Talk:Wii U/Archive 5

Using "the" before Wii U
According to many reliable sources cited in the article – USA Today, CNN, and Bloomberg Businessweek just to list a few – references are made to the Wii and Wii U with the definite article "the". If this is incorrect grammar, please provide a source that backs the claim. General rules about the use of definite articles in the English language won't suffice, as there are always exceptions. Proper names and proper nouns can be preceded by a definite or indefinite article, more commonly when they are the name of an object or device. Take the iPhone 5, for example. You're not going to say, "I'm buying iPhone 5". You would correctly say, "I'm buying an iPhone 5. However, for the company, and investor may correctly say, "I'm going to buy Apple", because Apple in this case is both a proper name and a proper noun. The iPhone 5 is a product of that company, and therefore is less specific than the company itself, warranting the use of an article of speech. In the proper noun Wiki article, it illustrates a similar comparison with "Chevrolet" and "Corvette".

I'm sure we have more important things to discuss, but seeing that this change is happening in other related articles, it may be time to reach a consensus before it goes any further. Thoughts? --GoneIn60 (talk) 00:42, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Clarification: I support the use of "the" before Wii, Wii U, and other video game console names. At least one editor – – does not. --GoneIn60 (talk) 15:01, 12 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I was going to come here and say basically the same thing, assuming I remembered to. So thank you for saving me the trouble, now I can just agree! Anomie⚔ 02:19, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
 * "The Wii U" comes across as more natural. I can't say if it's technically grammatically correct, but the Wii U is a physical, tangible object, like "Banana" or "Cat", so "The Wii U is..." feels natural to say, just like "A cat is... ". --ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:57, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback so far. After combing through the article, I noticed there are a ton of grammatical errors. It doesn't seem like the omission of "the" should be a top priority at the moment. --GoneIn60 (talk) 23:28, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, you wouldn't say "Game XYZ was released for the Xbox, Playstation, and The Wii U. The "the" should stay in the lead, but not capitalized or bolded, as it is not part of the title.  Konveyor   Belt  23:39, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Technically, you only need to use "the" once in that phrase ("Game XYZ was released for the Xbox, Playstation, and Wii U"), since it covers all of the objects that follow, but I agree with the point you're trying to make that it needs to be used at least once. Good example. --GoneIn60 (talk) 15:01, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I also agree with KonveyorBelt. I should point out that Nintendo's own use can be inconsistent, and that at Talk:Wii it is explained that Nintendo favoured not using 'the' for Wii. However, we're not here to do Nintendo's marketing, so whichever sounds the best should be used. So I agree, 'the' can and should be used sometimes.  Dark Toon  Link  06:00, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * They are already definite; the article is not about a single Wii U, but a class of product known as Wii U. Proper nouns do not take definite article. Of course, it would be proper to say "I am buying a Wii U" because you are talking about a specific instance of Wii U. Please also see Talk:.NET_Framework. ViperSnake151   Talk  18:38, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Exactly, that was why I originally made the change, but I wasn't too sure if it was grammatically correct or not. It seems now we have the answer.-- Arkhandar ( Talk • Contribs ) 19:17, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * "Proper nouns do not take definite article"
 * This is most certainly incorrect. In general, proper nouns do not need articles, but there are many, many exceptions. This Yale University article lists some of those exceptions. I believe you are missing the distinction between a proper name and a proper noun. While proper names do not typically require the use of an article, proper nouns in some cases do, as demonstrated at that link. Also, reliable sources cited in the Wii U article (and other game console articles) overwhelmingly use the definite article "the" when referencing consoles. If you focus on the points made at the proper noun article, there are examples showing that a Company's "product class" is often preceded by an article:
 * Chevrolet is similarly a proper name referring to a specific company. But unlike Microsoft, it is also used in the role of a common noun to refer to products of the named company: "He drove a Chevrolet" (a particular vehicle); "The Chevrolets of the 1960s" (classes of vehicles). In these uses, Chevrolet does not function as a proper name.
 * Corvette (referring to a car produced by the company Chevrolet) is not a proper name: it can be pluralized (French and English Corvettes); and it can take a definite article or other determiner or modifier: "the Corvette", "la Corvette"; "my Corvette", "ma Corvette"; "another new Corvette", "une autre nouvelle Corvette". Similarly, Chevrolet Corvette is not a proper name: "We owned three Chevrolet Corvettes."
 * The discussion you referenced above does little to show consensus here, as it is only one editor's opinion versus two others. --GoneIn60 (talk) 19:24, 7 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Hello guys. I noticed a couple of things in your discussions:
 * The first and foremost rule about using "the" is the one that you learned in elementary schools: Use "the" to disambiguate a unique instance of a noun when its uniqueness is not obvious. So, ViperSnake151 is correct to say "Proper nouns do not take definite article" as generally correct; only, not 100% of times correct.
 * Hardware brand names are different from software brand names in terms of being definite. A piece of hardware, like a device, can be indefinite or plural. e.g. "there are many iPhones in the world, I don't have an iPhone, my friend's iPhone crashed when he first turned it on and so, he returned the iPhone back to store and received a replacement." It can also be definite, e.g. "iPhone is manufactured by Apple Inc." Reason? Metonymy. Metonymy alters noun roles. In my first example, the word "iPhone" – which is a brand name – is used to refer, not to a brand, but to a tangible device, as in "iPhone device". So everything that can happen to a "device" can happen to an "iPhone" too: Be definite, be indefinite, be plural. Same applies to GoneIn60's examples on Corvette and Chevrolet: Metonymy has altered the noun role.
 * Verifiability applies to article information, not grammar or style, which have other policies governing them. For grammar, see a good grammar book. Differences between grammatical schools are resolved as MOS:STABILITY has explained.
 * To summarize: When you are talking about a device, use articles (definite or indefinite). When you are talking about a brand name or all devices of that brand name in general, do not use article; the name is already definite.
 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 00:18, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Welcome Codename Lisa to the discussion! The first point you mentioned about what most of us learned in elementary school has already been acknowledged – proper nouns do not "generally" require a definite article. However, the problem we're facing here isn't so elementary, I'm afraid. There are thousands of examples, if not tens of thousands, where we see a proper noun and even a proper name being preceded by a definite article. This is well illustrated in article (grammar):
 * The definite article is sometimes also used with proper names, which are already specified by definition (there is just one of them). For example: the Amazon, the Hebrides. In these cases, the definite article can be considered superfluous. Its presence can be accounted on the assumption that they are shorthands of a larger phrases in which the name is a specifier, i.e. the river Amazon, the overture Hebrides. Some languages also use definite articles with personal names. For example, such use is standard in Portuguese: a Maria, literally: "the Maria". It also occurs colloquially in Spanish, German and other languages, and is sometimes heard in Italian. In Hungary it is considered to be Germanism.
 * How does this apply to Wii U? Simple. Wii U can be taken as the shorthand for the Wii U video game console, of which there is just one product line by that name, justifying the use of the definite article. Also realize that these products – Wii U, iPhone, PlayStation 4 – are models, not brands. Nintendo, Apple, and Sony are the brands. Perhaps that's where some of the confusion is setting in.
 * There is also one important fact that keeps getting glossed over. A vast majority of published sources are using the article "the" in reference to these products. It's not very convincing to say that hundreds of sources are just using bad grammar. --GoneIn60 (talk) 04:28, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * @GoneIn60: Wow! You did not read those exact parts of my message that addresses your concern! What's the odds of that? But I am afraid if you did that in good faith, you might just end up beating a dead horse.


