Talk:Sega Genesis
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sega Genesis article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Sega Genesis" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
![]() | Sega Genesis was one of the Sports and recreation good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Index
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Article improvements?
Now that the naming situation is hopefully put to rest, what can be done to improve the article's ratings? It's categorized as a C-class article quality-wise, while it was delisted as a Good Article in July of 2010. What can be done to improve the article, possibly increasing the rating and maybe even renominate it as a Good Article? Wolftengu (talk) 19:42, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
- We need to create a list of areas that need improvement. Marketing is a biggie in my opinion. In Europe, Sega effectively broke the mould when it came to advertising; with the whole CyberRazor Cut/Pirate TV advertising concept. It was a foundation that Sony built upon when they launched PlayStation, and targeted it at 18- 29 year olds as a cool device rather than a console for kids. Obviously I've seen some of the North American marketing, but seeing it twenty years later via a grainy YouTube clip doesn't help get across the context - vice versa for NA users seeing EU footage, and they may not understand my zeal for it. I'll try and get all the info together, and hopefully write something up if I can squeeze it in in-between work/Uni. - X201 (talk) 20:02, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
- I really don't know how to move the article forward either...but I can say that seeing the Sega Pirate Sega CD commercial was actually very invigorating...I can really see why that would be an advertisement that broke the mold. Not to mention Peter Wingfield is probably my favorite British actor...and finding out about him being in Mega Drive commercials was very moving. I never saw these growing up, as I'm in North America...I saw Gotta Get Genesis, and Genesis Does of course, but for me, seeing Peter Wingfield and the Sega Pirate was nearly just as good as when I saw Genesis Does as a kid. IMHO it didn't get across the fact that "you can't do this on Nintendo" but some kind of context still came over for me. Getting a peer review or GA review is a probably a good next step.--SexyKick 23:53, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
- Some areas I see:
- 32-bit era - a number of small paragraphs intersperced with larger ones. That breaks the flow compared to the other sections.
- Emulation - a number of small paragraphs that could be condensed.
- Technical specificiations - a number of 1- or 2-paragraph sections that could be combined. Master system compatability also suffers from the same issues as 32-bit era.
- The table in variations imo would be better going up-and-down rather than left-to-right as it takes up 80% of the screen on my monitor.
- Legacy and revivial - those subsections should be combined and the short statements merged into 1-2 pragraphs.
- There are a number of items missing citation including stuff that looks like original research. This is mostly in the 32-bit era.
- The lead mentions that games continue to be produced, but nothing about later consoles. I'd go through and make certain every major section has at least something mentioned in the lead.∞陣内Jinnai 03:20, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- I guess I'll work on the citations. Can you write whatever needs to be written for the lead? Perhaps X201 could figure the best way to combine the emulation/32-bit sentences, and Tech Spec sections.--SexyKick 12:28, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- Alright, I've done what I can do for today. I can't find sources for the PBC stuff. So that should just leave the emulation sentence grouping, citations for the PBC section, and possibly grouping some of the tech spec sections??--SexyKick 19:59, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- Some areas I see:
- I really don't know how to move the article forward either...but I can say that seeing the Sega Pirate Sega CD commercial was actually very invigorating...I can really see why that would be an advertisement that broke the mold. Not to mention Peter Wingfield is probably my favorite British actor...and finding out about him being in Mega Drive commercials was very moving. I never saw these growing up, as I'm in North America...I saw Gotta Get Genesis, and Genesis Does of course, but for me, seeing Peter Wingfield and the Sega Pirate was nearly just as good as when I saw Genesis Does as a kid. IMHO it didn't get across the fact that "you can't do this on Nintendo" but some kind of context still came over for me. Getting a peer review or GA review is a probably a good next step.--SexyKick 23:53, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
