements of using "various inside sources (most of which is not made publically available)" and performing "a small amount of projecting forward and estimation" seems to be a cause for concern, in addition to the fact that the numbers don't seem to be dated to indicate how up-to-date they are. For a site whose reliability has the been subject of heated debate, I think some discussion is in order. What do people think? Dancter 22:38, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

I think it should be removed. While they are much better than nexgenwars.com, they still are not totally reliable and admit that they use some guessing. I say remove them and only use confirmable numbers. TJ Spyke 22:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
As their process is admittedly based on interpolation and guesswork, there's no reason to think it's any more reliable than NextGenWars' crystal ball.Sockatume 22:44, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
I just wanted to get the dialogue going on one of the more active talk pages before Jagged 85 got too carried away. Dancter 22:52, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
This was discussed in great lengths before in the List of best-selling computer and video games talk page, and it was determined that VGCharts cannot be used because it is unverifiable. You can find discussions here and more recently here. Dionyseus 23:29, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
I was aware of the discussions. While I didn't link to a specific thread, I linked to that talk page myself in my original comment. I did not read a definitive consensus in that. All I saw was that WhiteMinority backed down when a solution was proposed which would keep massive portions of the list from being removed. In any case, the numbers have been reverted, so I'm satisfied. Dancter 03:19, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Learn how to spell Australiasia

Latest comment: 17 years ago10 comments4 people in discussion

Is this some kind of new continent? Sorry, Im just OCD and i cant see the names of simple continents being spelled wrong. edit in the second paragraph: Australasia to Australia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Racerday182 (talk • contribs).

I believe it's a real word and not just a misspelling. Australasia is a term variably used to describe a region of Oceania: Australia, New Zealand, and neighbouring islands in the Pacific Ocean. 68.57.97.152 20:01, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Can we settle on using Oceania then, because Australasia is an obscure word. And seldom used outside the area of Australia. --Turbinator 21:24, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
I always though Australasia was just a nickname (sorta like Eurasia), no continent has that name. Oceania is what i'm pretty sure is the name of the continent of Australia/New Zealand/all those small Pacific Ocean countries. TJ Spyke 22:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
"Oceania" definitely reads better than an oddly mashed contraction. Just64helpin
Well, I don't think it really matters what term is used as long as the sentence it's being used in remains clear to the reader. And don't ask me whether it's a nickname or not. I simply went to the page and ripped the first sentence right out of the article to post here. 68.57.97.152 23:59, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Australasia is used outside of the area of Australia, I've heard it numerous times. I mean, if that IS the area that includes Australia, and Oceania does not include Australia, then I really don't see how we can be factually correct without calling it by it's name, unless we list "Oceania: Australia, New Zealand, and neighbouring islands in the Pacific Ocean" which is what Australasia is after all. Chris M. 05:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Learn how to spell its. -lysdexia 06:10, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Oceania DOES includes Australia. Even the Wikipedia entry on it says it is usually included (usully because most people do, it's a small minority that don't). Oceania includes Australia, New Zealand and all those little island countries in the Pacific Ocean. Oceania is the name of the continent, while Australasia is a rarely used term to decribe part of Oceania (the same way that Central America is used to decribe part of North America). TJ Spyke 06:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Just a note, Australasia isn't quite as rarely used as you might thing. It's what we were always taught in school as referring to Australia and New Zealand, to mean the continent rather than just the country of Australia. (If it helps, I'm talking about in Ontario) (~Bladestorm)
(Double edit conflict!) Interesting, it appears there is need for fixes on the Australasia article, as it says it includes Oceania, which it cannot according to the maps of both [7][8]. I haven't checked, but what does the reference refer to the area as? The question is if those far NE islands of Oceania are getting the wii at the same time as the rest of it (if they are, then the area getting it at the time is Oceania, if they aren't, then the area clearly isn't the whole Oceania, and Australasia may be the best use). Chris M. 06:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Actually, the Australasi article says it is part of Oceania (not that Oceania is part of it). TJ Spyke 06:43, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
Eh... maybe I should learn how to read, thank you. Chris M. 06:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
We should go for what the reference refers to the area as. Check the reference and see if all of the Oceania got the Wii at the same time, or see if only Australasia got it at that particular time. Then stick to it. While keeping in mind to keep it clear and to the point, for the reader. --Turbinator 19:03, 21 December 2006 (UTC)