 * As for this mysterious "vast majority of published sources": First, WP:WEASEL! Second, prove that by providing an example that uses definite article but not metonymy.


 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 09:45, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * There is no need to make this personal. I enjoy the discussion and the potential of gaining something from it, as both sides have some merit. I mistakenly glossed over your third point above, how ironic! Having read it more closely, I would agree that the WP:V guideline is focused on information, not grammar or style (we could all use a good grammar book from time to time, by the way!). However, this still doesn't tell me that it's Wikipedia's policy to ignore grammar and style in its sources. The idea of that sounds very strange to me, especially when there is a dispute over that very subject. Taking their grammar and style into consideration adds an objective point of view. Is that not what you want here? Should we just ignore the fact that a majority of the sources (all but a few) use the definite article?


 * WP:WEASEL doesn't apply here, by the way. The sources are listed in the article, so the viewpoint I've stated is quantifiable and accessible by anyone. Pick a few sources in the Wii U article, and open them to see for yourself.


 * And finally, I don't believe metonymy is a factor here. These sources are clearly referring to the Wii U product line. Unlike your iPhone example, Wii U hasn't become a term synonymous with a range of models. So you wouldn't hear someone use it in the same context. --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:14, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Wii U is also a line of games and accessories, not just the console. I think that pretty much justifies metonymy in this case.-- Arkhandar ( Talk • Contribs ) 20:57, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Well, since I don't have a Wii U, you guys know better than me. (Oh, look! I just said "a Wii U". Am I wrong?) Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 21:12, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * See? Disagreeing with someone in Wikipedia always has the risk of eliciting a "there is no need to make this personal" comment.


 * But yes, Wikipedia disregards the majority of writing practices in mainstream sources. (e.g. MOS:CAPS says headings must not be capitalized and all caps must be avoided if at all possible. Or, our main citation styles are CS1 and CS2; radically different than what you see out there.) WP:MOS says natural English grammar should be applied. Yes, there are more than one form of natural English grammar out there, often conflicting each other. For the conflict, we adhere to MOS:STABILITY. (British English has a lot more irregular "the" than American English.)


 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 21:12, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * True, there is a line of Wii U accessories. The article rarely refers to them, however. In most cases, the subject is the Wii U video game console, which is non-metonymic.


 * Consider that comment stricken from the record! --GoneIn60 (talk) 22:04, 8 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks a bunch. Love you. On the whole, I think you and I agree a great deal and our disagreement is minor: You mostly objected my rationale for using the definite article, rather than the actual act of using. So, I hope you'll excuse me for now. If you needed me for something, you know where to find me.


 * Best regards,
 * Codename Lisa (talk) 23:52, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 February 2014
i see a small error that i would like to edit, get back to me at aidanhoullahan@gmail.com

Aidan888 (talk) 23:41, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
 * You can list your request here, on the talk page. Sergecross73   msg me   00:03, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone will add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:59, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

The white Background is not necessary
File:Wii U Console and Gamepad.png was specifically created for the Wii U articles on Wikipedia. It is used in every other article that needs a Wii U image. We specifically removed the background because it looks better that way. We do that to any image that has a single color background, unless the background is actually a key part of the image. Check out every other console, if you don't believe me.

No other article has a special JPEG made that has a white background. There just is no practice throughout Wikipedia of converting transparent PNGs to non-transparent JPEGs. We always move the other direction: that's why we have an image cleanup category specifically for removing backgrounds.

Images with white backgrounds are supposed to have a border. The console infobox is not designed to have a border. The current uploader already had to manipulate the syntax of the infobox in order to display one. This is a pretty good indication that this sort of behavior is not intended.

We already had a picture of the Wii U that had a background. We intentionally removed it because we don't like the background. Why would we do that if we wanted an image with a background?

All the evidence points to the fact that we don't want a white background in this image. I am going to put it back the way it is on every other Wii U article. Please do not revert me without first offering a compelling reason why a white background is needed.

