Jump to content

Talk:Super Nintendo Entertainment System

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kool kitty89 (talk | contribs) at 05:09, 20 March 2018. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured articleSuper Nintendo Entertainment System is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 2, 2007.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 26, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
July 10, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
July 10, 2007Good article nomineeListed
July 26, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
April 28, 2016Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

Unverifiable Content

The following content, located under the "Console Wars" section, is attributed to a source that is unverifiable (WP:V)- "The Genesis only represented an estimated 60% of the American 16-bit console market in June 1992,[34]." In addition, the source cited itself is incomplete (WP:HOWCITE). I've attempted to contact the source named via e-mail and will provide an update if I receive a response. PonceDeLePwn (talk) 21:07, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Syntax & Formatting of References/Bibliography

Several of the references cited make use of the "Short citations" syntax (WP:CITESHORT). However, as specified by Wikipedia, short citations should be in the appropriate Notes footer section, and they should link to the full citation in "References". Currently the short citations are being used in the References section and are attributed to an entry below them in "Bibliography", which is not a section that is required. PonceDeLePwn (talk) 21:22, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Super Nintendo Entertainment System. 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:

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

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

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:44, 30 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Super Nintendo Entertainment System. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:59, 9 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Megadrive -> Genesis

User:P*h3i three things:

  • Can you point out where "This discussion's been had plenty of times"? I've checked talk page archives, and article history, and can find no discussion, never mind one that's been had "plenty of times"

*I am hugely amused by your assumption that I intended to start a flame war by my changes, rather than my cynicism that people would rapidly and volubly object - exactly as you did, which amused me even more.

  • However, that was nothing compared to the typo in your edit summary that states "In the context of this article, "Genesis" is fine" when you meant the complete opposite.

Obviously the latter two are just humorous observations - but really: Where has this been discussed? What is the objection - bear in mind that your edit summary doesn't actually include an objection and at the moment is nothing more than WP:IDONTLIKEIT. My rationale is plain and simple - there is no need to pipe when there is a perfectly good link, and the target article makes it plain the the preferred term is "Genesis". Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:35, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! I've made a grave mistake. I actually agree with you, I just read the edit difference wrong (I thought you changed it to Genesis/Mega Drive). I feel very dumb. ~ P*h3i (📨) 08:16, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Chaheel Riens: Also, please stay WP:CIVIL. No one cares how amused you are, you could've just left it as "can you point out where". ~ P*h3i (📨) 08:20, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. Chaheel, your edit was correct and P*h3i made a mistake - but no need to smirk about it. Popcornduff (talk) 08:43, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
On the contrary, given the original circumstances it was amusing - I predicted a vitriolic response, and got one - but the response made the exact point that I was trying to make - we should use Genesis not Megadrive. My comments were made before any errors were apparent. Still - good faith and all that - I've struck them. If anybody wants to remove them - or wants me to remove them, just go ahead. Chaheel Riens (talk) 12:19, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]



SNES Technical Specifications

See also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Super_Nintendo_Entertainment_System_technical_specifications

The Technical Specifications section was formerly redirected here, deferring a large block of information that was formerly redundant across both the main SNES article and dedicated technical specifications one.

A complaint was made in 2014 regarding this redundancy, but as of 21 January 2016, it was no longer redundant as the associated technical information was severely truncated in the "Technical Specifications" section of the SNES article. (now devoid of the sort of information found in most console and computer articles while also lacking a dedicated technical page to defer to) There seems to be merit of either re-activating the dedicated technical article and including an appropriate link in the SNES article, or reverting the main SNES article to include a comprehensive technical specifications section as it had prior to January 2016.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Super_Nintendo_Entertainment_System&oldid=700942814 (edit removing the Technical specifications details) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Super_Nintendo_Entertainment_System&oldid=700815383 (last edit including those details)

If there were poorly cited or uncited components of the technical specifications section, those should have been dealt with specifically rather than omitting it in its entirety. (I'm also unsure what complaints regarding being oriented towards a general audience refers to, as the technical details are no less general audience than in various engineering, programming, computer science, and similar computing articles)

Lack of citation may also have been improper transition of the information from the main article to the technical article, thus citations made properly originally became lost in translation, leading to some of the later complaints and edits made.

That said, given the final edits made to the technical article, its deletion seems to have been made under a great majority of protest, for what that's worth. However, the complaint made regarding "no sources to justify split from main section" as well as following comments to edits implies that the entire article should have been merged with the main article, reverting that section to its status as of 20 January 2016.

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Super_Nintendo_Entertainment_System_technical_specifications&action=history

Note, I've withheld from attempting to revert or merge that section myself, but felt the issue had significant merit.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Super_Nintendo_Entertainment_System&oldid=831358321"