LAN Adaptor

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Estimated cost is 2800¥ ~ $24 (USD)

Can be found here [9] Makar1 21:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Wii game discs

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I was looking for the article about the wii game discs and I got redirected to this article. Nintendo Gamecube discs got it's own article, should wii game discs got it's own article? Anyway, I was looking for whether the wii game discs is actually a DVD disc or what? Thanks 202.138.226.3 04:16, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

GameCube discs were basically mini-DVD's with modified encryption methods. Wii discs are similar. They are the same size as DVD's (4.7GB single-layer, 8.5GB dual-layer), but are not technically DVD's. TJ Spyke 04:20, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Criticism section?

Latest comment: 17 years ago19 comments9 people in discussion

I was quite surprised to not see one in this article. I came here after reading about all the remotes flying through the TV's and wanted to read more information about any other criticisms about the product. I know Wikipedia is not Consumer reports but if this is making the news it deserves more then just a casual mention here and the controller page. My first thought was not to go to the controller page but to go here since the controller is an important part of the Wii system. Just some thoughts from a reader. 205.157.110.11 03:45, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Creating a new section to accommodate one item makes no sense. In the PSP article, you don't see a section on "flying discs", which was a big fad concerning games supposedly detaching from the system during play. Just64helpin 15:42, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
You mean those idiots who are throwing the controller at their TV? To be honest, that is not a fault of the system. Even if the strap is weak, you have to be swinging the controller hard AND let go of the controller for that to happen. It's like taking your hands off of a steering wheel and then complaining about the car company when you crash. TJ Spyke 03:51, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Indeed. If people would actually hold on to the controller, then they would not have shattered televisions. --Guess Who 04:13, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
If Nintendo had not released commercials in which they suggest that Wii games should be played while standing up and using exaggerated movements of the arms, perhaps consumers wouldn't have any problems with controllers slipping from their hands in the first place. Perhaps if the solution were as simple as "hold on to the controller," Nintendo would not have included a safety strap in the first place. Dionyseus 05:11, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
They included one with the the DS too, what's your point? I don't mean normal actions like in the commercials, i'm talkin about idiots like that guy on YouTube who was playong tennis and swung his arm as fast as he could (and threw the controller into the TV). Nintendo even says not to do that in the manual, so people have no excuse for throwing their controller. TJ Spyke 05:18, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
The strap for the DS has a completely different purpose, it is used as an alternative for the DS stylus. Dionyseus 06:37, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
What about the PSP then? Anyways, the strap doesn't matter since even if the strap was faulty you would have to let go of the controller in the first place. TJ Spyke 06:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
What about the PSP? And yes it would matter because accidents do happen. We humans have good eyesight but car crashes still happen, if the seat belt doesn't work as it should and causes a death, the maker of that seat belt is responsible. We humans have good dexterity but objects can still slip off our hands, if the wrist strap doesn't work as it should and causes property damage or injuries, the maker of that wrist strap is responsible. In the Nintendo website, we are warned to wear the Wii Remote wrist strap because "Wearing the wrist strap will help prevent the Wii Remote from flying across the room if you accidentally let go of it during game play." [10] Dionyseus 06:54, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes. Precisely. "Help" prevent it from flying away. But, I believe it's Ron White who likes to say, "You can't fix stupid." The fact is, any time you have people moving, or heck, doing anything, you'll have accidents of one sort or another. Heck, even normal gamepads can cause problems with people's finger joints and thumbs. But, just for ha-ha's, go on over to the Hammer article, and see what you don't see there. Notice that they don't have an entire section on people hitting their thumbs with hammers. Why not? FAR more people have hit their thumbs with hammers than thrown wiimotes through tv's. The hammer is specifically intended to be used to strike a small object held by the other hand's fingers. It's an accident waiting to happen. And yet, there isn't a whole section in the Hammer article detailing legal liability for not making more idiot-proof hammers. (And yes, I know it isn't quite the same thing. Nintendo actually made an attempt to actively prevent such accidents from happening.) (~Bladestorm) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.88.64.22 (talk • contribs)
hammers are always going to throw people off. and perhaps there should be an "injury" section in hammer. the Wii controller incidents are recent, and covered much more widely than hammers. which one is more notable: breaking your thumb with a hammer or breaking your TV with a Wiimote? Scepia 08:04, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
To have the article pretend that there's been no criticism of the Wii is POV. The "flying Wiimote" claims are hardly the only time anyone's criticized it. There are also the fairly widespread criticisms of the Wiimote being overly gimmicky, dismissing the hardware as "GameCube 1.1", etc. The impression this article gives, on the other hand, is that the reception of the Wii has been universally positive. Redxiv 17:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
The PSP comes with a strap too. I still believe that if you actually hold onto the controller and don't act like an idiot (i.e. swing the controller as fast as you can) then you won't have a problem. Good night. TJ Spyke 07:03, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I tried adding some clear criticism to this article, and got nowhere. This article is completely controlled by one-sided POV, and I doubt there's much that can change it to neutral. Not that I'm going to stop trying. But it's defiantly not going to be easy. --Measure 00:52, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Measure, your first edit to the article cited two blogs, which are not reliable sources. In an attempt, I assume, to solve this problem, you readded the information without any sources. I don't understand what you think a reasonable course of action here would be. --Maxamegalon2000 01:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
First off, Some blogs ARE reliable sources. But in any case, I am going next to include dead-tree sources, and see if you'll all let me have any luck with that. I however, also believe that these criticisms will be removed. I really think all articles about consumer products should list common criticisms, not just be an ad for the product. --Measure 17:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Hmm... according to Wikipedia:Attribution, blogs are not excluded as unreliable. Re-adding. --Measure 17:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Attribution is a proposed guideline; it has'nt been approved yet. The correct current guidelines, Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources, do exclude blogs. Regardless, I don't consider either of your sources to be actual criticisms of the console. The Kotaku article does not criticize Wii for its abilities, but only states them as fact. The Wired article, especially the part you quote, seems to be criticizing gameplay decisions made by the designers of Wii Sports and incorrectly attributing them to the controller. I really think you'd be better off going with those dead-tree sources you intend to include. --Maxamegalon2000 18:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
The whole reason I chose those articles is because they are rational, and mostly pro-wii. I don't have anything against the Wii, I just don't believe the article should be an ad. Furthermore, just because the articles are pro-wii doesn't mean we can ignore the criticism of the Wii within. --Measure 18:15, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:Reliable sources both exclude only self-published blogs,(no editorial oversight), which my sources are not. --Measure 18:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Flash games on opera browser

