Talk:Nintendo/Archive 7

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Shiho Fujii. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Brayan Jaimes (talk) 20:17, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place as to whether Portal:Nintendo is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The page will be discussed at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Nintendo until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the page during the discussion, including to improve the page to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the deletion notice from the top of the page. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:22, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

As a practice I don't edit articles concerning this topic due to the similarity of my username. I ask that another editor make these changes.

Two references using the {{cite journal}} template are generating Missing PeriodicalCS1 errors because the |journal= parameters within them are not active. Since these two references are operation manuals, the templates should be changed to {{cite manual}}.^[a]

• Location: The last reference used in the Wii subsection of the Products/Home Consoles section
  
  

{{cite journal |url=https://www.nintendo.com/consumer/downloads/WiiMiniOpMn_RVO_en.pdf |title=Nintendo Wii Mini Operations Manual |publisher=Nintendo of America |page=10 |accessdate=16 December 2012}}

• Change to:
  
  

{{cite manual|url=https://www.nintendo.com/consumer/downloads/WiiMiniOpMn_RVO_en.pdf |title=Nintendo Wii Mini Operations Manual |publisher=Nintendo of America |page=10 |accessdate=16 December 2012}}

• Location: The last reference used in the NTSC regions subsection of the Policy section
  
  

{{cite journal |title=Nintendo 3DS XL Operations Manual |url=https://www.nintendo.com/consumer/downloads/SPR_EN_NA.pdf |publisher=Nintendo |accessdate=2 September 2012}}

• Change to:
  
  

{{cite manual |title=Nintendo 3DS XL Operations Manual |url=https://www.nintendo.com/consumer/downloads/SPR_EN_NA.pdf |publisher=Nintendo |accessdate=2 September 2012}}

Regards,  Spintendo  14:19, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Spintendo, all done. Regards, Lordtobi (✉) 14:28, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Can anyone with sufficient edit permissions mention that Scandinavia is not covered by Nintendo of Europe, but by the independent distributor Bergsala? That would be great. --2A02:908:1462:4B60:C0C7:9937:F20D:991C (talk) 15:30, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

Added to the NoEurope section. --Masem (t) 15:37, 17 December 2019 (UTC)

In the paragraph, Nintendo 64 and Game Boy Colour, there is a disturbing sentence that says "On 4 October,1997, famed Nintendo developer Gunpei Yokoi died in a car crash". For younger readers, I would like to change this to "On 4 October,1997, famed Nintendo developer Gunpei Yokoi passed away in a car crash". If you have any objections to my proposal then please say so here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8004:15A0:21E2:1D9B:FA2E:E34D:53BD (talk) 01:43, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

No, per our manual of style: Wikipedia:Passed away. As well as WP:NOTCENSORED. -- ferret (talk) 01:51, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I just learned that Nintendo made an optical telephone (more like a two-way radio) device in 1971. It's described in the December 1971 issue of Popular Science, at the bottom of page 61. This was when Nintendo was just starting to get into electronic toys, before they started making video games. It could be good to mention this device along with the electronic toys already listed in the article, especially given how toy-like it looks and that the author says it would probably be marketed as a toy in the US (while implying it was originally intended to be a serious tool—not sure how true that is). What do you think? ← PointyOintment ❬t & c❭  23:23, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

The redirect ES operating system redirects to a no longer existing section of this article which contained information about Nintendo "publishing ES, a now-dormant research operating system". This was removed in this edit by Cat's Tuxedo.

Please add that information back in, as that is a notable event. Ideally also link that it uses the Squeak programming language, which was previously the redirect target. Changing the redirect back to that would also be an option, but in that case, the ES operating system should still be mentioned on the Nintendo page.

2A02:908:E851:4020:816F:80DA:6C72:669F (talk) 04:20, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Replace the Nintendo logo from 1889 to the vector version of it:

Anomper012 (talk) 05:18, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

Since 1889 Nintendo had been making playing cards called Hanafuda cards. But had stopped selling them a long time ago. 216.174.190.125 (talk) 19:33, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. It's not clear what changes you want to make. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 20:42, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Can someone please add more information about Brazil, such as the release of the Switch in September? That would be nice.

Sources:

https://www.instagram.com/p/CEt5myfDo6C/

https://www.theenemy.com.br/nintendo/nintendo-switch-brasil-preco (In Brazilian Portuguese)WeirdEssential (talk) 18:34, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: as you have not requested a specific change in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
More importantly, you have not cited reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 18:45, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Can someone fix the Products section? 77.221.89.89 (talk) 10:28, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

In what way..? -- ferret (talk) 13:56, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

On the section there is an error. 77.221.89.89 (talk) 13:11, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

Which is? -- ferret (talk) 14:36, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

"Playing cards" 77.221.89.89 (talk) 15:15, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

I want the article Nintendo to be un semi-procted so we can all edit so pages = pages + accounts + registered users and I want to edit too. 70.24.31.108 (talk) 23:03, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

It's a common vandalism target so it's unlikely that it'll be unprotected. You can request specific changes here on this talk page on the form "Please change X to Y", citing reliable sources. – Thjarkur (talk) 23:26, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

Or you could create an account and quickly be granted semi-protection edit permissions. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 23:30, 6 October 2020 (UTC)

I had a question, and I stated it here, but I was wrong. Please remove this statement.I sincerely apologize.