- The sources need to be checked. I noticed a link to romhacking.net as a source in the lead and some of the sources noting 3rd-party console remakes are a bit dated.∞陣内Jinnai 20:21, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- I actually checked them first. Blaze Mega Drive is still on sale, Firecore/Gencore/Retrogen/Gen-mobile are still on sale...Mitashi is still selling its knock off, and of course TecToy still makes the Mega Drive 4/Guitar Idol. In fact, I think I should change the wording. So that's good. Don't know what romhacking.net is either, what tells us that it's not reliable?--SexyKick 20:48, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- Going back in the article history it seems Anomie was okay with the reliability of that source (he's a stickler for that stuff) and edited it here.--SexyKick 21:03, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- I actually checked them first. Blaze Mega Drive is still on sale, Firecore/Gencore/Retrogen/Gen-mobile are still on sale...Mitashi is still selling its knock off, and of course TecToy still makes the Mega Drive 4/Guitar Idol. In fact, I think I should change the wording. So that's good. Don't know what romhacking.net is either, what tells us that it's not reliable?--SexyKick 20:48, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- The sources need to be checked. I noticed a link to romhacking.net as a source in the lead and some of the sources noting 3rd-party console remakes are a bit dated.∞陣内Jinnai 20:21, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- The issue is not reliablity in their case. It is what they link to it may be cause for copyright violations because they distribute ips patches. While we could link to an archived page of such presumably legally (such as through wayback machine), we shouldn't link to a fresh page.∞陣内Jinnai 21:05, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- Alright then, I'll change it to a wayback link.--SexyKick 21:16, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
- The issue is not reliablity in their case. It is what they link to it may be cause for copyright violations because they distribute ips patches. While we could link to an archived page of such presumably legally (such as through wayback machine), we shouldn't link to a fresh page.∞陣内Jinnai 21:05, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Some more on sources (since that's one of the most important aspects for GA)
- Linking to publishers: (we don't link to pubslihers directly. If it doesn't have an article it shouldn't be linked, especially when the previous link also links o the site.)
- Publishers need to be moved from work to publisher. This is standard practice across wikipedia that for some reason only this project doesn't seem to follow.
- Unlink the direct (non-archived) link to romhacking.net. Just use the archieved link for copyvio reasons.
- Ditto for Zophar's Domain and any other source that could hold fan translations or other ips patches. If they just hold emulators, then that's fine.
- For now, I'll assume the book publishers are experts and the books not published by a vanity press without already being an expert.
- There are a ton of sources here that will raise red flags based on being blog-like. I would try to find better sources in general or remove them if they aren't essential (ie another source says the same thing for that statement).
- Specific ones I'm wondering about reliability:
- 55 - also doesn't appear to be by "Discount Store News"
- 80 - specifically "the first" needs a secondary source as that's a controversial claim.
- Other ones where the emulation site itself is the source claiming something like that should also use secondary sources. I didn't do a thorough check, but that one just stood out.
- Try to a better source for:
- 43 - The youtube one will be a red flag so if we can find a better source...
- 110 - ditto
- Other
- 103 - remove the part about staff. Staff is assumed if no one is specifically listed. It is also inconsistent with other sources, such as 104 which don't not that it was the manual's staff.
- Gaming Target listed twice.∞陣内Jinnai 18:47, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Source 55 should be fine since I got it from the SNES article, it seems to be by Discount Store News when I go to the article. Not sure when I'll get to do this stuff since it's going to be a few hours of work. I hope I can find alternate sources than YouTube videos...there's more than those two videos used as sources too. Like GameTap and Controversy...--SexyKick 19:35, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
- People seeing youtube will automatically raise alarm bells. That's why I say if you can find an alternative, it would be better. If not, then that's fine.∞陣内Jinnai 01:12, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
- The easiest way to make the article GA would simply be to revert it back to its state in 2010, thereby removing all of the damage that's been done to it since then. Quite frankly the article in its present state is a mess, its so bad that I really don't see how anyone could even begin to fix it, and honestly I don't see anyone caring enough to try anymore. I ask you, are people expected to care about arguing the same case over and over for eternity here? There is never any conclusion on this talk page, its all meaningless, for instance the article name of "Mega Drive" has already been concluded multiple times, and yet every year it comes back up again and we're back to square one, nobody is going to keep arguing the same case over and over with no true conclusion, most (myself included) lost interest in repeating themselves a long time ago.