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Just a note, the little blurb that mrnitemare tried to add about flash games via the opera browser wasn't OR. It was just a bit premature. :)
If you take a look here, you'll see ign's coverage of the concept, or you can go straight here to a website featuring wii-friendly flash games.
They're basically all just mouse-only flash games, that could thus be played with a wiimote instead. And some are really pretty darn neat, and should translate very well to the wiimote.
But, like I said, though not OR, still kinda premature, since it obviously won't be taking off for a while. (~Bladestorm)

Yeah, it's not so much the existance of the games that's original research as much as the enthusiasm. I think we should probably wait a bit before mentioning it. --Maxamegalon2000
It's not really special to the Wii though. These same flash games can be played on any system with a web browser (like the Dreamcast, PS3, PSP, etc.). TJ Spyke 23:46, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Nice hypocrisy and censorship, wikipedia stands for bad information

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Nice, the entire article does not mention wiihaveaproblem.com, a hilarious website dedicated to people who have accidentally smashed their TV sets or light fictures due to the too-weak wrist strap and controllers flying out of hands.

I wonder why? Wikipedia, the bastion of wonderful information, seems to be increasingly under the control of the powerful and elite. The 'editors' are some faceless mass of unelected bureaucrats who go around willy nilly deleting stuff for no reason, or because they are just inherently a bunch of ninnies who cannot handle the truth.

Link to wiihaveaproblem.com, or consider wikipedia to be, basically, dead, and stupid, and awful. To have, basically, abandoned its entire purpose for existence in the first place. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.185.250.195 (talk • contribs).