— trlkly 23:29, 9 March 2014 (UTC)


 * I think its because there's some Wikipedia policy that says that photographs should be in .jpg format, hence the white background.-- Arkhandar ( Talk • Contribs ) 20:25, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

not 8th gen
wii u is not 8th gen it is 7th gen please change 2601:7:5380:664:E4A6:3A64:7F28:48B8 (talk) 04:18, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
 * ❌ Reliable sources say otherwise. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 04:28, 9 April 2014 (UTC)


 * Actually the Wii U is 8 Gen. But performance wise it pretty close to what the 7 Gen consoles (no including the original Wii in that) has going


 * Here is a list of the main systems we know today (Nintendo, Playstation and Xbox) according to generation


 * 5 Gen – Nintendo 64 and Playstation (the original PS1)
 * 6 Gen – Nintendo GameCube, Playstation 2 and Xbox (the original Xbox)
 * 7 Gen – Nintendo Wii, Playstation 3 and Xbox 360
 * 8 Gen – Nintendo Wii U, Playstation 4 and Xbox 1


 * So yeah unfortunately ever since the Wii came out Nintendo's systems seemed to be peforming equally to the previous generations consoles, so it shouldn't be a major shock that their 8 Gen console is performing at a 7 Gen level. Hope that clears things up :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.168.3.6 (talk) 14:12, 28 April 2014 (UTC)


 * The Reception section somewhat addresses this. Also it's worth mentioning that the term "generation" refers to a period of time. The industry refers to a console based on the time period it existed in and to whom its main competitors are. Very little if any of the designation has to do with performance. --GoneIn60 (talk) 19:24, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, part of the reason these dumb generation arguments always occur is because no one, Wikipedia or otherwise, can quite agree on how to define them exactly. You're right though, the sourced explanation currently in the Reception section sums it up better than either IP's WP:OR-based accounts, so I don't believe any change is warranted.  Sergecross73   msg me   23:05, 30 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The definition of generation is not vague, it is very clear, as noted, it is defined by time (not power). When in time a console emerges is an objective fact. Consoles also have a tendency of coming out around the same time. Consoles that come out roughly contemporaneously constitute an objective generation. Wii U/PlayStation 4/Xbox One form an objective generation. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 18:57, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm glad it's so black and white to you, but I guarantee that if you started a discussion at the Wikiproject, you wouldn't get a consensus for a clear, succinct definition. Arguments have persisted for years without resolution. Sergecross73   msg me   21:35, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

according to shops in norway only 1 wii u gamepad can be connected at once
if it is true then the article needs to be corrected as it currently states that 2 wii u gamepads can be connected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.60.156 (talk) 20:16, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * ❌ Nintendo themselves have declared that the console can support up to 2 Wii U GamePads, and this is supported by reliable sources. No existing software makes use of the feature, however. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:28, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * the shops likely have reliable sources as well and they say that the system only supports 1 gamepad.(the operating system of the wii u.)
 * As Thomas says, right now, it's only able to support one, but it was built to be able to support 2 in a future system update. Sergecross73   msg me  12:38, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * 'norwegian game shops' are not reliable sources. What they say does not override what Nintendo says. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 13:31, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * i said have reliable sources not are reliable sources but until support for 2 wii u gamepads is added i suggest that the article shows that one can be used.84.213.34.70 (talk) 13:01, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Honestly, it should probably be reworded to explain both sides of this. I feel like this isn't the first time we've had this argument. But should be written by reliable sources, not second hand observations from retail shops. Sources like this cover it pretty well: http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/06/18/miyamoto-on-the-potential-for-dual-gamepad-wii-u-games Sergecross73   msg me  12:53, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Refinement of the history section
So I'm being singled out as a vandal by a specific user just because of how I've been going about my bold edits, but apparently I'm required to discuss these things now. So here's my beef:

The development section is too long. It needs to be condensed and re-organized to focus less on rumor. We're past that, some of it is not as relevant anymore and can be summarized. Some of it probably shouldn't have been there in the first place. I'd prefer more of a focus on Nintendo's side of the development.

The release section needs an overhaul. Personally, I'd split out a List of Wii U retail configurations (similar to List of Nintendo 3DS colors and styles) from that and make it use a table instead. It would be more concise, and let us handle regional variations better.

So, thoughts? I want this to be a GA at some point, so we've got to clean things up. ViperSnake151  Talk  01:08, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
 * That release split sounds sensible. Before this goes anywhere near a GA though, you need to go through each and every ref, because I saw at least one in a place where it didn't verify anything. Some of the development section does need to go, but I don't know how much. Luke no 94  (tell Luke off here) 12:55, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

The Wii U's successor
Does anyone think we should label Codename NX as the Wii U's successor? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C56B:29B0:C474:6E3F:D43F:B553 (talk) 16:38, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * We don't know if NX is a home console or a handheld, so it's too soon to label it as Wii U's successor. --ThomasO1989 (talk) 17:07, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, exactly what Thomas said. Sergecross73   msg me  17:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Wii U and Gamecube Games
Should it be mentioned on the article somewhere that through homebrew usage on the consoles "Wii Mode" ( known as VWii to the community ) that Gamecube games can be played at full HD? It's very possible and there are videos on Youtube. So therefore, the backwards compatibility for the console goes all the way to the Gamecube natively, technically. Even though the Wii U can't accept Gamecube Discs, it's fully able to play them. -Jetfire77 (talk) 17:32, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
 * No, I mean, unless mainstream websites like IGN or GameSpot are doing big articles on it or something, we don't usually cover all of the "unofficial" or "hacked" attributes of systems on Wikipedia. Sergecross73   msg me  17:51, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