岩田溥 (talk) 12:42, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

I hope everyone is doing well. What does everything think about a Criticisms header in this page vs a dedicated page like: https://www.search.com.vn/wiki/en/Criticism_of_Electronic_Arts? I believe it should be in a different page since it can then go in the Criticisms of Companies category that most software companies have and so that companies have less incentive to edit their own main page. Would love you hear everyone's thoughts :) WeJustWantToPlay (talk) 20:21, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Outside of how Nintendo has handled its IP, I'm not aware of the level of criticism it has gotten to warrant something like that, compared to EA. We generally try to avoid outright criticism sections and incorporate that where we can, and in this case, into the IP section on this article. --Masem (t) 20:28, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

I see where you're coming from, but with how long Nintendo has been around, it's about time we establish something that aggregates this knowledge. There's no convenient up to date resource on the internet that aggregates lawsuits, cease and desists, recalls, etc. There's 131 years of history good and bad, and I think that criticisms for such a large company with huge influence deserves an equal chance to stand on the internet. It does sound like we are in agreement though regarding not having a criticism section on the main article; I also feel that would be unconducive of productive editing. The separate article doesn't even have to link back to the main page for at least a few years. Thoughts? WeJustWantToPlay (talk) 22:39, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

A dedicated page for "Criticism of Nintendo" absolutely would not fly. A criticism section is unlikely to be particular well fleshed out, and the details should be worked into the general history besides, per MOS. There is definitely not enough reliable secondary sourcing to create a full article. -- ferret (talk) 22:44, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

To contrast, the Criticism of Electronic Arts page involves several cases of detailed coverage getting into why EA has been criticized and their attempts to work it out (if they have). But it also doesn't document every lawsuit or C&D EA has put out. That's not our job there, nor here for Nintendo. It is fair that we have the IP section on this page pointing out their IP practices are considered harmful at times, but that's about the most intense thing we can say about the company (individual products like the Virtual Boy, that we can save for the specific pages). --Masem (t) 23:25, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Nintendo has attracted ire from fans, gamers, and journalists for a long time, not just the recent handling of controversy with Melee, Splatoon, and the Etika tribute Joycons. The rarity and price of older games despite Nintendo's zealous protection (going after ROM sites), the never-wavering $60 tag of newer games, the barely-there online support for games since the DS era, recent controversy with Pokemon (although I believe this is covered on the Sword and Shield pages), the dismissive attitude of the widespread Joycon drift problem, and more are all actively-discussed issues with Nintendo. These are all off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are more. These may all be small potatoes, but Nintendo's recent attitude towards fans of a game they no longer actively produce or publish has brought a lot of grievances to light, to the point of Nintendo cancelling the stream of their Splatoon tournament finals in retaliation. These controversies and events are significant, especially for a company as crucial to the gaming industry as Nintendo. 65.222.183.232 (talk) 16:14, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Several of these things require pulling from forums and other user-generated sites that we simply can't do (like the price tag of games). Further, some of these are less about the company and more on specific products - take the Joy-Con drift issue. That's well documented at the Switch + Joy-Con pages, but does it necessarily reflect on Nintendo as a business? Are they known for shoddy hardware in general? No, so it makes no sense to flesh that out here. (The Wii Remote had similar issues with legal trouble but again, that didn't reflect on the company itself). The stuff that came out over the weekend with the Splatoon event and the C&D on the Ekita Joy-Con, we don't have enough sense of time if this is a major problem yet; the Ekita Joy-Con stuff though was added to the Etika page since it is relevant there. Everything else that we can readily document as "criticism" comes down to Nintendo's heavy-handed practices on IP, which does reflect on the company and why we have a whole section for and coverage these factors. We're still not at a case like EA's page where we have several major controversial topics that necessitate a section or split. --Masem (t) 17:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, but people getting mad on the Internet that a corporation does not behave the way they want it to does not real criticism make. Most of the stuff in the EA criticism article falls into three categories: incidents that resulted in legal action, stories that became so big they were picked up by mainstream media outlets, or criticisms that were so widespread that EA felt a need to respond and change their business practices (or at least pay lip service to changing their business practices). Consumers getting mad because Nintendo defends its IP in ways they do not like is simply not in the same league. Indrian (talk) 17:18, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