Thanks for your comments. Unfortunately, most users don't consider petitions when they come back to back with insults. Try again. -- ReyBrujo 19:21, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Or ultimatums. Anyways, I'll still treat your suggestions maturely, even if you weren't mature yourself. First, to reiterate a previously made point, this article is for the wii console itself. A website, about a tendency for accidents, related to a strap, used for a controller, designed for the wii console... that's kind of a lot of degrees of separation, isn't it?
Second, you make an unverifiable assertion. That they're all "accidentally" smashing things. The fact is, once you know you can do something screwy with any object, there'll always be idiots doing it intentionally. Once you know people will get worldwide attention for doing something stupid, there'll always be people doing that stupidity intentionally. It's sad and pathetic, but it's true. What percentage of wiihaveaproblem's submissions were staged? I don't know. But it really doesn't matter. The point is that it's entirely unverifiable. You can't investigate every claim yourself, so you really don't know. Since it's unverifiable, it's really a bad idea to include it. Verifiable sources are supposed to be prized pretty heavily here.
Third, It isn't an "official" site. It's just a website someone came up with. It doesn't need to be linked to verify that straps have broken. Even if you want to talk about damage that's been inflicted to various possessions/people, if you want to include a specific reference for it, then you have to make a direct case for that particular source. And keep in mind that there are at least a couple of more legitimate published sources.
The site doesn't just feature broken strap mishaps. It includes at least a couple instances of intact straps, but drunk people swinging them. Call me crazy, but I think that drunk idiots swinging anything around is more an indication of them being drunk idiots, rather than nintendo's liability. (~Bladestorm) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.88.64.22 (talk • contribs)

Wii release price in Finland

Finland's release price differs from rest of Europe. Here it's 269,9 €. You can find the price in [11] (in Finnish). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.230.83.55 (talk • contribs).

"Wii-tarded"? I hardly consider that to be an NPOV comment.

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

As per this WP:NPOV, I'd like to question the preceding comment, on the fact that, well, imagine what would happen if a PS3 fan caught wind of this. RageSamurai21655 22:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, but I don't quite see where you mean. Is this in the talk page, or in an edit history comment? Or are you talking about our discussions about just the existence of a made-up word, "wiitard"? Bladestorm 04:10, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
He's referring to this edit: [12]. TJ Spyke 05:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
Ayup that's exactly what I mean. Thanks. RageSamurai21655 17:37, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Anascape Sues Nintendo

Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Should be mentioned in the Nintendo article, or the gamecube one, the Wii features no analog buttons on its standard controler and nunchuck attachment and the patents that have been brought up in the linked articles are about analog butons. I am unsure about the classic controler, but from the design of it and its intended use, I doubt analog buttons are included.Golden Dragoon 03:34, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Archive

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I archived posts from the first half of the month. Unluckily, someone messed the archives, so archive 20 and 21 are pretty similar. Next time remember to delete content from this page when archiving. -- ReyBrujo 03:48, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

RVL Numbering Scheme?

Latest comment: 17 years ago13 comments6 people in discussion

In the article, it states:

I do admit that it is quite coincidential, but looking at recent Nintendo consoles, it doesn't make sense. Looking around the house, I see the N64's scheme is NUS, the GCN's is DOL, the GBA's is AGB, the GBA SP's is AGS, the GBM's is OXY, and the DS Lite's is USG. I see the GCN and Dolphin connection, but that's about it. Can we find a source that acutally addresses the claim, as opposed to the IGN article that doesn't even mention it? As far as I'm concerned, the letters in the scheme are somewhat random. Like most things on this article, I wanted to get a consensus before changing it. Your thoughts? -Kevin 07:40, 26 December 2006 (UTC) (PS: Sorry if this is in the wrong spot, feel free to move it. An indication to where new topics should go would be helpful.)