NX might not be a console
What does it mean that NX might not be an actual console?? Georgia guy (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * It means we don't know exactly what NX is. It could be a new console, or it could be a codename for the next console, or it could be a codename for the development process that will lead them to something that isn't a console. We also don't know what its position in the Nintendo console heirarchy could be. Better to just leave this blank for now. -- McDoob  AU93  20:29, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 * What's the difference between the first 2 "It could be"s in what you said?? If it's just a codename, then it's an actual console whose official name is not known yet. Georgia guy (talk) 20:44, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Codename means it may well change. Here's one more reason why it shouldn't be there ... do we know 100.0000000% that NX, in whatever form it may take, will actually be released? If we cannot say "yes" with that level of certainty, then how can the console have a successor if its successor does not exist? -- McDoob  AU93  20:52, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
 * McDoob is correct. All that we know is that it's "hardware". We know nothing else, including whether or not its intended as a "successor" to the Wii U. Literally nothing is known. Until more is known, it shouldn't be in the successor field. Sergecross73   msg me  13:35, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * http://uk.ign.com/articles/2015/06/17/e3-2015-next-proper-metroid-prime-game-not-likely-until-nintendos-next-console
 * Surely it's safe to call the NX the Wii U's successor now? 86.25.135.140 (talk) 03:42, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * In my mind, a successor doesn't exist until it's been released. A lot can happen between now and when that time comes: delays, cancellations, new direction, etc. Also, per this source, the official stance is that the NX won't be a "simple replacement" for the Wii U. What does that mean? It's still too vague in my opinion. --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:18, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Agreed. We still can't even define what exactly it is, it's hardly a "successor" at this point. Sergecross73   msg me  18:20, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 April 2015
Nintendo 64 and Nintendo DS Virtual Console games are made available now.

Homerb123 (talk) 22:26, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. -- El Hef  ( Meep? ) 01:43, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * http://www.polygon.com/2015/4/1/8328063/nintendo-ds-64-wii-u-virtual-console
 * http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/04/01/nintendo-64-and-ds-games-coming-to-wii-u-virtual-console
 * I would request an edit myself, but I don't really know how to format citations Letkhfan (talk) 00:33, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Removal of software info
Articles consisting solely of details surrounding a game console's operating system, software, and changelog have been declared WP:GAMECRUFT per Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games/Archive_99, and have been deleted and redirected by. ViperSnake151  Talk  15:35, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Wii U's Long History
I know that the history section for Nintendo's Wii U is quite long, but, despite that, I have a hard time, thinking that all of the section could ever stand on its own. What are your opinions? Surely, its first two subsections are short enough to rely upon the main article, but I am not sure about the other two sections. Have ye still your old opinions? Gamingforfun365 (talk) 08:12, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not exactly sure what it is you're asking...what exactly are you proposing to do? Sergecross73   msg me  18:21, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * What I am trying to do is to let you all share your own opinions as to whether it is too long in one article. I vote that it is short enough to stay in one article and shall not be split up into two articles. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 00:31, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree...but if no ones actually advocating for a split, this seems sorta pointless. Sergecross73   msg me  00:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I am going to remove it because no one is complaining about it. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 23:38, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 * It just unnecessarily makes this article extra longer. Gamingforfun365 (talk) 23:39, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I do agree. I'd rather trim down a lot of the rumor stuff that isn't very relevant now. ViperSnake151   Talk  03:07, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with trimming as well. The editor who wrote a lot of the page, while good, often got carried away with bloating things a bit too far. Especially now, it could use a trim... Sergecross73   msg me  12:26, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Please help
I can't figure out how to do the refs. ShyGuy8 talk 21:10, 29 October 2015 (UTC) ShyGuy8  talk 21:10, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 November 2015
Australia not Australasia

Batty213 (talk) 01:34, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your recommendation. Australasia is a real term in this case, and refers to a region of Oceania. I believe it's used correctly in the article. If you believe it's used incorrectly, please explain. Thanks! ~ Super  Hamster  Talk Contribs 02:37, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

Product Family?
This was discussed in January of last year, why does the infobox still list Wii U as belonging to the "Wii"-product family? Wii is not a product family, the Wii is a console. If one looks at the product family fields in the PS4 and Xbox One articles, they lead back to articles about the PlayStation and Xbox brand pages. No such article exists for the supposed "Wii"-line, because the Wii is it's own separate piece of hardware.

Could editors please exercise some consistensy in this matter? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.175.155.10 (talk) 13:25, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Removed it. Archive 4 contains the last discussion which I believe was also leaning to removing it, just no one did it. -- ferret (talk) 13:32, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

The article is hard to read and tedious
This article is hard to read to find information about the Wii U because it contains a lot of very detailed information. Possibly it would make sense to move all the rather tedious details into a new section or their own article, and try to just make an article containing the basic information. NotYourFathersOldsmobile (talk) 04:09, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, it probably could use some trimming. The editor who expanded it a ways back, while a good editor, had a tendency to bloat articles a little too much with tangential details. You'll have to be more specific if you want others to do it (for example, I have no idea how you'd want to split this article exactly), but you're free to trim away at things yourself too.  Sergecross73   msg me  05:23, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Sidebar should be Units Sold, not Units Shipped.
The sidebar states Units shipped for the Wii U are 10.73 million, but this figure is supposed to be Units Sold, as can be seen under the sales section of the article.

