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.
This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Leave messages at the project talk page
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology 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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Engineering, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of engineering 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.
The article is called GameCube, but Nintendo GameCube would be the proper name. Should the article be moved or not?Darrman1 (talk) 18:49, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Dunno. The article was moved unilaterally a while back, ignoring consensus established during a previous move request. The argument is that there is no other page at the name "GameCube" so there is no need to disambiguate. I think there's an argument there, but there should have been a discussion first, especially since consensus had already been established. --Jtalledo(talk) 00:01, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
So you're saying he moved without discussion and against agreement? Isn't that a broken rule? Maybe there should be a move discussion. Darrman1 (talk) 11:00, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Yes, 'Nintendo GameCube' is probably a better title... DarkToonLink (talk) 11:41, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
I think the rationale is that we have a lot of other articles with names without the company name in them, e.g. Xbox 360 and PlayStation 2. Therefore some editors think if there's no page at the most primitive name e.g. "GameCube", they should automatically move it to the name without the company in it. For Xbox and PlayStation, which rarely are referred to with Microsoft and Sony in the name, there is a cogent argument. For others like Sega Master System, of which the prominent acronym is SMS, I think there is less of a case (although my request to move it back was blocked). For this system, there's a good argument either way. NGC and GC are both commonly used acronyms and unlike the Wii, the company name has been commonly used in conjunction with "GameCube". So yeah, maybe there should be a move discussion. --Jtalledo(talk) 12:48, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived 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: Withdrawn by nominator Prototime. George Ho (talk) 12:19, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
GameCube → Nintendo GameCube – As noted above, the name of this console is the Nintendo GameCube, not merely "GameCube". See Nintendo.com List of Systems; note that, unlike "Wii" or "Game Boy Advance", the console is called "Nintendo GameCube", akin to the "Super NES" and "Nintendo 64". See also the official Nintendo GameCube logo, which is used at the top of this very article in the infobox. Furthermore, previous consensus—established during a previous move request—was that this article should be named "Nintendo GameCube". However, a user moved this article to the present title a few months ago unilaterally, ignoring the consensus without discussion. This article should thus be returned to its former, correct, consensus-supported title. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 02:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Support Although most people call GameCubes GameCubes, Nintendo GameCube is the full official name. Take Secure Digital for example; everyone calls them SD cards, but Secure Digital is the proper name. As well, 30 Wikipedias call this Nintendo GameCube, versus 9 who call it GameCube. My source?  So, Nintendo GameCube is the more used name on Wikipedia. GameCube is the common name, but Nintendo GameCube is the official name, and the article should be moved. GameCube can exist as a redirect. Darrman (talk) 05:47, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
A brief read later, and I saw examples like the UK being called the United Kingdom, not United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. So, I checked the Nintendo website, and it says Nintendo GameCube, not GameCube. And just to show, the Wii is called the Wii, not the Nintendo Wii. Darrman (talk) 09:45, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
SupportNintendo GameCube is its proper title, and many people do commonly refer to it as such. Simply GameCube is generally only used in context and as per the reasons above I agree it is better to give it its full title, Nintendo GameCube. That is the name of the console, after all. The Nintendo 3DS is commonly called simply 3DS, although its article includes the proper prefix of the brand name, even though it is sometimes dropped; the same principle applies here. DarkToonLink (talk) 09:56, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
the 3DS example is a bad one, considering how many uses there are to 3ds -- 184.108.40.206 (talk) 00:50, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
So I checked the disambiguation, and I've never heard of any of the other meanings! I think it's fine. The Nintendo 3DS is more likely then not the most common meaning! The 3DS is often called the 3DS, in fact, I always drop the Nintendo myself. But Nintendo 3DS is the proper name, and that's why the article is called. Same deal here, the proper name is Nintendo GameCube, even though it's often called GameCube. That's why I said Support in the first place, in fact, I brought up the subject in February. If I offended you, sorry. Darrman (talk) 11:15, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Oppose unless someone can show that the full name is actually more common. PowersT 13:43, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Can somebody prove that GameCube is more common in a variety of contexts? DarkToonLink (talk) 09:56, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
