Talk:Nintendo Switch

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured article candidateNintendo Switch is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 28, 2024Featured article candidateNot promoted

Nintendo switch versions[edit]

Petition to create a section or separate linked arricle with a comprehensive list of all Switch models and versions, that is special editions and different builds WOWLWOWL 16:53, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Opposed - article like this are routinely deleted on Wikipedia. Thats really more of a fan wikia thing. Sergecross73 msg me 17:36, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    What about a section? There seems to be no easy to read list about the topic online and was hoping to find it here. All i can find are articles that are widely spread throughout the page and outdated. Itd be nice just to have a list or table somewhere. WOWLWOWL 23:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Sections like this are routinely deleted on Wikipedia. Thats really more of a fan wikia thing. -- ferret (talk) 23:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh I see, this page isnt meant to be a full enciclopedia article wikia is. Got it WOWLWOWL 00:37, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No, it's that Wikipedia is written for general audiences, not the hardcore super-fans into all the minor trivial stuff. Your average general audiences type reader doesn't care that they momentarily sold an aqua colored Switch in New Zealand in 2018. That's the sort of thing the super fans list out on the fan wikis written for other super fans. Sergecross73 msg me 01:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Such list doesnt exist. It would just be a list with the about 12 limited edition models not a single aqua colored from australia. Succh list doesnt exist anywhere only lengthy articles but its ok, the article owner can sometimes be counterproductive. Its fine really. Thanks. WOWLWOWL 01:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Missed opportunity WOWLWOWL 01:28, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Feel free to join a Nintendo fan wikia and add it there. Sergecross73 msg me 01:41, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Find it surprising that you might think this basic info would only fit in a fanbase site which by the way it isnt there. After all this is the Switch wiki page and if under the section “Console” we have a subsection called “Rumoured high end revision” which turned out to be the OLED, then i dont see why not have a subsection under the same “Console” section called “Special Editions” and have a list or table in chronological order and its base model (normal, lite or OLED). Its not a matter of a fan thing as you are claiming, its a matter of having a better article about the game console in question. For example Im 32 yo, a family member got the red mario wonder version for christmas. I went ahead and googled nintendo switch versions because i wanted to see if this was 2023 or the other red one. You see im not a fan in that sense im a casual gamer having a discussion about a Nintendo Switch topic. I opened the wiki article since its an encyclopedia. Wanted to get the year and in the sane list the year of the other red one. Its not here and there is no list anywhere else just blog articles outdated. Ended up just googling the specific name. You see, it would enrich the Nintendo Switch article in my opinion. WOWL 03:48, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    See WP:NOTCATALOGUE and WP:NOTHOWTO. What you're describing is not the function of an encyclopedia. What you want is a buyers guide. I hope you find one. But you shouldn't find one on Wikipedia. Sergecross73 msg me 13:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, we have much less irrelevant subsections in this article. A list of the different special editions is something very relevant to the product and title of the article. I think its something basic that adds to the expected info one can find here about the console. Its not about writing an article about each one is just listing them as basic knowledge of the console. Nintendo switch… conception, reception, popular titles, specs, models and versions. Thats basically all we want to know as info seekers. Everything else is helpful but imo not as essential. WOWLWOWL 18:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, but no. Wikipedia isn't an indiscriminate collection of information. We don't list every edition of every console unless they're particularly notable. Listing these editions for the sake of "deciding which console to buy" will be irrelevant once the console is no longer on the market, being only of interest to enthusiasts, and would be deleted anyway.
    Now, multiple editors have now stated that listing every Switch model that are otherwise indistinguishable is not appropriate for an encyclopedic article. It's best for you to drop this. ThomasO1989 (talk) 20:36, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You can disagree thats fine. Its not a guide for buying its the fact that within the encyclopedic page of a product, example a car, it is better to have a subsection listing the different versions. Its something relevant to the topic that enriches. Afterall, 100 years from now we will be looking at things like encyclopedia to find a summary of all the basic info. Good luck. WOWLWOWL 22:33, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Examples of other wiki articles that mention the different versions:
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_64
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_Wireless_Controller_special_editions
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Xbox_360_retail_configurations
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GameCube
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_500_(2007)
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IMac_G3
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/G-Shock
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Boy_Color
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Game_Boy_accessories
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Furby
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Lamborghini_automobiles
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_Edition
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special_edition
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter_and_the_Philosopher%27s_Stone
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_models#PS_One
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_(magazine)
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_American
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_online_encyclopedias
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sunday_Times_Magazine
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_(game)
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SimCity_2000
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/BMW_M3
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Criterion_Collection
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugatti_Veyron
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Corvette_(C7)
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Silverado
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_FJ_Cruiser
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazda_MX-5_(NA)
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playboy_Special_Edition
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_licensed_and_localized_editions_of_Monopoly:_USA
    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_(game)
    to name a few. Im sure so many article handlers cant be all wrong in including this info to enrich the page. Some cases have hundreds of special editions. Some cases have explanation of special editions. Some even have a separate article for them. All I was suggesting is voicing them out in some way for the Nintendo Switch. I did what I could in suggesting this improvement. Id have no problem helping doing the work if thats an issue. For now, Im out. End of suggestion for me. WOWLWOWL 23:36, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You can filter categories if you want more examples in this industry especifically. WOWLWOWL 23:37, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Please read WP:OSE. Sergecross73 msg me 23:44, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hence my last comment. First it was that this is not a buying guide, then that wikipedia deletes such things, then other excuses. I understand its the article handlers choice, it was only a suggestion. Some may agree some may not. Thats fine. WOWLWOWL 23:51, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This needs to be its own article perhaps with a table as its main filler, with direct link to the NS article WOWLWOWL 18:40, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, there was no consensus to move forward with this, with policy/guideline-based arguments against it. Actively ignoring the outcomes of discussions is a great way to get your account blocked from editing. Sergecross73 msg me 18:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There was no poll done. Besides the article I’m suggesting needs to be written first as a rough article and will be completely independent of this one with its own talk page. I don’t see any issue let alone handing out block threats. That is something we should take notice as a community since we certainly don”t want bad cops here. If I or someone creates a page titled: Nintendo Switch Versions that in no way violates any policies. Did you see how many articles of the same nature I referenced above? There probably are dozens of more like that so please I will ask you to be more professional and less intimidating especially since the idea of a solution is to do something that is not on this article. WOWLWOWL 18:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Three separate editors opposed your idea. None supported it. That is a basic consensus against. Knowingly editing against consensus is considered disruptive editing. Disruptive editing gets people blocked. I'm just telling you the very basics of how the website works. Sergecross73 msg me 19:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Disruptive editing is editing the same thing multiple times. I haven’t edited anything. You need to check the way you make accusations. Since the beginning of this thread I have proposed adding a subsection and after the people watching this article disagreed I have only mentioned about doing a separate article. This is all here written and in the history of the article anyone can see it has not been edited.
    Remember one of your roles is to encourage others to enrich wikipedia. What you are saying are lies and thats very irresponsible on your part. Maybe I should report it because who knows how many false accusations and threats you’ve done. WOWLWOWL 19:21, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is just an extension of the same thing. If no one supported it being added to the article, why would anyone be supportive of it being at its own article? That doesn't make any sense when you read anyone's rationale for opposing. Please read WP:IDHT. Sergecross73 msg me 19:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The two or three observers didnt agree thats fine. But does that mean it is “illegal” for wikipedia to creat a separate short article? Instead you dismissed and said that that should be done on a fan page but I showed you many examples of similar nature right here on wikipedia and you still havent addressed that. So basically the correct solution to this concern wouldve been to just say to try and propose a separate article which will then reference this one as its main. Not to threaten and acuse of editing the article when that such thing never happened. Have a good one and remember your role. Now lets keep making wikipedia better. WOWLWOWL 20:52, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Please spend less time trying to lecture me and just focus on learning the basics. You'll get less opposition from everyone if you take the time to learn how you're approaching this wrong. Sergecross73 msg me 20:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure bud WOWLWOWL 21:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Lets keep ignoring all those wikipedia articles and disencouraging potential contributors. I know you two have been on top of this article for a long time and have seen people edit stuff but that doesnt mean you should blatantly discourage others who are actually trying to be objective because they differ with your current view. And also giving false info is plain irresponsible as well as falsely accusing. Just some advice. WOWLWOWL 21:29, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I did not give false information. And didn't accuse you of anything, merely warned you what would happen if you do something. Tense and context matters. You have to slow down and read more closely. Sergecross73 msg me 22:02, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your incoherence is beyond incredible. Just go back and reread. Btw as an expert that you are, can you address all the wikipedia articles I referenced? They shouldnt exist according to you. WOWLWOWL 23:31, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Successor Console Rumors[edit]