64.179.64.5 (talk) 23:16, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes check.svg Done This was a leftover when only units shipped was reported. The current official source clearly states "units sold" -- ferret (talk) 23:47, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Wii U. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130926032226/http://nintendowiiu.com/wii-u-price-and-release-date-just-announced/ to http://nintendowiiu.com/wii-u-price-and-release-date-just-announced/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 00:48, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Checked. -- ferret (talk) 01:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 February 2016
Porterisaboss5.0 (talk) 00:22, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. -- ferret (talk) 01:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on Wii U. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.next-gen.biz/news/nintendo-no-%C3%ACsignificant-reason%C3%AE-make-wii-hd
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.next-gen.biz/news/e32010-wii-successor-%C3%ACprobably%C3%AE-3d-iwata
 * Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2011/06/04/nikkei_wii_controller_details/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 22:18, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Wee Ew?
What is the Wee Ew text in the parenthesis next to the phonetic spelling and what purpose does it serve? --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 12:05, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * If you click on the exact part you're asking about, it takes you to a page that explains it... Sergecross73   msg me  12:25, 2 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Clicking it indeed tells me what the Pronunciation respelling is but it doesn't answer the question of why it's in the article. I should also like to ask is the phonetic spelling really necessary either? --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 19:25, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Appreciate that you find it absurd, but considering the confusion on how to pronounce it actually led to Nintendo making videos on the subject, it's perfectly suitable to be included. It certainly doesn't hurt anything. -- ferret (talk) 20:52, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Its an aid to help people understand how its pronounced. I don't know Wikipedia's exact standards on when to include it, but as Ferret mentions above, it strikes me as appropriate here considering the disconnect between the spelling and pronunciation of something like the "Wii U". (Using "ii" to make an "ee" noise isn't a conventional thing in the English language, nor is it particularly common for there to be names with a "U" by itself like this. Also keep in mind that, yes, as a gamer, sure, this is common sense how to write/say "Wii U", but we don't write just for gamers, we also write for general audiences. That includes that 80 year old grandfather who doesn't know the first thing about technology, or that 8 year old little sister, who isn't into the gaming world yet.) Sergecross73   msg me  20:59, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

You can't be serious. Whether Nintendo has any concerns about the pronunciation of the system's name is entirely irrelevant, people will pronounce the system name as they damn well please. While I appreciate that the pronunciation respelling is for English speakers who don't understand IPA, it appears to be incorrect by my understanding of the English language, as / ju: / in IPA denotes "yuu" as in the word "you" and not "ew" or / iu /. However, the pronunciations of other systems names don't abide to their written forms as well. I would at least expect some specific justification for why the Wii and Wii U are getting singled out in this regard. --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 21:12, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * MOS:IPA is the relevant manual of style guideline. If the IPA or respelling is incorrect, then it should be fixed, not removed. The fact that other consoles are missing it is not justification for removing it here, it simply indicates no one has taken the time or felt a need. Editors here have expressed that there is a need. -- ferret (talk) 21:27, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd recommend searching the talk page archives at Wii, as it has been discussed heavily there. -- ferret (talk) 21:28, 2 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Had a closer look at the respelling guide and I retract my statement about the spelling being incorrect (I still don't think it makes sense, but according to the chart it's correct). But I would still want to know why the Wii and Wii U are getting cherry picked to have transcriptions while other consoles with longer and far more confusing names (Xbox One, Playstation 4, TurboGrafx-16, Neo-Geo Pocket Colour) don't have them? --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 21:34, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I dislike this answer, but it basically comes down to: Because someone took the time. Someone had the interest and did it. A better question might be "Why hasn't someone added IPA to these other consoles?", and it's unfortunately the similar answer: Because no one took the time. Wii and Wii U are in compliance with the manual of style. The other articles are potentially out of compliance. Unfortunately, I can't find a specific guideline that says "Include IPA when...", everything (MOS:IPA, Help:IPA) seems to assume that as an encyclopedia, IPA would be included everywhere. -- ferret (talk) 21:40, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

In the interest of all things being fair, let's sneak in IPA on the other 8th Gen. console articles and see if anyone notices. --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 21:44, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * It'll certainly be noticed, but I can't predict if anyone will decide to revert or not. In the end, local consensus can determine if something should be included on a particular article or not. I'd recommend that if you're reverted, discuss it at that article's talk page. Or if you feel there's a broader topic that needs addressed, head to the talk page for the Video Game project. -- ferret (talk) 21:54, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes. I did notice. But Wikipedia isn't a dictionary. These are just corruptions of common words, and MOS:LEAD states that "If the name of the article has a pronunciation that's not apparent from its spelling, include its pronunciation in parentheses after the first occurrence of the name."  ViperSnake151   Talk  00:06, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for finding that. I checked a bunch of pages and didn't think of looking at MOS:LEAD. I still feel Wii and Wii U qualify though. -- ferret (talk) 00:10, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * "In the interest of all things being fair"? What in the world is that supposed to mean? What does fairness have to do with anything? Is this pronunciation being listed supposed to be some great burden on the article subject or something? I don't understand why you're making such a big deal out of this... Sergecross73   msg me  02:41, 3 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Fine, consistensy then if "fair" is so abhorrent to you. My point is that you can't place a (frankly) unnecessary pronunciation guide in two console articles and just leave it out from everywhere else, especially if no actual guidelines demands it. There are some inconsistencies that can't be helped (Microsoft not releasing sales figures for Xbox One) and some that can and this is clearly a case of the latter. Btw, I added the IPA to both other 8th Generation Console articles and it was swiftly removed in both cases. --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 06:52, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * What do you mean we "can't" place IPA in two console articles? We very well can. There's no policy or guideline against it. There's no policy that declares that console articles must be 100% consistent with each other. There's actually many cases where the MOS says not to change things just to create consistency between articles. (WP:CITEVAR, WP:ENGVAR, dates, etc, others). The fact of the matter is that the Wii article, being a non-English Proper Noun, fits the bill for including IPA according to MOS:LEAD. -- ferret (talk) 12:02, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
 * We don't require absolute consistency between articles. And the person who reverted your additions at the other article's rationale is actually consistent with ours - its used when necessary. For example, at PlayStation 4, the rationale was "pronunciation is apparent by spelling". There's no unconventional pronunciation/spelling in "PlayStation 4" - its exactly how one would expect it would be. Not the case with "Wii/we" pronunciation and spelling. Additionally, since your ultimate intention is actually to remove this from the Wii U page, not add it to others, we don't appreciate it when people make edits just to try to prove a point. Sergecross73   msg me  12:55, 3 May 2016 (UTC)