I'll move the ref tag to clarify what's being referenced. I suppose other editors can come up with a solution on the unsourced part. Just64helpin 17:58, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
  • RVL: Revolution
  • DOL: Dolphin
  • AGB: Advanced Game Boy
  • AGS: Advanced Gaming System
  • OXY: Oxygen
  • NUS: Nintendo('s) Ultra System
Each of these are the code names for the respective systems. A source would be needed, but there is more than one 'coincidence' here though. --Thaddius 19:05, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Can we please stay on-topic with this discussion? Just64helpin 19:12, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
He was questioning the 'numbering scheme', I was letting him know that this was in fact accurate. It doesn't help if you go around pretending you are in charge. --Thaddius 19:16, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
There's still no source, which is the whole point of the topic. Just64helpin 22:38, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
It's easier to find a source for the info when you have a better idea of what exactly the info is. I don't see how this is at all off-topic. —Locke Cole • t • c 01:15, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for the info, I knew the code names for the Nintendo 64 (Ultra), the Gamecube (Dolhin) and the Wii (Revolution) but i didn't know the ones for the Gameboy Family. One more thing; in the Nintendo Entertainment System and its accessories the three letters used are NES. --JohannSinuhe 21:32, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
OK, my bad. Honestly didn't know that. I'll just leave the article to you guys. -Kevin 02:49, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
I'll try looking for a source. No promises though cause no one really writes about this kind of stuff. --Thaddius 03:25, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I knew I had read this in a print magazine before, so I looked it up, it is stated in Issue 1 of Ngamer magazine, page 8, I know that online sources are preferable, but it is a reputable magazine, and has a proven track record. I am not 100% sure how to add a new reference so I will leave it until someone adds it, or I figure it out. Golden Dragoon 12:33, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I've verified the source and added the reference. Just64helpin 16:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
) I had just looked up how to add a reference and had just come back to do it, thanks for saving me the work . Golden Dragoon 23:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I suggest adding a link to The Hardware Book's page about Wii hardware. Connector pinouts and cable descriptions are available at the website. Mike Yaloski 23:59, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Latest comment: 17 years ago8 comments5 people in discussion

http://toolserver.org/~leon/stats/wikicharts/index.php?lang=en&wiki=enwiki&ns=all&limit=100&month=12%2F2006&mode=view http://toolserver.org/~leon/stats/wikicharts/index.php?lang=en&wiki=enwiki&ns=all&limit=100&month=11%2F2006&mode=view

This is links to the statistics of Wikipedia, from november and december 2006. Except for the common Wikipedia-words, Wii is the most searched word in the entire english Wikipedia. It is more popular than sex and much more popular than Playstation 3. Does this fit in the article? Sjalvastefan 10:43, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

It's interesting, but not really noteworthy for the article. --Conti|✉ 15:19, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Shouldn't be in the article, for sure.Acewolf359 15:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
Not include. It is both original research and a self-reference to Wikipedia. --Stratadrake 09:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Okay, I'm just nitpicking here, but: Mentioning this would not be a self-reference. We can write about Wikipedia on Wikipedia. It would still be original research tho, of course. And even if it wouldn't be, it would still not be very noteworthy. --Conti|✉ 16:35, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Ah, so only the NOR point stands then. True, not exactly noteworthy, it's like saying that a certain site is #1 on Google for a certain search. --Stratadrake 19:13, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Adding the fact that Wii is the most popular word searched in Wikipedia is not realated to the Wii itself, but realated to Wikipedia, thats why it shouldn't be in the artical.MastertagUSA 12:01, December 31 2006 (UTC)

Also related is Wii's status as the 6th most edited article on the most revisions page. Nonetheless, it doesn't need including as I don't believe it is notable enough. N.B. Does it count as original research if you research it and I put it in? :) OriginalPiMan 12:46, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes it still does. Nearly any analysis or interpretation of existing data which is not previously performed and published by a secondary source constitutes original research. --Stratadrake 14:37, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

List of launch titles

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Both trauma center and Avatar last airbender are getting released within launch period (December 2006-march 2007). Update needs to be made to table. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 11ryan (talk • contribs).