The more I think about it, the more I'm convinced that the section about the rumored successor console shouldn't be on the page. Rumors are not generally added to Wikipedia and it's notable that the sources are not official themselves. 2603:6010:8B00:44FF:616A:2F92:6360:5F9E (talk) 00:44, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you mean by "the sources are not official", Eurogamer is certainly a notable source in this field. We don't need for Nintendo confirm or deny anything themselves, in fact independent third-party sources are more reliable anyway. The rumors are substantial and reported on enough to be included. Darkage7[Talk] 01:01, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Rumors are fair game when they're reported on by reliable sources, which is exactly what the entire section is, so it's fine as is. Sergecross73 msg me 01:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Okay then. Just seemed strange to me. 2603:6010:8B00:44FF:4C51:5E85:4D07:9602 (talk) 22:08, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is a bit out of the ordinary, but it's more because it's relatively rare for reliable sources to comment on rumors so much. Most rumors don't go much farther than random internet and social media chatter. Sergecross73 msg me 22:26, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I actually agree with you. Speculation is more in the realm of conspiracy files not an encyclopedia. These rumors almost never turn out to be remotely close to the actual thing even more when there are discarded patent leaks. I guess this section will be deleted once the real thing comes out and we should look at this as the 2024 edition of this page. WOWLWOWL 03:43, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Some of it might remain, but yes, once Nintendo actually states it themselves, then we can trim down from industry rumors/insight to actual statements. Masem (t) 05:02, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we're currently in the month of February, which is usually when a new Nintendo direct comes by, so I think things will get cleared up pretty soon. 2603:6010:8B00:44FF:3511:60FC:EE35:AC96 (talk) 03:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first half of what you said isn't rooted in any sort of policy or guideline, but you are correct that much if it will be trimmed once it's officially revealed. Sergecross73 msg me 13:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
True. Wikipedias guidelines are extensive enough to even include norms on such articles which is why we even have pseudoscience topics and such. I just agree that for this device’s page specifically it looks out of place at least in the long run. WOWLWOWL 13:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@WOWL, what you're saying makes sense. Besides, think about Nintendo. Wouldn't they like to keep their project a secret so that people can actually be surprised when they find out about it. 2603:6010:8B00:44FF:C8A1:919D:ECFD:E3FF (talk) 21:38, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What WOWL said is not supported by any Wikipedia policy or guideline. We're building an encyclopedia. It does not matter if it correlates with a company's marketing and reveal plans. And again, it's all just reporting on what reliables sources have already published. There's nothing here that doesn't already exist somewhere else on the internet. Sergecross73 msg me 21:51, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Alright then. 2603:6010:8B00:44FF:C8A1:919D:ECFD:E3FF (talk) 03:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree it can stay for now but what Im saying is that there really is no need because it will be innacurate anyways when the real “switch 2” comes out eventually. Many articles have this speculative subsection talking about future plans even if they rely on unproven leaks. So in the end just leave it for now since it serves the purpose of being the most possible up to date article about the device. WOWLWOWL 18:31, 28 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Development" section[edit]

