Template talk:Seventh generation game consoles

Re-add Zeebo

I am going to re-add the [Zeebo] games console, as for some reason or another, it has been removed. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 16:28, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

It was repeatedly removed because up until May 25th it was an unreleased console. These templates are only for released consoles actually competing on the market. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 18:46, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Ok then. But it'll be staying permintly from now on, as it is a releaced console. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 15:06, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Zeebo is not offically a 7th gen console leave it off the template. ~~GuineaPigWarrior (talk) 12:30, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

No. You will refrain from including Zeebo in the template, user Mcjakeqcool. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.28.152.244 (talk) 19:05, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

And you will refrain from giving directives. We don't go by the whims of an anonymous IP giving directives with an attitude that violates WP:CIVIL, based on personal opinion rather than WP:Consensus here. The current consensus here is 7th generation, and that its included. --Marty Goldberg (talk)

I think I'll just keep removing it, thanks. Nobody even knows what the hell a Zeebo is. It is a highly insignificant console. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.28.152.244 (talk) 05:39, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Zeebo is inferior device. No games, spics only, South American Destination. Does not belong with the likes of 360, Wii and PS3. Has less games than the PS3, literally. It should not even exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.245.214 (talk) 05:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Zeebo sucks cock, does it real mexican. Zeebo will not work with our advanced internets why don't we just leave them in south amelica whele they berong!!!

DOWN WITH ZEEBO! DOWN WITH ZEEBO! DOWN WITH ZEEBO! Mr. Briney: ROAAAAARRR ZEEBO! Okay, srsly, ffs, keep the gd zeebo off 7th gen console list thingy. That is all. (A) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.24.202.197 (talk) 05:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

2 things: 1, it is a Seventh generation console, and 2, to you really all need to squable? P.S It is a console so therefore it should be listed, we had this debate about a month ago, and it came out in my favor (dunno how) but it did, therefore it should be listed, it has been releaced, it is Seventh generation, and also user 98.24.202.197, you're personal grudges against the Zeebo do not count on wikipedia. mcjakeqcool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 16:35, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

Zeebo is a second-rate console that is not at the same echelons as PS3, Wii and Xbox 360. I don't have a 'personal grudge' against Zeebo. In fact, the whole fact that it is there is a result of YOUR OWN opinion. You really should also learn to spell before trying to contribute a legitimate argument. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.28.152.244 (talk) 03:09, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

211.28.152.244 It's not you that has a personal grudge against the Zeebo, it's 98.24.202.197. mcjakecool Mcjakeqcool (talk) 16:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

It really doesn't matter. It's staying off the template. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.28.152.244 (talk) 06:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

And with that kind of talk and continued vandalism warnings, you will wind up with your IP banned. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 18:46, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I.. really don't care, sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.28.152.244 (talk) 00:30, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Okay, guys, let's get one thing clear: No single user has the right to say "Yes, it goes on the template" or "No, it stays off the template". The IP users who are saying that Zeebo must absolutely stay off the template are not operating within the bounds of good faith or consensus policy, and they have not given any reason based on factual information (opinions only) as to why it should be excluded. That's not how it works here, and further disruption WILL result in blocks (range blocks if necessary). Either play by the rules and discuss this matter CIVILLY, or go the heck away. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 19:56, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Why not split the template to two sections. "Mainstream" contains the 360, Wii and PS3, while another additional column "Others" to contain Zeebo and/or other "controversial and lesser known" consoles? Owl order (talk) 16:17, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Because unfortunately that puts us in a position of making a judgment call on what is "controversial and lesser-known", especially in light of the possibility that Zeebo could be a bigger thing in Brazil than any of the so-called "mainstream" consoles. 360 and PS3 might be mainstream in the United States, but this wiki needs to cover such topics from a worldwide standpoint, and without judgment or bias. (It's up to the sources we cite to provide any biases - a point I've been trying to get through to Guinea Pig Warrior and the anonymous editors above for months now.) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 17:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

yeah i guess you're right... that does have a chance of complicate things further. i only suggested it in the first place because zeebo's listed as "other systems" in History of video game consoles (seventh generation). — Owl order (talk) 21:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

A way to stop bias is to seperate it into consoles that have sold over 1 million units and consoles that have not... -4LPH4 W0LF —Preceding undated comment added 23:22, 4 February 2011 (UTC).

Zeebo - Seventh-generation console or not?

Let's try to get some real discussion going on about the Zeebo and whether or not it belongs in this template. In order for this discussion to succeed, everyone needs to keep the following rules in mind:

• Reasons like "I don't like it", "It sucks" and "It's only for people in Brazil" are not valid reasons for excluding content on Wikipedia.
• Discussion must remain civil and be free of personal attacks.
• Do not push your agenda or personal opinions on other users. Wikipedia content is based on published third-party information in reliable sources, not on what you think should or should not be included.