 * It's a point worth proving, the pronunciation guide is absurd and your assertions about spelling-pronunciation correspondence are rather amusing from the point of view of someone who is not a native speaker. But whatever, there apparently is no clear-cut solution to this problem. I even had a look at how other language Wikipedias handle this: some have IPA spelling for Wii U, some don't. It's still absurd, it looks like baby talk and it's insulting the intelligence of any reader with an above 1st grader's understanding of the English language. But okay, I'll consent that if these kinds of decisions can be made for single articles, then I have no argument here to turn it around. --CaptainNtheGameMaster (talk) 15:42, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Improvement needed
The section "Launch titles" needs some improvement. The text states "The Wii U was launched with 23 games in North America", while the table "List of Wii U launch titles by region released" lists 24 games for NA. -Poskim (talk) 11:04, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 October 2016
I suggest that 'The Wii U is backward compatible with most games released for the Wii' is changed for 'The Wii U is backward compatible with all the games released for the Wii'.

If the Wii U is not backward compatible with all the Wii games then where is the source/reason for such a statement?

Maneauleau (talk) 19:41, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ I implemented this, as I'm not aware of any exceptions, and it says this elsewhere in the article too. Sergecross73   msg me  19:47, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2016
Mario Kart 8 sold more than 8 Million on wiiu WiiU (talk) 12:10, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 12:59, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Eurogamer discontinuation article
Supposedly a spokesman for Nintendo has denied the claims that they are halting production. 66.38.14.146 (talk) 15:15, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and removed the EG statement, then; doesn't make sense to include officially denied rumors. --M ASEM (t) 15:40, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Wii U ending production
According to Nintendo's own website, they will be ending production of the Wii U in Japan (no news on other countries yet) soon. See here (Google's translation of the Japanese site) and here (Kotaku's translation).  — Gestrid  ( talk ) 19:19, 10 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Already covered in the article. -- McDoob  AU93  19:35, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Developers section
Part of the Wii U's saga was developers deciding whether to develop/port for it. A "Developers" section should be a good place to develop that coverage. czar 05:20, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

The Switch is successor to Wii U. Why it isn't?
It's technically Nintendo's next home console after the Wii U. Why does it not count as successor? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.208.80.166 (talk) 18:52, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Because currently, Nintendo is on record as saying it's not a successor, to either the Wii U or 3DS. We're still waiting for it to be released and to see what the reliable secondary sources ultimately say. See Talk:Nintendo Switch for related discussions. -- ferret (talk) 18:54, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, see this source in particular. Sergecross73   msg me  18:56, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
 * The Switch is the successor to the Wii U. The Production for the Wii U ended in Japan and no more consoles will be shipped to the US.  The President of Nintendo of America recently spoke of the Wii U in past tense. 76.1.121.138 (talk) 15:59, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Again, Nintendo has specifically stated they do not consider the Switch a successor to the Wii U. It is their next console, but I believe they are trying to avoid the implication that the Switch should be taken as an improved version of the Wii U that "successor" would imply. --M ASEM (t) 16:06, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * See the source I listed above in my last comment. On Wikipedia, we need to stick to what sources directly say, and we've got a third party source directly citing Nintendo stating its not a successor. That trumps any of your interpretations of what tense Nintendo execs are using to formulate whether or not it would be a successor. Sergecross73   msg me  16:36, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
 * How about a quote from Reggie Fils-Aime stating that there are no more first party games being developed for the Wii U after Zelda: Breath of the Wild. http://www.polygon.com/2017/1/19/14313914/legend-of-zelda-breath-of-the-wild-last-nintendo-game-for-wii-u 76.1.121.138 (talk) 20:20, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * That doesn't say anything that the Switch is a successor to the Wii U. It is Nintendo's next home console unit, but it is not specifically the successor to the Wii U. --M ASEM (t) 20:23, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * He also said the Wii U was a necessary step in order to get to Nintendo Switch. The only thing we're missing now is Nintendo literally saying "This is the successor to the Wii U."  If they don't say it, the media will.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.1.121.138 (talk) 20:37, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * And as pointed out, Nintendo has said that the Switch is not a successor to the Wii U, so regardless of what other sources might say, we have that. --M ASEM (t) 20:46, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I guess it doesn't matter. It'll be up there eventually. 76.1.121.138 (talk) 21:07, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Wii U discontinued in Japan on January 31, 2017
http://www.gonintendo.com/stories/272998-nintendo-official-ends-wii-u-production-for-japan JP: January 31, 2017
 * discontinued =

— Preceding unsigned comment added by SuperMarioMuseum (talk • contribs) 15:18, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ It was also discontinued worldwide, according to NoA.  —   Gestrid  ( talk ) 00:56, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