- The article is bloated, confused, full of undue weight, and completely lacking in focus, revert it back to the last time it was GA, update the sales information in as clear, concise, and non commital a manner as possible, and then call it a day IMO Jesus.arnold (talk) 02:38, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
Some more
- File:JP MegaDrive Logo.gif - rationale needs improvement.
- File:MD Sonic the Hedgehog.png - rationale needs to be improved for this article. "Typical gameplay" is pretty weak, especially since its not typical of the console as a whole (just Sonic games).
- Related to that, the caption should give a better reason for being there that relates somehow to the text (preferably by it, but at least somewhere).
- File:SegaMegaDrive AudioComparision.ogg - will need to be updated and probably use a template (even if its not required, it seems its wanted now to make things clear).
- File:VirtuaRacing.PNG - is in bad shape.
- Caption is just as bad.
- Finally, if I were reviewing this, I'd say all but the logo could be easily replacable with CC-created imagry/sound. Why? Homebrew. The article mentions how hacks were made to the game that allowed not only translations and hacks, but homebrew games as well.
- Reminds me, that section could possibly use some checking for any new info.∞陣内Jinnai 19:51, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't want this to be archived yet.--SexyKick 16:24, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
- I realize I should have been putting a "Done" check mark thing under things I finished. I can't remember what I did and didn't do now! Wow.--SexyKick 12:45, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- I was going to ask what had/hand't been done. Part of the reason I sped up the archive was to clear out that huge discussion so there'd be less distraction to this particular one.∞陣内Jinnai 16:42, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
About the name
"But but but I have a new argument about the name!..." Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 09:41, 6 July 2012 (UTC) |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
I know little of what happened in the past 3 or so months, but quick glances give me zero real arguments and even more ridiculous title suggestions, and what I see just above me is not helping in the slightest. So, with the "national pride" nonsense out of the way (of course, I'm American and was raised knowing only a "Sega Genesis" for a very long time), I should put down what actually matters:
None of this has anything to do with "fanboyism", or how much "no one cares" (which will work against you here). All of this has to do with avoiding the various misleading scenarios we have now. There really is no argument against this other than "stop arguing", which isn't even a great statement, especially not here at Wikipedia. Please, let's just move it back to Mega Drive. Oh wait, this was a "vote", wasn't it? This is never supposed to be a vote. I am talking about the article's current issues. Despatche (talk) 12:00, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Yet again, this has absolutely nothing to do with any pre-existing discussion, because that discussion is over. This is an issue with the article and related articles that is currently still here, as I've said again and again. I'm tired of the forced inconsistency when it's uncalled for, and the forced consistency when it's completely unnecessary. Please fix this issue. Despatche (talk) 01:31, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
This is all crap. It does NOT matter what name a wikipedia article was originally created under. We should be using the best name. The console is known as the Mega Drive by more people in more countries, and with more published/reliable sources. It really is not an issue for it to be called Genesis, a name used in only one country (and even then, only accidentally, due to an unforseen trademark error). This does not constitute a worldwide view in the slightest (look in the Languages dropdown on the right of the article - none of the other languages label it as such, including the NA languages French and Spanish). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.211.125.130 (talk) 21:41, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Meh, sales figures aren't part of this argument. It's known as Genesis to the 300 million people of the USA, out of some 6,500 million people worldwide. For those struggling with math, that's under 5%. THE OTHER 95%+ OF THE PEOPLE IN THE WORLD CALL IT THE MEGA DRIVE. And this is regardless of whether they speak English or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.39.200 (talk) 01:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
