Jump to content

Talk:Wii Mini

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

TV output

[edit]

Nintendo has now posted the Wii Mini instruction manual online. It simply says only the included composite cable works. There is no direct mention of any support for s-video, component video, or progressive scan (480p). Do we need further confirmation? http://www.nintendo.com/consumer/downloads/WiiMiniOpMn_RVO_en.pdf Theclaw1 (talk) 13:48, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wii Mini: why have a separate article?

[edit]

i see that some users disagree with the Wii Mini article, believing it should be merged with the main Wii article. Here are the reasons why i believe the Wii Mini should get its own article:

  • Different by design: the Family Edition of the Wii is too similar to the original for a separate article. The Wii Mini, however, differs in many ways. The red border covering three sides features no ports, buttons or lights. The top has the disc tray, power button/LED and eject button, reminiscent of (but incompatible with) the GameCube. The back has ports. The Wii Mini deserves its own article for the same reason the Nintendo DS Lite (and, while we're at it, the various "minor" Game Boy line revisions such as the Pocket, Advance SP and Micro) has its own: it is a different design compared to the original and Family Wii.
  • Features: the Wii Mini focuses on its core aspect of playing Wii games. This means that all older games, from the NES to the GameCube, are currently incompatible with the Wii Mini. One could consider the SD card, but it is unclear if the Wii Mini supports this, or if Virtual Console games could be transferred to or sold for the Wii Mini this way. Online game support is also omitted, and Internet-dependant applications such as Opera or Netflix cannot be used on the Wii Mini. However, parents and guardians (such as daycares or hospitals) may be more to know that their children cannot access inappropriate online content on the Wii Mini. The Wii Mini deserves its own article due to its lack of features and the potential benefit of no Internet access.
  • Homebrew community: given the lack of features, it may be difficult or impossible to run unauthorized software on the Wii Mini. Its lack of Internet capabilities could also make it more unattractive for custom applications. Its lower price point and potential lack of firmware updates, however, may be an appealing motivation. The Wii Mini deserves its own article because the homebrew community may approach it differently than other Wii consoles.
  • Canadian exclusive: it is rare that a product is exclusive to Canada. The majority of the time, a product is launched in markets other than Canada, especially with technology products. The Wii Mini deserves its own article because, for the time being, Nintendo has made it exclusive to Canada.

Feel free to share your thoughts! Thanks! --True Tech Talk Time (talk) 22:45, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

YEAH MAN — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.56.219.89 (talk) 00:01, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Article should be merged 24.189.212.174 (talk) 04:19, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I oppose the merge; the Wii Mini is a separate device, like the iPad Mini is in regards to the iPad. It was only recently announced so more information about it will emerge, and give it enough content for its own article. Bui (talk) 08:26, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article should be merged because regardless of the differing factors of the "new" console, the Wii Mini is still a Wii. The various PS3 redesigns have not received their own pages, nor have the redesigns of the Xbox 360, so the Wii Mini should not be prioritised in this way. (Jeimii (talk) 13:36, 28 November 2012 (UTC))[reply]
Agreed. Couldn't have said it better myself. The article should be merged.--Arkhandar (talk) 15:36, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But the PS3 and 360 do not remove significant features, other than PS2 and Linux. Even then, most of the public won't mind these omissions. With the Wii Mini, however, there are much less features with both Internet access and GameCube games removed. --True Tech Talk Time (talk) 21:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. All points by True Tech Talk Time are not acceptable enough to warrant a separate article for the Wii Mini. Just because it looks different, it is still a Wii. The Game Boy line you spoke of are all completely different handhelds across multiple video game generations. Personally, I can't believe you compared the original Game Boy to the Advance SP. The Wii Homebrew community is barely notable enough as it is (look at the Homebrew Channel article to see what I mean). Every single other one of those points can easily be worked into its own sub-section in the Wii article and as its own article just looks redundant; just listing off all of the opposite of the Wii's features (no Channel support, no backwards compatibility, no Online features, etc.). Lastly, let's not forget about the fact that this article has no sources. There's just no reason for this article. ☆ Antoshi ☆ T | C 16:45, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment to Antoshi: no, i wasn't comparing the Game Boy original to the Advance SP. i was comparing Original to Pocket, Advance to SP and Micro, and DS Original to Lite (and while we're at it, DSi). i agree that the Family Wii is a minor revision. Only GameCube support was removed, and it looks almost the same as the old one. The Wii Mini, however, has a significantly different look and much less features than earlier models. Very few channels (maybe the Mario Kart Wii and Wii Fit Plus channels, for example) will be supported, as only the Disc Channel (for Wii games only) is confirmed. It remains to be seen how critics will respond to its release. Please wait until at least 2013 if you still insist on merging or deleting the article. Thank you! --True Tech Talk Time (talk) 21:24, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge - It's nothing but a small Wii with some features stripped out. It can easily be covered in a section/paragraph in the main Wii article. We don't usually have articles for minor revisions like this. (You'll note there's no separate articles for the PSP 1000, 2000, 3000 and E100). Sergecross73 msg me 18:32, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose the merge, simply because when compared to revisions like the PS3 Slim and Super Super slim and the 360 S, these systems do not remove features that affect the operation of the device that much like removal of proprietary memory cards on the 360 S and addition of CEC to the slim PS3 models. However, the Wii Mini removes important features to gameplay such as removal of Internet connectivity and limiting compatible acessories such as GameCube ports and the possibility of USB and SD card slots. Also, the Wii Mini uses a different name for advertising while the slim PS3's use the same name as the original fat design and the 360 S is still advertised the same as the fat model although it is called the 360 S on accessories and microsoft's support website. 50.98.164.143 (talk) 00:31, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge - Articles aren't needed for minor revisions. See Xbox 360 & Xbox 360 S; PS3, PS3 Slim, and PS3 Super-Slim; PSP-1000, PSP-2000, and PSP-3000. If there's any direct comparison that could be made here, it should be PSP-E1000 versus Wii Mini. Both of these consoles removed wireless and both are in a different finish, and PSP-E1000 was still located in the primary PlayStation Portable article. --GSK ● talk ● contribs 05:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge'. No reason why this variant is a special snowflake. 90.229.34.175 (talk) 12:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Tally is 4 Keep, 7 Merge. i'll recreate the article if there is a perceived need, such as notable negative or positive reception for this Wii Mini. Please do not delete this talk page! It remains here for archival purposes. Thanks! --True Tech Talk Time (talk) 19:03, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Voting Comment round 2