"Wii outliving the Wii U"
While "with the original Wii having outlived the Wii U." is technically true if you take that the Wii Mini (which for all purposes seems it is still in production in some areas), I believe that this statement is rather POV-ish in nature as it reads to mock the Wii U. I would argue that most people would call "original Wii" being the model that is not the Wii Mini, the full-featured unit, which has been fully discontinued. So no, the original Wii did not outlive the Wii U here, --M ASEM (t) 03:35, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Fully agreed. I don't oppose some mention of Wii Mini being still active to some capacity somewhere in the article, (if absolutely necessary by compromise) but the proposed wording was poorly done. Sergecross73   msg me  03:46, 6 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd also add the logic to keep (because of the Wii Mini), means that we should consider the NES still in production (due to the NES Classic). Logically this doesn't make sense. A second point is that we have plenty of sources that compare the Wii U as unsuccessful to the Wii (meaning our mentioning of it is very valid), but I've never seen anyone try to state the Wii (even the Wii Mini) outlived the Wii U, which is the POV issue I described. --M ASEM (t) 03:51, 6 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 February 2017
NEED TO ADD 104.235.39.186 (talk) 10:22, 26 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Based off your previous edit to the talk page, I'm guessing you're requesting that the Nintendo Switch be named the successor to the Wii U. Please read the section above to see why that hasn't happened yet.  Michael Ivan  10:59, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting comment.svg Note: Marked as answered. DRAGON BOOSTER   ★  14:20, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2017
Wii U succeeded by the Nintendo Switch console as nintendo stoped making wii u 198.52.13.15 (talk) 10:00, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Per the numerous above discussions and requests. -- ferret (talk) 11:54, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

I found a source that says that the Wii U succeeded by the Nintendo Switch console
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-38689991 — Preceding unsigned comment added by EquestriaGirlsFan2003 (talk • contribs) 04:56, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * The relevant quote, I believe, is "The Wii U struggled to match the success of the original Wii device. It will be succeeded by the Nintendo Switch console in March." Just posting that here, not commenting on whether or not to include it or not just yet.  —   Gestrid  ( talk ) 05:00, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Does its means that the Wii U succeeded by the Nintendo Switch and put Nintendo Switch as successor to the Wii U? — Preceding unsigned comment added by EquestriaGirlsFan2003 (talk • contribs) 05:04, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Like I said, I'm not gonna comment on whether or not we should include it just yet. We need a WP:CONSENSUS first, as this discussion has gone back and forth for at least a few months now.  I've gone ahead and notified people over at Talk:Nintendo Switch about your post here.  —   Gestrid  ( talk ) 05:06, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a very big claim to make and while that is a reliable source, we should wait for more sources to make the same claim. For a small piece of information, one source may be enough, but I think in this case, we need to wait longer. My expectation is that Nintendo will continue with its statement that the Nintendo Switch is a different product concept and doesn't follow the same lineage of the GameCube-Wii-Wii U in terms of succession. If reliable sources generally begin to follow with Nintendo's narrative, that's what we should be going with.  Michael Ivan  07:27, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, its a good source in general, but its still too soon to make a call on this. It'll be much clearer once hardware reviews start coming out in a month... Sergecross73   msg me  14:39, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * A thing to keep in mind is that when you look at all what Nintendo has said about the Switch and the Wii U, they seem really intent on making it clear Switch is a brand new console from the ground up, and have no one associate as a successor to the Wii U (Successor here being that it is a revision of the Wii U hardware, not just "next in line"). --M ASEM (t) 14:41, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Referring to the Nintendo Switch as Nintendo's first hybrid video game console, rather than their next home console or handheld console, is probably the best solution to this. It falls in line with current information perfectly, and could be a good solution to this dispute.  Michael Ivan  04:57, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Just an FYI that instead of continuing the discussion here, I have started a new thread at Talk:Nintendo Switch. --GoneIn60 (talk) 11:40, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

ALevy95 review
Referring to the Impact of Nintendo Switch section, while using the terms "NX" and "Nintendo switch" interchangeably is okay, you might consider making sure that readers know they mean the same thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ALevy95 (talk • contribs) 04:03, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Joncraib's edits were reverted, as there's little relevancy to keep sales history about the Switch, released post Wii U discontinuation and therefore not impacting the Wii U, in this article. -- ferret (talk) 13:00, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Interesting since it deals with revenue
This article from Nintendo talks directly about the Wii U's revenue success. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2013-01-11-nintendo-hails-wii-u-sales-success-in-the-us — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CFD3:2EE0:2915:E8BF:7084:D453 (talk) 06:43, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Wii U. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://e3.nintendo.com/iwataasks/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://e3.nintendo.com/iwataasks/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://e3.nintendo.com/iwataasks/
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://e3.nintendo.com/iwataasks/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110713030027/http://www.industrygamers.com/news/miyamoto-on-hd-graphics-nintendos-games-will-move-along-with-progression-of-technology/ to http://www.industrygamers.com/news/miyamoto-on-hd-graphics-nintendos-games-will-move-along-with-progression-of-technology
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/library/historical_data/pdf/consolidated_sales_e1212.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/library/historical_data/pdf/consolidated_sales_e1306.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/library/historical_data/pdf/consolidated_sales_e1312.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/library/historical_data/pdf/consolidated_sales_e1506.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131004232118/http://www.news10.net/entertainment/gameguys/article/224725/99/Wii-U-sales-surpass-Wiis-through-first-six-weeks/ to http://www.news10.net/entertainment/gameguys/article/224725/99/Wii-U-sales-surpass-Wiis-through-first-six-weeks/
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20141128015902/http://www.computerandvideogames.com/481700/smash-bros-becomes-fastest-selling-wii-u-game-in-the-us to http://www.computerandvideogames.com/481700/smash-bros-becomes-fastest-selling-wii-u-game-in-the-us/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:02, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Name affected sales
Another reason should be added as to why the Wii U failed. The name played a factor but the admin removed my edit. Whitebro (talk) 02:03, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * You need a source for this. --M asem (t) 02:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * And better writing. “And the name was abysmal” is terrible writing, lacking in detail, context, and flow. I would have removed it too. Sergecross73   msg me  02:14, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