I really hate these kinds of discussions because in the end, the article suffers as a result. It happened over at fixed-wing aircraft where they could NOT agree on what the hell to call the article. Americans wanted airplane, brits wanted aeroplane, and the result was a stupid title that was a term that no one used. Sadly, bias enters a lot into these discussions, so lets keep it unbiased ok? I'm an American, and grew up knowing only the "Genesis" name, but even I know that this article should be called the Sega Mega Drive. Why? Because that's its original and true name. It was only renamed in America due to the name already being trademarked. It should be called Sega Mega Drive, but whatever happens, it should NOT have a composite name just to please the biased users here. Objectively, this article should be called Sega Mega Drive. ScienceApe (talk) 16:19, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
I hope my latest addition to the FAQ is a satisfactory outcome of this discussion to all. --Born2cycle (talk) 17:16, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
Probably going to regret bringing this up, but if the consensus has settled on Sega Genesis for this article, Should the Multi Mega article be changed to Sega CDX, and Mega CD be changed to Segs CD to maintain consistency across Sega's 16 bit consoles? I Don't see a problem with the mis-match, but know some people seem to care about this kinda thing. 81.149.182.210 (talk) 02:13, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
I think the articles title will be continually re-addressed unless people see the names, and number of people who wanted one name or another. Because that will always change over time and new readers will come and wish to give their views on the articles name and a suggestions of how it and the article can be made more clear. I suggest two perminent talk columns so all readers are able to contribute their views, both new contributors as well as those who have given their opion in the past. Even if one of those becomes the longest, the losers will always leave their comments, where they could easily be put off by simply saying 'add your name to the list' of "Sega Mega Drive" or "Sega Genesis" perminent columns on this talk page. Simply pointing them to a discussions were about 12 people discuss it over and over, and then deleting new options doesn't get things anywhere. Most of the same people seem to have been at the 'straw poll' as at the last "Requested move (November 2011)" page and about the 12 people voting supporting the 'Sega Genesis' move, which isn't much of a majority even though only 10 of the people commenting didn't care which of the two names were used, while 2 even suggested "Sega's 16-bit", and only two that opposed the move preferring the 'Mega Drive'. I agree with the comment given earlier by user:MTC "Mega Drive”, as the English name that Sega intended for it and released it under in many countries, should be preferable to the alternative name they were forced to give it for the US release." (Floppydog66 (talk) 21:41, 30 April 2012 (UTC))
Lets Get This Staight! Ok so I am aware that Americans are overly patriotic and highly stupid which is why it seems we have ended up with the mess we have, The biggest argument given for the current name if one wants to delve through the archives is that the Mega-Drive sold more units in the Unites States and Canada under the regional name of Genesis, and by this yank logic that makes the system most popular in the North America region with the name Genesis. However if American's understood basic mathematics and population size they would realise this is not the case and the system was actually much more popular in Europe and Asia. Let me break it down for you. There are no accurate statistics of Britan's population in 1998 but it was around 57 million however we will use accurate numbering from the 2001 census of 58,789,194 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Census_2001 so this gives us a conservative figure and we will even round it up to 59 million. We do have accurate statistics for the United States population as of July 1st 1998 it stood at 270,298,524 http://www.npg.org/facts/us_historical_pops.htm which we will round down to 270 million. The same issue for Canada we cannot get exact figures for 1998 but they also had a census in 2001 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada_2001_Census and their population stood at 31,021,300 which again we will round down to 31 million. Now the sales figures we have listed in the article for North America stand at 20.4 Million http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sega_Mega_Drive#cite_note-SalesNote1-10 And the sales figures for Britain stand at 8 million units between 1990 and 1998 http://crave.cnet.co.uk/gamesgear/sega-mega-drive-named-best-retro-console-50006754/ So that gives us a population and sales count of Britain's Population = 59 million Unit's sold 8 Million USA's Population = 270 million + Canada's Population = 31 million = North American Population = 301 million Unit's sold 20.4 million Now lets do the maths to calculate the popularity shall we, 8 Divided by 57 Multiplied by 100 Equals 14% so 14% of the British population bought a Mega Drive 20.4 Divided by 301 Multiplied by 100 Equals 6.7% so 6.7% of the North American Population bought a Mega-Drive under is regional name of Genesis This makes the system more than twice as popular in the UK