Oppose GameCube isn't ambiguous, nor is "Nintendo GameCube" more commonly used. Hot Stop 15:27, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
Oppose for now – no other challenging topics yet. --George Ho (talk) 19:04, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Oppose – Per WP:COMMONNAME, "Wikipedia does not necessarily use the subject's 'official' name as an article title; it prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources. This includes usage in the sources used as references for the article." This Wikipedia guideline should help clear up some confusion. Nintendo GameCube is indeed the official name. But as evidenced in a majority of the article's references, GameCube is the common name and thus, an acceptable title. Unless it can be proven that the official name is more common, I oppose moving it. --GoneIn60 (talk) 18:08, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
Withdraw - While Google searches (Web, News, and Scholar) do show that "GameCube" is a more common name, I question the value of strictly adhering to WP:COMMONNAME in an instance where the common name is as extremely similar to the official name as "GameCube" is to "Nintendo GameCube", and I lean in favor of using the official name in such an instance on an encyclopedia. I further disapprove of the action that created this situation—specifically, the action of a single editor who took action unilaterally against a previous, long-standing consensus that this article be titled "Nintendo GameCube". This action inappropriately necessitated that yet another consensus be obtained as to whether to revert that change. Despite the result of this discussion being favorable to that editor's unilateral action, I wish to strongly emphasize that, per WP:CONSENSUS, all editors should achieve a new consensus before taking action against a previous consensus (bearing in mind that per WP:NOCONSENSUS, no new consensus would result in either no change or a reversion to a longer-standing title). Nonetheless, it appears clear from this discussion that, between WP:COMMONNAME and the preferences of most editors in this discussion to strictly follow it, "GameCube" is now the consensus title. While I maintain my position otherwise, in an effort to conclude a discussion that now appears to have a clear outcome, I withdraw this move request. –Prototime (talk · contribs) 03:01, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
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.
Nintendo GameCube is the proper title and you guys are fucking stupid. Please change it back as every site I know of that links to this page links to "Nintendo GameCube", not "GameCube" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 07:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Don't personally insult other editors. I agree with you about the page name but I can understand others disagree and have accepted that without having to direct profanity at them. Please also remember to sign your posts. DarkToonLink 07:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
RfC: Nintendo GameCube is the official name regardless of popular belief
I would like to make a request for consensus on the subject. So, in every official Nintendo marketing, report ,labeling etc. you will find that the official name of the console is in fact, letter by letter, Nintendo GameCube. As such it is my point of view that Wikipedia should support support official naming rather than common slang, otherwise the original Nintendo Entertainment System article would be named just Nintendo, the Super Nintendo Entertainment System article would be named Super Nintendo and the Nintendo DS and Nintendo 3DS ones would be simply DS and 3DS respectively, like media and the general consumer uses to call such consoles. Now, I find this rather unnecessary since we already have official naming at our dispose. As such, I aprove this article to be moved to Nintendo GameCube. What are your thoughts on this?--Arkhandar (talk) 00:46, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Oppose and speedy close. This new discussion was created right below a discussion on this topic that just ended last month. I'd respect that clear community consensus (there are a plethora of arguments to choose from, though I think the last two summarize the requested move best) for a longer period of time before reasonably returning to the topic. Read GoneIn60's response above for a direct refutation of the central premise of your nomination. czar·· 00:59, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
By this line of though many other console article on Wikipedia should be changed too, including both the consoles I mentioned above and the entire PlayStation family which is more commonly refered as simply PS, PS2, PS3 and the more recent PS4 which doesn't even have a full PlayStation 4 like other PlayStation systems, only a PS4 one. You know where the difference here is? It's called and abbreviation. And although abbreviations are more commonly use I seriously object the use of them in Wikipedia articles. GameCube is merely an abbreviation of Nintendo GameCube. Likewise, SD card (much more commonly used) belong to the Secure Digital article title.--Arkhandar (talk) 01:16, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