[edit]
CLOSED
Consensus is merge to Wii. --GSK ● ✉ ✓ 09:50, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is now the second voting comment round for those who did not vote comment during the first round, per user Status' request. --True Tech Talk Time (talk) 20:21, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wikipedia does not work by voting, and suggesting doing so is contrary to Wikipedia policy. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:55, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Sorry about that. But what do you call what happened above? --True Tech Talk Time (talk) 23:07, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • James is somewhat incorrect in this situation. While most discussions (AfD's, etc.) are weighed upon editor's arguments as to whether or not an article has merit (General notability, sources, etc.), in regards to merges, there needs to be an established general consensus as to whether or not the merge should take place. "After a period of time when discussion has ceased, a rough consensus to proceed with the merger may emerge. If enough time (normally one week or more) has elapsed and there has been no discussion or is unanimous consent to merge, any user may close the discussion and move forward with the merger." This CAN be perceived as to how many 'votes' a merge discussion gets, but still weighs heavily on, again, whether or not the article has merit and notability.
There doesn't need to be a 'Round Two' and you shouldn't have tallied up all the votes so quickly. I also feel the Administrator that carried out the merge may have jumped the gun a bit early, as remarked upon by User:Status in the edit history.
Since the general policy for discussions is one week, give editor discussion/comments until Dec. 4 before a general consensus on the merge is established. For more information, read about the steps for merging here. ☆ Antoshi ☆ T | C 00:55, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge with Wii. Appears to be a very small release [only being released in Canada (as far we know), got a very quiet announcement]; probably won't receive that much coverage. If it becomes a bigger thing that it appears to be right now, an obvious recreation of the article could be done; but for now, it works perfectly fine in the Wii article. Statυs (talk) 02:03, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another vote for merge It is just a redesign; redesigns shouldn't have their own articles. (similar to DSi LL and 3DS LL) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abckookooman (talk • contribs) 16:56, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There is enough information to have a separate article. Also, the Wii Mini is not a redesign, is almost a new console. It has the same capabilities of the Wii in regards to processing power and video, but it has a complete [lacking] set of features that make this substantially different from redesigns. Also, this "redesign" is way too drastic in comparison with PlayStation 3's, PlayStation 2's and Xbox 360's redesigns [The Xbox 360 was a bit drastic, tho, but it regained all the technical specs from the older version and was marketed under the same name.] — ΛΧΣ21™ 21:01, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, the only features missing are SD card support, WiFi, and GameCube support. Let me refer you over to the PSP-E1000, which was only released in Europe (much like how the Mini was only released in Canada). The PSP-E1000 has no WiFi, a mono speaker, and no microphone, and it too is in a matte finish. The PSP-E1000 also has been integrated into the primary PlayStation Portable article. Basing off of this, there seems to be little reason why there should be a separate article for the Wii mini. This behavior is also repeated with the various XL models of the DS line. --GSK ● ✉ ✓ 00:01, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wii_Mini&oldid=1206042972"