than the USA and Canada, who if you want to look into the sales figures actually preferred Nintendos offerings. This Article needs Renaming back to Mega-Drive or it needs the world wide tag as it most defiantly does not represent a world wide view, only a North American view which 16 pages worth of archived discussion has shown to be biassed and bigoted.221.2.228.202 (talk) 16:15, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I have not attacked any editor and resent the accusation, also you do not have concensus, as 16 archived pages of people disagreeing with the North American viewpoint is evidence of.221.2.228.202 (talk) 17:46, 26 June 2012 (UTC) That is not a consensus if it were, I an others would not be disagreeing with your biased viewpoint221.2.228.202 (talk) 17:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
My first post that you and your buddy kept trying to censor has valid reasons with reliable sources... and you will never be done here while this article is named Genesis... you will get countless users raising issue with the name forever untill it is reverted... "Genesis" is a regional name for the "Mega-Drive" so as long as you are in the wrong and hold a North American biased viewpoint you will never be done221.2.228.202 (talk) 18:11, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Nice way to exclude me from the discussion banning me for a couple of days... a very lame tactic from very sad people, and no that isn't an attack upon you, it is a statement of FACT based upon your actions. subseven, one naming yourself after and 1990's trojan is lame and two no I do not think it is a good argument and no it is not convenient to me, it is a counter point to the choice "Genesis" you Americans have enforced upon us. you have chosen this idiotic page title because "it sold more units in North America" and thus by yank logic is more "popular" in North America which it is not... learn to comprehend ENGLISH!!!! and again this isn't an attack it is just a suggestion to stop you sounding retarded in future. 221.2.228.202 (talk) 22:41, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
The summery at the top of the page isn't very accurate, the last discussion on the subject of the article's name was a proposed move to Sega Genesis from 'Sega Genesis and Mega Drive', and yet it says "clear consensus was found to be in favor of that proposal to rename the article Sega Genesis". But that's not what that discussion showed. There were like two people that wanted it to be 'Sega Mega Drive' and like 3 people that wanted it to be "Sega Genesis", while the the other 8 or so people didn't care, but thought the the combined name wasn't working. That's not much of a "clear consensus" as stated above. Instead of this article, and the other articles, being changed to the new name, as should have been done, if Wikipedia as a whole was being considered. Only this one was changed leaving the other 'Sega Mega Drive' articles giving the direct opposite view. What should have been done, and should still be done is that the Video Game Project, should get all its members together and they as a community should decide on what the title of this article should be, rather then what has happened so far, only visitors to the page have been giving their views on the subject. Then others coming in and looking at that, and saying well, I guess you guys were first, and it did sell more. Then instead of a small group of people saying yeah we won, the discussion is now over. The video Game Project would have actually fixed the problem, and not just claimed victory on the name of one article, and ignored the contradictions on the other articles. The lead sentence of the article doesn't even give a reason as to why the article has the Genesis name. To the reader it would seem completely arbitrary, leading to even more dislike of an article that doesn't bother to explain. Until that is fixed there will be more and more people dropping in to discuss what has been described as a closed subject. I liken this argument to if the movie The Wizard of Oz (1939 film), was released in Australia as "Dorothy Goes Home", and by some chance everyone there bought a copy, and it out sold the rest of the world. Despite it being a U.S. film and it having been released everywhere else under the U.S. name, a Australian started the article about it and named the Wikipedia article "Dorothy Goes Home".(Floppydog66 (talk) 19:17, 30 June 2012 (UTC))
|
Sales
Every "official" source mentions worldwide sales of 29 million for Genesis. Why do some pitiful "researchers" cling to non-independant sources such as New York Times and "other claims" to inflate the system's sales? This is supposed to be an accurate article... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.194.19.172 (talk) 04:10, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
- "non-independant sources such as New York Times"? Seriously? You think the New York Times is published by Sega?--NukeofEarl (talk) 15:32, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
i don't think that the article must be named sega genesis.