We don't decide article titles based on reading logos, but reliable sources. Please see the "WP" links from the previous discussion. Also I know what an abbreviation is, and I think you will find little argumentative traction in condescending to others. Enjoy your crusade czar·· 02:08, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Arkhandar, you do such good work when you're working on content and not argument type stuff like this. I wish you'd concentrate on that, considering people just got done arguing over this about a month ago... Sergecross73msg me 02:54, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
You're right and I'm sorry for bringing this up again, but that's just the way I tend to work, to give to much attention to details like this. Although I don't completely agree with the current consensus, I understand that there's no need for further discussion so soon, so I'm going to have to back down now. Thank you.--Arkhandar (talk) 11:52, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
@Lukeno94:, When I approached the GameCube article a few months ago, it was clear that the article needed a lot of work. There was a lot of redundancy, missing information, and unsourced content. My intent is to get this article to GA status. The last remaining section is "Market share". Clearly, a lot of the information here is redundant and unnecessary, as it is already mentioned in the opening of "Reception and sales" section and/or in other sections throughout the article. My proposed change was to shorten this section keeping the most notable information and summarizing it. Regarding the sourced content I removed, it detailed events that may have mattered in late 2003 or early 2004, but does not contribute significantly to the overall lifespan of the console and it's market share performance. The next step is to request a peer review, so please explain your objection to the proposed change, and I'll be glad to work towards a compromise. --GoneIn60 (talk) 07:13, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Don't get me wrong, there were several unsourced statements in there that needed to go. However, I did object to the large removal of sourced content that you also engaged in without discussion. One major issue I have with your paragraph is that it doesn't really compare how the Gamecube sold against the XBox and PS2 - it's there in very vague terms, but certainly is insufficient; before, there was a little more there, and it was sourced. Although it is unsourced, I think the bit about the special GD-ROM discs being a problematic factor should've been kept, and sourced; I'd say the same for the sourced information on major publishers pulling support from the Gamecube, and similar things. You probably also should've left in some of the information about when the last games came out, although that was unsourced, so you'd have needed to sort that. :) Lukeno94(tell Luke off here) 07:20, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
I understand it appears to be a drastic removal of content, but I should emphasize that some of the content removed is redundant.
How the GameCube stacked up against the Xbox, PS2, and Dreamcast is explained directly above with specific numbers and an IGN ranking.
Regarding the mini-disc format being an issue, my edit stated: "...the console's limited disc storage capacity led to higher video compression and missing content in many third-party releases". The previous text seems to state the same thing, only in more words. The technical section of the article discusses the capacity and how it differs from DVDs. Perhaps that can be expanded upon, but really that should happen earlier in the article and not under "Market share".
Regarding third-party publishers pulling the plug, you've got a good point. Though the text needs some work, it should be left in some capacity.
I'm not opposed to leaving in the information about when the last games were sold, but it should probably be moved out of "Market share" and perhaps directly above under "Reception and sales".
I'll work on a proposal and provide a link to it afterwards for review. Thanks for the feedback so far. --GoneIn60 (talk) 08:04, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
I think the rankings of the consoles still needs to be more detailed, particularly in regards to the various markets (Europe/USA/Japan/other). I must admit, I thought moving the information about the later games would be a good idea. And not a problem, glad you're open to ideas :) Lukeno94(tell Luke off here) 08:39, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
The Wavebird was an interesting device at the time. But I do not believe that it was the first Wireless controller as is being said in the article. The 2600 had wireless controllers, the CD-I had wireless controllers, the Tandy/Memorex VIS had wireless Controllers, there was a wireless controller option on the Commodore 64GS since it could use accessories from the original Commodore64. That's just a few examples. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leeroyhim (talk • contribs) 23:09, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
I believe the operative word here is gamepad. The Atari 2600 had a wireless joystick and the CD-i something resembling a remote-control with a small control joystick. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 17:28, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
Many in the industry have called this a commercial failure, including Microsoft. Why is there no section to this being known as a commercial failure?2602:304:CFD3:2EE0:80C7:890E:F43:CF74 (talk) 05:04, 17 July 2015 (UTC)