Now, the question is: Is Zeebo a seventh-generation game console or not? According to all of the information on the Zeebo article, it qualifies as such because it is based on current-generation hardware, and more importantly, it was created and released during the 7th-generation console period. If you disagree with this, please feel free to reply with your reasoning. Comments like "It sucks" and "It should burn in Hell" will be struck through to indicate that they are not valid to the discussion.

Thank you. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 19:09, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Going through press coverage such as Joystiq, Endgadget, Cnet, every indication is towards it being meant to compete in the current generation. Cnet even goes as far as to label it "a fourth console of this generation, Zeebo". Wired calls it a "4th console". ZDnet also has an article on the "Zeebo - the fourth game console?" which discusses its possiblities of competition in the current market with the three others on the market - again, at no time considering anything than the current market or generation. I think the confusion is arising because its not meant to go toe to toe hardware/powerhorse wise with the others, but instead compete in 3rd world markets where the budget is more important. That also includes (according to the interview), leveraging the Zeebo's modern hardware and UI for customization for specific markets, etc. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 19:33, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

And according to the accepted definition of console generations, a console is not considered a part of a particular generation based solely on its hardware specs. Arguing that the Zeebo doesn't qualify as a 7th-gen console because it can't and doesn't attempt to compete with the 360 or PS3 would also necessitate asking whether the Wii qualifies, since it also isn't anywhere near those consoles in terms of power. (Actually, looking at the specs, the Zeebo appears to be somewhat comparable to the Wii in terms of hardware horsepower, though its market is obviously different.)

The point being that the general time period and market in which the console is produced and released generally has more to do with the console's "generation" designation than its hardware makeup. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:05, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Yes, my thoughts as well. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 20:57, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I think we can all agree with it being released during the seventh generation, but I believe it's futile to list it alongside the Wii, Xbox 360 and PS3 for now, if only for the sake of consistency: on the "History of video game consoles (seventh generation)" page it also isn't listed next to the bigger consoles in the "Home consoles" section, but rather in "Other systems" with the likes of the Vii, Hyperscan and Evo, so let's leave it there. If it actually turns out to be a successful, revolutionary or otherwise popular console, I believe it and it's successors have every right to be mentioned as one of the big consoles in their respective generations, but as of now it still hasn't proven itself.

If anything, it might be useful to include the handhelds in this template. --Kaiser Mat (talk) 27 August 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 23:10, 26 August 2009 (UTC).

I wouldn't be opposed to expanding the template to include two rows, one for "Main" and one for "Other" that reflects the 7th gen page. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 23:15, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Look it was created in the 7th generation era but its not really a main 7th gen console. There has been alot of fights over it being on this templete I think it should just be removed. --GuineaPigWarrior (talk) 12:45, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Once again, personal opinion has no place here, as was clearly defined above and as you have been explained. At this point it's beginning to constitute vandalism. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 07:32, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

GPW: Your stated opinion is that Zeebo isn't 7th Generation. You have not once provided a reliable source that backs up your opinion, whereas Marty has provided a LOT of sources that back up the assertion that it IS 7th-generation. This is the last time I'll say this: Either give us at least one good, reliable source that clearly defines this console as something other than 7th-gen (and is not just an opinion piece), or stop pushing your agenda. If you keep edit-warring on this, you will be blocked. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 18:20, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

It's a seventh generation console, going by the date released and the above sources. Popularity, comparitive power and area of release have little if anything to do with it. Someoneanother 22:10, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Zeebo can NOT be considered a seventh generation gaming console as its standards aren't enough for so. This includes worldwide availability and release. *Petition for speedy deletion*. T-oliveira (talk) 01:29, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

There are sveral problems with that. First, I am not aware of anything stating that for a console to be part of a specific generation, that it has to be have a worldwide releae. Second, The established consensus it that it should be listed so something stronger than a unsoured claim will be needed to reverse that. Finally, reliable sources has called this a seventh generation console which carries much more weight that the views of any one particular editor. This is the biggest obsticle regarding removal. If you want this removed at the very least you will need a reliable source to speciacally state that this is not a seventh generation console. If not I doubt this will ever be removed. Also if by standards you are talking about power that has also be strongly rejected earlier in the disucssion and the multiple times people has argued that Wii should be removed. Power is not an issue.--76.66.183.238 (talk) 03:17, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