of course i've read the f.a.q., but this faq is nonsense. admins say that article must be named sega genesis only due to being mostly popular in north america, but it was popular in europe too, and due to the english-languaged reliable sources. the console was first released in japan as mega drive, 2 years later released in europe also as mega drive. most of the world uses the name mega drive for the console. why people think only about america ??? --82.139.5.13 (talk) 11:22, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Is this a troll? I'm frankly tempted to remove this as "unhelpful to improving the article." If you really want to change the name, re-read the faq, and bring something new to the table. Chaheel Riens (talk) 12:05, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not a troll. this is my opinion. everyone has own opinions and thoughts, as well as pros and cons.i've just only criticized it.--82.139.5.13 (talk) 13:49, 24 April 2012 (UTC) oh and also i've carefully readed the F.A.Q. --82.139.5.13 (talk) 13:53, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Opinion noted. However, this is not a forum to just criticize the article. As Chaheel pointed out, unless you have a truly novel argument for why the name should be changed—one that hasn't been covered by the FAQ or previous discussions—such posts could be considered unrelated to improving the article since you're simply voicing your distaste and not bringing anything new to the table. --McDoobAU93 13:59, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not a troll. this is my opinion. everyone has own opinions and thoughts, as well as pros and cons.i've just only criticized it.--82.139.5.13 (talk) 13:49, 24 April 2012 (UTC) oh and also i've carefully readed the F.A.Q. --82.139.5.13 (talk) 13:53, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
ok, but i would say why the article must be named sega mega drive
1. the console was released FIRST in Japan in 1988 as mega drive. It was the FIRST and ORIGINAL name for console. not sega genesis
2. most of the world uses name "mega drive" for console, only north america used the name sega genesis.
3. it was popular in europe, brazil, australia, japan and india as mega drive.
4. in google search "sega mega drive" and "mega drive" have more points than "sega genesis", even in youtube together.
5. most of Wikipedias use name "Sega Mega Drive", even Simple English Wikipedia.
6. the name of article of Mega Drive/Genesis' CD-ROM addon is Mega-CD (international name), not Sega CD (USA/Canada name)
7. some portions of article about Mega-Drive/Genesis use the word Mega Drive
dear chaheel, i don't want to change anything in faq --82.139.5.13 (talk) 20:33, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- If there is a point here that is not addressed in the FAQ, I don't see it. Anyone? --Born2cycle (talk) 20:54, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Nope, but I do see demonstrable mistakes.LedRush (talk) 20:58, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'll try and take this question by question from the IP. Items 1 and 5 are covered by Subsection 4 of FAQ Item 7, as Genesis was the term used when the console first debuted in an English-speaking market; I would extend that by saying that Simple English is more for users to whom English is a second language, so they would well know the console as Mega Drive, so that's not grounds for much of a case. Items 2 and 3 are covered by Subsection 1 of FAQ Item 9, based on majority of console users being in North America. Item 4 is covered by Subsection 3 of FAQ Item 7; we prefer reliable sources over fan postings on YouTube. Item 6 is not germane to this because we're not discussing that console; frankly, these same reasons for setting this article's name to Genesis could be made over there and cause a move to Sega CD. Item 7 is covered by FAQ Item 5, as well as the reasonable fact that discussions of the console in markets where it was known as Mega Drive (such as Europe and Asia) should rightfully include that name. Again, unless you have something new to add (and none of these are new), it's time to again put down the stick. --McDoobAU93 21:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- To add insult to injury, his google analysis is simply wrong. You need to compare apples to apples if you want someone to acknowledge that argument (please see the archives for conclusive proof that the Genesis is used more than Mega Drive). However, McDoob is right that reliable sources matter more than this anyway.LedRush (talk) 21:34, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Nope, but I do see demonstrable mistakes.LedRush (talk) 20:58, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Oh and also i want to say the console was created in japan, not america. the company (sega) that created the console is also from japan. McDooB, What about item 4 you've forget to say about google search, you've said only about youtube videos. --82.139.5.13 (talk) 14:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- On the Japanese Wikipedia, that's perfect. But, for the English Wikipedia, where the console's first appearance in an English-speaking market is what mattered here, and that's Genesis (FAQ Item 7, Subsection 4). Where it's manufactured doesn't matter, as the same arguments held. As to the Google searches, I would think that replacing the term "YouTube" with the term "Google" (since they're owned by the same company) would be reasonable; doesn't change the point that it's reliable sources that count more, and that also is covered in FAQ Item 7, Subsection 3. Again, please feel free to provide a new, novel argument for the change and stop citing points that have each been covered by the FAQ. --McDoobAU93 14:29, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- Indeed, article titles are often different in different Wikipedia languages. It's no surprise at all that Japanese Wikipedia names it differently from English Wikipedia...there are hundreds of articles about things like cars (which are almost always marketed under different names in different parts of the world) where the English article is named after one product name and the Japanese one after some other variation.