In the section on the development of the Nintendo Switch, it makes no mention of the information on its development that was obtained through the Nintendo Gigaleak such as their work with STMicroelectronics (Project INDY, Mont Blanc). Would it be within guidelines to have that information in the article? MrSwedishMeatballs (talk) 18:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We cannot use the leak information directly, we need a reliable source to discuss what was in the leak. Masem (t) 18:50, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source for 141 million units[edit]

I can't find the figure in the PDF that is used on this page for the claim of the console having sold 141.32 million units, seen here - [1]. Unless someone can show the claim of 141.32 million is given within this PDF then I'll look for an alternate source to add to the article to show its current sales figure. Helper201 (talk) 20:13, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've found a source I'm going to change it to that clearly shows current figures. Helper201 (talk) 20:25, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First, never use VGChartz as a source - its wholly unreliable.
Second, someone updated the figures and did add the right ref to the table but did not reuse that same source in the prose. It has been fixed. — Masem (t) 20:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Masem I still can't find the 141.32 million units figure in the source. I've searched the page for "141" and it’s bringing back zero results. Where exactly in the source does it say the Switch has sold a total of 141.32 million units? Also, where are the breakdown sales figures for the standard Switch, OLED and Lite in the PDF? Helper201 (talk) 20:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
First, make sure you are using the updated source here [1] Look at page 14 , and down the column marked "Life to Date". Note that the numbers are in 10,000s of units so the 14,132 total is equal to 141,320,000-some units. — Masem (t) 20:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reception[edit]

Many outlets compared the unit to that of the Steam Deck. Valve stated that by happenstance, they came out with a device that was similar in function to the Switch.[2] The Verge stated that generally, the Steam Deck was a more powerful machine compared to the Switch, but that power came with a tradeoff in battery life which was greater with the Switch. 78.144.96.156 (talk) 16:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since the Deck came after the Switch, it doesn't make sense to make the reverse-order comparison. On the Steam Deck page, comparison to the Switch absolutely makes sense. Masem (t) 16:33, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ "Consolidated Financial Highlights – Q1 FY2024" (PDF). Nintendo. August 3, 2023. Retrieved August 3, 2023.
  2. ^ Bailey, Kat (July 23, 2021). "Steam Deck: Valve Says It Never Really Compared Its Handheld to Switch". IGN. Retrieved July 23, 2021.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nintendo_Switch&oldid=1225493561"