Talk:Virtual Console

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Virtual Console article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find video game sources: "Virtual Console" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

Archives: 1, 2, 3: 12 months

Video games: Nintendo Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Nintendo task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

GrayStillPlays (4 participants)
Black Widow Games (2 participants)
FarSight Studios (4 participants)
COWCAT Games (1 participant)
Digital Eel (2 participants)
Doublesix (3 participants)
Blueside (2 participants)
BattleGoat Studios (2 participants)
Aggro Crab (3 participants)
Keith (gamer) (1 participant)
Five Nights at Freddy's: Help Wanted 2 (2 participants)
Dan Bull (2 participants)
Freebird Games (4 participants)
Airlines Manager 2 (4 participants; relisted)
Fishstick (Fortnite) (12 participants; relisted)
Lilly Contino (24 participants; relisted)
Gustavinho em o Enigma da Esfinge (5 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Criticism

Should this field be added to? I have noticed more and more commentary on Nintendo not updating this feature for weeks. Let alone Nintendo not adding games requested by fans: earthbound, smw2. I am not sure how much criticism references are needed, for it not to be basic complaining. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.255.145.117 (talk) 09:01, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 20 February 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: No move. We have clear consensus against the proposed move. Cúchullain ^t/c 21:23, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual Console → Nintendo Virtual ConsoleNintendo Virtual Console – This Article should be move instead of cut and paste. Christiancardenas732 (talk) 01:48, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Nintendo is not part of the name not am I aware anyone calling it that. it's the same reasons the Wii and Wii U articles are not titled Nintendo Wii or Nintendo Wii U.--67.68.21.106 (talk) 05:58, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- It is WP:NATURALDAB by way of corporate manufacturer. -- 70.51.46.39 (talk) 06:43, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - "Do not, however, use obscure or made-up names." Reach Out to the Truth 15:12, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Strong rename Nintendo's isn't the only virtual console out there. Indeed the Java one is quite prominent. -- 70.51.46.39 (talk) 06:43, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Nintendo's digital distribution of older games on their platforms is simply "Virtual Console". If it's a disambiguation issue, I would suggest "Virtual Console (Nintendo)" or something similar. Jonny2x4 (talk) 14:40, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I am OK with the present situation, having pages Virtual console for what I usually call "Virtual terminal" and Virtual Console for Nintendo game shop. I agree with "Virtual Console (Nintendo)", but I think the rename is not necessary. TvojaStara (talk) 17:21, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is going back to Nintendo GameCube-style. A quick search through WikiProject Video Games custom Google search engine shows it's not called Nintendo Virtual Console. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 15:20, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This not move pages. closing requests. --忍者ポップ (talk) 05:30, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 10 March 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 20:21, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Virtual Console → Virtual Console (service) – The primary topic should redirect to Virtual console. 176.88.80.215 (talk) 20:06, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose.Virtual console is a generic computer term, Virtual Console is an unrelated Nintendo system. It seems hard to believe this isn't a classic case of WP:DIFFCAPS, especially because Virtual Console is the page with the more views, I doubt most people on here would be happy landing at Virtual console. Also, the nomination is bad, no evidence or reason or anything provided! --Quiz shows 20:58, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Lean to support DIFFCAPS can be problematic in many subject categories, including tech, like here. Difficult to see how readers would be hurt by clearer titling. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:28, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- I could see your point, but the proposal isn't a disambiguation page, it's to point Virtual Console at virtual console. That would hurt reader, there's no evidence anyone wants that setup, in fact the evidence points to the opposite. --Quiz shows 22:08, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Lean to support DIFFCAPS is a terrible guideline and an accessibility nightmare. That we continue to insist that "Virtual console" and "Virtual Console" are sufficiently distinct and clear to readers is amazing. Frankly, I don't really care which article moves, or if they both move and a disambig is created. I'll always vote against DIFFCAPS from accessibility grounds. -- ferret (talk) 00:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as proposed. I think it's highly unlikely most of the readers of Virtual Console actually want something else. Weak oppose disambiguating this page in general; DIFFCAPS is dodgy, but I don't really see benefits to such thin DAB pages most of the time. Nohomersryan (talk) 00:30, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose as proposed, weak support with changes. Due to how the search bar works, any page titles that only differ by capitalization are incredibly unfriendly to users, and I believe should be avoided whenever possible. However, I do not think moving this page to "Virtual Console (service)" is the best option. I would prefer either moving this page to "Virtual Console (Nintendo)", or moving the other page (which is probably a far less likely intended target page) to "Virtual console (computer user-interface)" (or similar). --SnorlaxMonster 00:45, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Quiz shows above. Sergecross73 msg me 00:46, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (for transparency's sake, I found this discussion through a message in the Wikipedia Discord server, however I would have found it anyways in my standard looks through active discussions; however this comment can be discarded if needed, I'm not familiar with the applicable standards) – WP:DIFFCAPS is policy and this seems to be a textbook example of it. Per Quiz shows, the Nintendo service may be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC as well. DecafPotato (talk) 02:39, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per WP:DIFFCAPS. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:57, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Past Tense

Now that the virtual console has been discontinued on all platforms should this article be in the past tense instead? Personma (talk) 21:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neogaf/Kohler commentary

Starting a discussion on this exchange. ThomasO1989 removed the content on the grounds of it being sourced to Neogaf. Smuckola removed it on the grounds of ..."needless destruction" (?).

I have to say I agree with Thomas on this one. Neogaf as a source definitely needs to go, per WP:USERG and WP:VG/S. Beyond that, looking at the heart of the message, I'm not sure much of a loss here. The sequence appears to be:

1) Kohler states negative sentiment. (Source: Wired) 2) Kohler say he no longer believes negative sentiment that. (Source: Wired) 3) Kohler states negative sentiment again. (Source: Neogaf)

So, if #3 definitely needs to go, it seems like the better choice to remove #2 and #3, as Thomas did, so we're still accurately conveying his ultimate negative stance. If only #3 is removed, and the non-RS is to be believed, then we're ultimately ending on a stance he no longer believes in. Because of the way he flip flops, if we just include #1, it would still be correct, despite the changes. Sergecross73 msg me 19:24, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If Smuckola has a problem with adding the word "initially" since it's not followed up with the other two sources, then we should just remove that word. But to blindly revert and add back the unreliable source and then refer to my edit as "needless destruction" while still calling it "good faith" is honestly amusing. ThomasO1989 (talk) 19:32, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The edit summary puzzled me as well. His negative sentiment is still there, so little is "destructed". It just cuts out the part that he waffled back and forth on it, which honestly isn't all that important, as we're still covering his primary sentiment. Sergecross73 msg me 19:34, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Patronizing edit summary aside, do we really need to give this much of the reception section to Kohler flip-flopping? That only tells me how underdeveloped the section is in the first place. ThomasO1989 (talk) 19:47, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that was going to be my other point as well - its a bit WP:UNDUE to have so much of it documenting just Kohler's thoughts on it too. It should be expanded with other sources (and renamed to "Reception" per WP:CSECTION too.) I don't know if I have the time or interest for a real thorough rewrite, but I can see doing some level of work on this potentially. Sergecross73 msg me 20:23, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the revert but removed the word "initially" per my comment above. I've also rename the section to "Reception" and added an expand template. ThomasO1989 (talk) 02:54, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]