- We also don't name articles after the first name something was ever given. To take an example that I happen to know about, the Mini car was launched as the "Austin Se7en" and as the "Morris Mini-Minor" - it wasn't called "Mini" until it had been in production for 8 years! But because the vast majority of its' sales were under it's later name: "Mini", that's what our article is called. That's the Wikipedia way.
- As for YouTube - it's a really poor way to sample common usage because it's highly localized - and unlike Google's main search engine, it's not segregated by language but by nationality. Hence, if you were to search for "Mega Drive" in YouTube in the UK, you'd get much different results than in Australia, the USA, etc. Since Wikipedia is segregated by language, we can't say that a YouTube search in (say) the UK accurately represents the likely usage in all English-speaking (and thus English-Wikipedia-reading) Internet users.
- SteveBaker (talk) 16:36, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- And, as I alluded to above, the past discussions on the topic of google hits demonstrates that searches for (Genesis plus Sega) return far more hits than (Mega Drive plus Sega) and that (Sega Genesis) returns far more hits than (Sega Mega Drive). You can't pick and choose the results, you have to go apples-to-apples. And, as has been said, reliable sources is a better way to do this.LedRush (talk) 15:29, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- What about youtube, i live in Poland. when i clicked just only ""genesis"" on google search, it were about whole different things, not sega's console. but when it's only sega genesis searched i saw there are only 16,2 million points. As sega mega drive there are 18,9 million points. As just mega drive there are 51 million points, much more. But i agree that together genesis and sega genesis have more points, than mega drive and sega mega drive.--82.139.5.13 (talk) 10:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Article name
So this seems to be a very contenious issue. I have gone through the archives and it seems to me that an agreement over it will never occur :( it obviously should be called Mega Drive for the hundreads of reasons listed by other users above me so im not going to go into them what I would like to say is it seems to me that the consensus for the name Genesis is very weak, there was basically two American users requesting this article title and the other users while not for it agread to it to get them to shut up, also as only 10 users agread to the rename and since then there has been at least 50 users stating there opposition to this silly article name I feel there is no consensus at all and a new vote should be held. or alternativly there should be two articles, or the same article but with diffrent names, ie if you come from an American ip address you would be directed to the current erronious article title and if you come from anywhere else in the world you would be directed to the correct article title of Mega Drive this would probably be the best sollution possible as both sides would be happy, otherwise it just looks like a war is going to occur forever over the name and it will never be solved :( compromise is the way forward, regards, dave — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.107.146.209 (talk) 18:59, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- If we changed the name, then we'd have even more people coming here to complain of the name "Mega Drive", for the hundreds of reasons listed above. Beyond that, all I can say is that your review of the discussion was inadequate and your summary of it is inaccurate. Your ignorance of the basic facts of this dispute is clear by your chosen "compromise", and it's not really worthwile to engage you on a serious level until you have new ideas and understand the situation.LedRush (talk) 19:20, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
hello ledrush you were one of the two users pushing for this title against the will of everyone else so your above trollish comments hold no weight, regards, dave — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.107.146.209 (talk) 19:33, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- I argued long and strenuously against the name change in favor of the composite, compromise name and acquiesced after the people who had forged that consensus agreed to agree to this new consensus. This lack of review of the discussion is exactly what I was referring to above. If you can't be bothered to review the past discussions or summarize them correctly, why should anyone listen to you present no new ideas here?LedRush (talk) 19:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
I am more than happy to go through the archive logs again and copy and paste all of your comments arguing for the title genesis and your shooting down of everyone elses oppinion on the matter like you are trying to do to me now but that would not be very constuctive, dave