The source was already in the article: “ [15] Kuchera, Ben (August 5, 2014). ‘The Wii U name is still hurting Nintendo’. Polygon.” Whitebro (talk) 18:10, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, while that's in that source, and to the word "abysmal", I think that simplifies the point in the article too much. It was how Nintendo marketed the system as it attached to the name, failing to really do anything with it in its marketing. That's why its more a poor marketing factor than a bad name. --M asem (t) 18:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Or more specifically, I wouldn't simplify it down that simply in the lede. In the body there's likely more room to explain that because the name suggested it wasn't a second version of the Wii, Nintendo's marketing didn't help...--M asem (t) 18:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Sourcing aside, you must see the issues with the way you’re wording your addition, right? Are you really not seeing the issues with the lack of context or attribution to your addition? Sergecross73   msg me  18:24, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

"Nwiiu" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Nwiiu. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. TheAwesome Hwyh  01:58, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 June 2020
Please May You Let Me Edit The Page. Nathan Mohammed (talk) 14:47, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Hi Nathan! You will be able to edit this page when your account is four days old and you have made ten edits. In the meantime, you can request for specific edits to be made to this page using the format "change X to Y." aboideausapere aude 14:52, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank You Aboideau. Nathan Mohammed (talk) 14:57, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Home video game console/video game console/hybrid
Hi all

I corrected the article: not really a home console, as it is a handheld as well, so is either a hybrid, or just a video game console

it was reverted: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wii_U&type=revision&diff=1013130023&oldid=1009721866 It is a home console. There is no "Handheld" aspect to it as the gamepad had to be used with the base unit]

So I re-edited it to correct it again: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wii_U&type=revision&diff=1013132422&oldid=1013131037 Please see Home video game console and note that the very definition of a handheld is that it has a built in screen. I am NOT saying that, I am saying it is a hybrid"]

Which was, once again, reverted Wii U doesn't have a built in screen on the base unit

That "on the base unit" is NOT a valid point, it has one on the handheld part.

That is just silly - No one ever said "the built-in screen must be built into the base unit". A handheld device is one you hold in your hands, and that "has a built-in screen" ... the "base unit" is the "console", which plugs into the TV or monitor. Similarly, the Switch and the PSP have a built in screen, though the Switch screen is built into itself, it could also be regarded as a hybrid.

I realise it might be hard, but the issue is that the Wii U does indeed have a built in screen, into the handheld part of it. It also has a "base unit", as you call it, which for Wikipedia terms is being called "the console". So, it is NOT a home video game console, because it has a built-in screen, and it is NOT a handheld, because it has a console. It is, therefore, a hybrid.

The problem is "used as" and "is a". The Switch AND the Wii U can both be used as a handheld, and both be used as a home video game console. Only one of them is a portable though, unless you have a battery pack for the U. The defintion that matters is the "plugged into a TV" or similar device.

To get around the issue, I simply want to remove the "home" from "home video game console". It's either that, or we need to change all the definitions, on 4 pages:

Home video game console

Video game console

Handheld game console

Hybrid video game console

I really don't care which, and would favour a revamp of all those pages to bring them up to date, instead of using 80s definitions!

I'm going to correct it again.

Bear in mind the "home video game console" article currently reads "This differs from a handheld game console which will have a built-in screen, controller buttons/features, and a power supply like a battery or battery pack." Chaosdruid (talk) 03:22, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You simply cannot carry around the Wii U without the central unit, which has to be plugged into a wall sock. It's not portable, a primary requirement for a handheld system. There's nothing hybrid about the Wii U. --M asem (t) 07:10, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Seconded. It's generally and most commonly been referred to as a home console. This feels like a WP:RGW situation or something. Regardless, Chaos, you do not re-add further. Per WP:CONSENSUS and WP:NOCONSENSUS, you are not to re-add contented info until you have a consensus. You don't have one. Wait until if/when you do or you'll be blocked from editing. Sergecross73   msg me  12:58, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the threats lol. All we had to do was discuss, and give an opinion.


 * There was no discussion, and no consensus. And the discussion was just summaries on reverts.
 * Once consensus is found, editing stops. No need for silly threats.


 * And no. There is still work for you all to do, because that Home Video Game Console article says nothing about portable.


 * Change them please. It is confusing for people to have different definitions that are blatantly wrong or outdated. Chaosdruid (talk) 13:57, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Because it is you who wants to make a change, the burden is on you to get a consensus in your favor to support the change, not Masem, who was reinstating the status quo. Do not make the edit again until you have a consensus in your favor. I'm saying this because the page history shows you've reverted many times already, and your initial comment on the talk page threatened to keep going. Sergecross73   msg me  14:03, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Joncraib. Peer reviewers: ALevy95.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Notice of Spoken Wikipedia
Hello. I am going to be making an audio version of this article. PerryPerryD Talk To Me 02:59, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Did the Wii U Discontinue in November 10, 2016 in NA?
the article Kotaku put about the Wii U back in November 10, 2016 saying that Wii U Production ending in Japan BUT in a edit in 5:09pm it said that Nintendo of America stated saying ''“We can confirm that as of today, all Wii U hardware that will be made available in the North American market for this fiscal year has already been shipped to our retail partners. We encourage anyone who wants Wii U to communicate with their preferred retail outlet to monitor availability.”'' which in terms of the fiscal year             (April 1, 2016 - March 31, 2017) and since didn't told anything about it. so did it Discontinue that date because although I am saying this I'm Not sure if I'm correct or not. Himyfriends123 (talk) 22:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)


 * We don't know for sure if that was the last for NA shipments, but we do know that Nintendo definitely said no more Wii U on Jan 31 2017, so we use that date. M asem  (t) 00:34, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * what makes you say that we don't know for sure if those were the last NA Shipments or not, just saying :P Himyfriends123 (talk) 13:35, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Sources back up what Masem said - https://www.gamespot.com/amp-articles/wii-u-production-ends-worldwide/1100-6447419/ - and on Wikipedia, we go by what can be verified. Sergecross73   msg me  13:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)