Already there. // Sasuke-kun27 20:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
LAUNCH titles are games that are available on LAUNCH day. If a game comes out after that launch, then it is not a launch title (hence the term LAUNCH title). TJ Spyke 20:43, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Wrong, launch titles are games that are released within the first 6 months, hence launch period.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 11Ryan (talk • contribs)

If a title is not available at launch, it is not a launch title. --Maxamegalon2000 20:40, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Availibility

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Does anybody know when the Wii will become "availible," as in you can actually find it at stores?David the Phantom 21:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

(Update) Amazon is going to have Wiis this Friday! Information thru Wii're Gamers—Preceding unsigned comment added by Amlwaycooljr (talk • contribs)

No they dont.David the Phantom 20:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I've seen it at several stores in the recent days. I'd say a few weeks before it is really common. Chris M. 05:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Wii Online Connectivity

Latest comment: 17 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion

I have not found the answer to this question clearly yet: what exactly do you need to connect to the internet?David the Phantom 02:42, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

A broadband connection and a wireless router (if you don't have a router, you an use the Nintendo DS USB Wi-Fi adapter). Nintendo will also be sellng a LAN adapter for those who don't want to buy a wireless router or th DS adapter (it releases in January). TJ Spyke 02:39, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

where do i find that stuff?David the Phantom 02:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

I believe Nintendo's online store sell the DS USB adapter. Just about any store that sells electronics (like Best Buy) sells wireless routers. I suggest a Linksys WRT54G, it's the one I use. TJ Spyke 03:07, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

wait, does that mean that if i use the DS USB Wi-Fi adapter, that i have to plug it into my computer?David the Phantom 20:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the Nintendo Wi-Fi USB Connector would need to be plugged into your computer. I would recommend a wireless router though. Jecowa 03:09, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

how much does the wireless router cost?David the Phantom 20:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Depends on the brand and type. Go to a site like circuitcity.com and type in "wireless router" to see some of the many types. TJ Spyke 23:13, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Here is a wireless G router (the faster type) at Comp USA for $1.99 after the $48 mail-in rebate.Jecowa 23:50, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Virtual Console

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I thought you didn't need internet connection to buy games from the VC, but my cousin got the Wii and he says you do. Clear this up for me, please.David the Phantom 21:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

You do. --PsyphicsΨΦ 21:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Broadband

Latest comment: 17 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

How do i know if my computer has broadband?

(ps if this helps, i have roadrunner)

pps: what's all this business about a "built-in 802.11b/g Wi-Fi"? what's that? David the Phantom 23:04, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean? You do pay for your internet access, right? So you should know if you have dial-up or broadband. Road Runner is boradband though. If a computer has built Wi-Fi, then you don't need to buy a wireless card for the computer (you still need a wireless router though). BTW, you might want to check a tech forum if you have more questions since they willbe able to help you more. TJ Spyke 23:12, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
If you have a phone line just for your internet, or if you can't use your phone while on the internet, then you do not have broadband. Broadband is DSL, Cable, or faster internet connections. 802.11b/g Wi-Fi means it has built in wireless internet connections. If you've ever been to Starbucks or similar coffee places, people can connect their laptops to the internet easily because their laptops can receive wireless signals, so can the Wii. You'll need a router in order for it to work in your house though, if you don't have one. Chris M. 05:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Backwards Compatiblity

Latest comment: 17 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Gentlemen,

I noticed on the editing page under the backwards compatibility section it notes "HARDWARE compatibility only. Do not list virtual console systems as "compatible", emulation is not the same thing as actual compatibility."

This is confusing. Wouldn't this mean that the Xbox 360 is not backwards compatible with the Xbox because of how "Backward compatibility is achieved through software emulation of the original Xbox?"

--Nakile 10:05, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I think backwards compatibility means compatible with the physical game discs. Because you cannot insert your Nintendo cartridges into your Wii, it is not compatible with the Nintendo cartridges. Jecowa 18:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
I'll see if I can make the warning clearer. Just64helpin 17:00, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Compatibility can be achieved in several ways. Read this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Backward_compatibility. Perhaps compatibility with regards to different aspects (GC discs, GC hardware, GBA software/hardware) should be mentioned in the article. To what extent an emulator can be a called a method of providing compatibility for a given platform I don't know. Neither forementioned page nor this one http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator, clearly gives the boundaries of the definition. Mausy5043 14:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wii/Archive_22&oldid=1089801008"