If zeebo is on the list, other consoles from this generation such as onlive NEED to be added, of course power is not an issue, but worldwide availability is, and actually i have seen numerous reports that you can not buy it for example on a store.T-oliveira (talk) 20:45, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Plus like another user said, the zeebo console should not be listed along with the three titans of this gen, it should be listed on the page for the seventh generation consoles and not here, just like other ones in there.T-oliveira (talk) 20:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you're not presenting anything new, and you have provided no further reliable and notable references to counter the ones that say it is. You've only provided more personal opinion. That's not how Wikipedia works. Likewise, no, other consoles that do not meet notability requirements do not belong on this list. Onlive is an unreleased console. EVO's article doesn't even meet notability requirements to have an article on Wikipedia, I count maybe one reliable source in that article talking about it back in 2006 - certainly a candidate for deletion, thanks for bringing that up. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 04:24, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I have never in my life seen such a dedicated group of people try so hard to get a single console removed from a list in this way. I'm seriously beyond the point of being able to assume good faith, and I just gotta wonder: What does it matter to you guys anyway? Why do you care so much about whether Zeebo is considered 7th-gen or not? I'd really like to know. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:20, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I think it's extremely bizzare that we list Zeebo on this template when it gets barely a passing name mention in the article this template is based on. --Dorsal Axe 17:58, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

I think the reason is that there are reliable sources clearly calling this a seventh generation console.--76.66.180.54 (talk) 04:58, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Generation topic for Zeebo again

I believe the Zeebo would be considerd a secondary console. It is not well known, it mostly plays 6th generation games and nobody agrees with you. I haven't seen one person agreeing with you. GuineaPigWarrior (talk) 11:20, 11 October, 2010 (UTC)

We've gone around and around with this with you (we as in more than just me, in contrast to what you insinuated - lied - about above. You've been explained here, and on your talk page as well. It has nothing to do with not agreeing with me, it has to do with you not agreeing with the given references that state it as 7th gen. As you've been told, Wikipedia doesn't work on personal opinion. It works on valid and reliable sources. Now you wait several months hoping people forget what you were previously told, and try and sneak in the edit again. Let me refresh what you were told previously above by Keifer, who is an admin: "You have not once provided a reliable source that backs up your opinion, whereas Marty has provided a LOT of sources that back up the assertion that it IS 7th-generation. This is the last time I'll say this: Either give us at least one good, reliable source that clearly defines this console as something other than 7th-gen (and is not just an opinion piece), or stop pushing your agenda. If you keep edit-warring on this, you will be blocked." --Marty Goldberg (talk) 01:44, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

You don't have to be rude and uncivil. I admit, I just came across the article and was wondering if you two were still boting the article. I read the discussions page and undid it to see if you two would react and maybe we all could dicuss it. Now nobody is bothering to make an effort to make "Zeebo" an known console on the seventh generation article. It is only a secondary console. Now you can block but I will report you for rudeness and abusing of power. This is all in good faith. I am not using my personal opinion infact, I am against it. And would like to know more about it's use on wikipedia if maybe you could direct me to a page about it. GuineaPigWarrior (talk) 19:20, 11 October, 2010 (UTC)

An IP user brought my attention back to this discussion and suggested that I was "deliberately allowing" Marty to be "combative" on this issue. I realize this reply is several months late with respect to the discussion, but I do want to address both of you on it:

Marty: The point of my statement to GuineaPigWarrior (which you quoted) was to warn him that he was in danger of being blocked for disruption. However, I want to caution you against using my (or any admin's) warnings to back up your own arguments. The fact that I'm an admin has little to do with the substance of the conversation - I have no more weight in the discussion than you do, honestly. The only difference between us is that I have access to the blocking tools. But when you bolster an argument with an admin's warning, that gives the impression of us "ganging up" on a user, and I'm pretty sure that's something most admins frown upon (myself included). I would have been fine with you leaving the fact that I'm an admin out of it, and just quoting the parts about him not having provided any sources to back up his argument. I'd like to ask you to be careful of that in the future.

(I would have said this in October if I'd been aware of the discussion - this page wasn't on my watch list.)

GuineaPigWarrior: While I disagree with Marty's methods, I will say that I completely understand him being really tired of arguing this issue with you. We've both asked you repeatedly to point us to a reliable source that actually gives an explanation as to why Zeebo is a 6th-gen console, and I don't recall ever seeing you provide one. Marty has pointed to numerous sources supporting the 7th-gen assertion, all of which are considered reliable by consensus in the WikiProject. Because you have continued to insist that Zeebo doesn't qualify, and the only thing of substance I've seen to your argument has been that its hardware is more similar to 6th-gen consoles (presumably those in the US and Japan - eg. PS2, GameCube, etc.), but failed to provide sources, Marty and I have really had no choice but to assume that you have some sort of agenda to push and are basing your arguments solely on personal opinion. If you really are acting in good faith and have a genuine argument for saying Zeebo shouldn't be on this list, then show us the proof. Otherwise, we're just going around in circles and getting nowhere.

To be clear: I warned you to cool it earlier on NOT because I felt you were wrong or because I wanted to defend Marty, but because I felt you were becoming disruptive and acting in bad faith, and I recall linking to several relevant policies (just like I did here). The block would have been temporary and would have included an explanation, and you would have been able to request an unblock review where a separate, uninvolved admin would take a look at the situation and decide whether my block was justified or not. The policy still stands, though months went by with no disruption, so any "warning timers" are mostly reset at this point. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 06:05, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Regarding "The point of my statement to GuineaPigWarrior (which you quoted) was to warn him that he was in danger of being blocked for disruption. However, I want to caution you against using my (or any admin's) warnings to back up your own arguments." That is certainly not what was being done, the repeating of your statement was to point out his disruptive editing practices. In fact, you're leaving out the first half of my statements which give the clear context - "We've gone around and around with this with you (we as in more than just me, in contrast to what you insinuated - lied - about above. You've been explained here, and on your talk page as well. It has nothing to do with not agreeing with me, it has to do with you not agreeing with the given references that state it as 7th gen. " I don't need you to back up arguments, that's what reliable 3rd part references are for. However, I do need you to point out there's a consensus, as in more than just me as I was being accused of by him. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 06:54, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Like I said elsewhere, I'm mainly just trying to make sure bolstering consensus and admin issues are kept separate. It's fine to quote me in supporting consensus, but please don't also quote my block warnings or use my status as an admin in the discussion. Thanks. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:01, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, with regard to GuineaPigWarrior in particular: It's kinda a moot point now anyway, both because of a separate discussion you pointed me to that revisits the definition of console "generations", and also because GuineaPigWarrior got himself permanently blocked for similar incivility elsewhere. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

the Zeebo and the Mattel Hyperscan are both 7th generation consoles. it does NOT matter how succesful your console is, as long as it is commercially produced, which both are (or were in the Hyperscan's case), and both were produced in the 7th generation era, which is any time beyond the date of the XBox 360, and untill the date when a console created by Nintendo, Microsoft, Sony, Tectoy, or Mattel release another console. -4LPH4 W0LF

It looks like from your edit history you're new here, and appear to be confused as to what the purpose of these generational templates on Wikipedia are for. As has been discussed previously, the purpose of these generation templates is not to document every single console in a generation - they are limited to main consoles from that generation. There's already articles here that give full listings of a generation. The Zeebo, as has already been discussed earlier, has multiple reliable references as a "4th console" to this generation. The consoles you are trying to add do not, and have in fact been removed from this template because of that long before your recent attempts at adding them. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 05:00, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Well, one could argue that the Amiga CD32 was not a major console for the 5th generation, but it is still listed, and never saw a US release. I can understand why the smart console and hyperscan would be taken off, but the OnLive console has gained a lot of sales, and could be considered major. -4LPH4 W0LF

And yet no one has addressed the point that the main article for this topic most certainly does not present Zeebo as a "4th console" or some sort of major player in the space at all. Zeebo is mentioned once, and in a table at that. Unless the article reflects Zeebo as a major competitor in the space, it should not have any more prominence on this template than the other consoles with barely a passing mention on the article; that is to say, none. --Dorsal Axe 18:29, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

I diagree. I am not aware of any rule or denfination of console generations that state that a console has to be a major player to part of a specific generation. I also don't think that we should be trying to invent our own criteria to overrule reliable sources simply because we don't want to include something.--76.66.187.132 (talk) 06:21, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Also adding to what I wrote before I don't think lack of coverage on a Wikipedia article should be used as a source for anything since it may also be the case that the Zeebo is is not being properly represented and not evidence that it is not part of the seventh Generation. In this case we have a dispute between several reliable sources directing calling it a part of this generation and a lack of coverage on a Wikipedia article with no assertion (soured or unsouredced) that it is not. In this case I believe that we should be following the several reliable sources that make the assertion and not the Wikipedia article that does not. In short I don't think lack of coverage on a Wikipedia article should be used as a source especially when it is being used in an attempt to overrule other reliable sources.--76.66.187.132 (talk) 21:37, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Edit request

{{editsemiprotected}} I have added links between the other video game generations navigation boxes. Could anyone add an analogous link to Template:Sixth generation game consoles? On second thought, these all templates are so small they could probably be merged into one. Ian (178.37.148.53 (talk) 12:43, 5 September 2011 (UTC))

 Done (added the link that is)--Jac16888 ^Talk 13:19, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Just a comment, no - these should all be merged to one. These were originally in a single large list and split off in to generations to support the relate articles, via consensus. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 21:54, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Remove Zeebo? (2013)

In the article for the seventh generation of gaming, it states that the Zeebo isn't a seventh generation game console, it was just a console released at the same time. Shouldn't it be removed from this template? Soffredo (talk) 20:11, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

There's already been entire pages of discussion on this already, including here. Wikipedia doesn't self reference, the fact that someone added content like that on the 7th gen page has no bearing. Reliable references stating the console as a 7th gen console were already provided. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 04:20, 25 April 2013 (UTC)