The company is currently worth 7.61 trillion JPY, which is approximately 73.1 billion USD and being a 131 year old company means that they have a lot of resources to promote themselves and that they've been doing that for a long time. In that 131 years, Nintendo is bound to have made decisions that people are critical of; it's certainly very, very, very unlikely that they are criticism free. How does Nintendo's resources and time compare with the people who gather criticism of Nintendo? Whether you think it's a thousand, million, or billion times more than the criticsm crowd, the point is that criticism against Nintendo has been absent for a long time. There is not one place on the internet of a crowdsourced timeline of criticisms against Nintendo, and Wikipedia fits the bill quite well for the first edition of this, however rough it may be. Even if there had been 10 prior places on the internet that fit the description, I would still be in favor of a dedicated Criticism of Nintendo Wikipedia page. To address the user-created-content point, I think it would be warranted, they are not just "anyone" as the wikipedia guide says. They are people who have worked with Nintendo directly, but I'm sure there will be secondary sources that would write about the recent happenings eventually if we really want to play it by the book. All in all, I hope we can find more empathy for the little guys rather than the $73 billion company at the end of this discussion. WeJustWantToPlay (talk) 22:21, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't here to "right great wrongs" for the little people versus the $73 billion company. Sourcing requirements have been pointed out several times in this discussion, and you've come back with nothing. If you cannot find reliable secondary sourcing to start providing examples of established documented criticism, best to drop the stick. -- ferret (talk) 22:52, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

I addressed the concern in my previous reply, where we can wait for more secondary reporting to come in before adding in the recent criticism. The recent criticism about Nintendo is new and shouldn't stop contributors from compiling and documenting the many things that have happened previously in a dedicated page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WeJustWantToPlay (talk • contribs) 08:58, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

It has been reported already - and none of the RSes made a big deal out of it. Every large company had made consumer slights; WP's job is not to document each one of them, but when they have made ones that are enduring for a company, we will. EA has made several; Nintendo's only enduring one is its rigorous IP protection against emulation and mods. --Masem (t) 14:30, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Also against this. Most of this is very recent and it’s far too early tell if it’s something of lasting impact or just another instance of gamers raging about this or that. (I’m guessing the latter.) If some one feels the need to add a reliably sourced and neutrally worded sentence or two about this, sure go for it. But an entire article or section is overkill/WP:UNDUE. Sergecross73 msg me 19:22, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm going to post this for anybody who might see this as useful. This link belongs to a former member of the Project M development team, who made a chronology of Nintendo's "crimes" against various communities. Yeah, take that title as you will. Multiple subjects (except the recent hacker surveillance stuff) are discussed here. Again, take this as you will: https://press-z-or-r-twice.blogspot.com/2020/12/accounts-of-nintendos-crimes-against.html?m=1 Roberth Martinez (talk) 23:10, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

@Popcornfud: and @Smuckola: Thanks for making those changes. The (now blocked) RyanSonic2002 user hit over 30 different pages with Grammarly (or something like it) and made a big ol' mess. I was going to come back and re-add anything worthwhile, but y'all beat me to it. Thanks so much! Happy holidays to you! — UncleBubba ^{( T @ C )} 01:01, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Under Products, the subsection 'Playing cards' is empty, and 'Toys' is a link to the 'Toys and cards' section of List of Nintendo products. I propose merging them. --82.40.14.9 (talk) 11:00, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Get rid of and, and add and Pokemon Masters EX Mynamenotjeffok (talk) 23:37, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Not clear what edit you would like made. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:20, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Is "Nintendo" a neologism of the 1980s? Like in "playing Nintendo". − Gebu (talk) 17:49, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I don't think so as it has generally fallen out of common use. ---Taltos :) (talk) 16:49, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• App-augmented-reality-game-gps-163042 (cropped).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:18, 12 May 2021 (UTC)

The playing cards section has been empty since 2020 despite a notice in that section. This is rather sad given it is their original product so being able to talk about the continued history of their playing cards would be a nice addition. Sadly this article is semi-protected as present, so I'm putting in some sources here:

• https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2020/06/nintendo_releases_hanafuda_and_playing_cards_based_on_mario_zelda_splatoon_and_more_europe - "Nintendo Releases Hanafuda And Playing Cards Based On Mario, Zelda, Splatoon And More (Europe)"

• https://www.nintendo.co.jp/others/hanafuda_kabufuda/index.html - (Japanese) - The Nintendo Hanafuda/Kabufuda site showing their current line up and a section of "how to play".

• https://www.nintendo.co.jp/others/playing_cards/index.html - (Japanese) - The Nintendo western style playing cards site. As well as a range of different designs, custom orders seem to be possible.

• In addition, there are also similar sections for Mahjong, Shogi, and Go on the nintendo japan website.

If someone with the ability to edit this article is able to add in some of this information, I would be rather grateful. 176.251.175.52 (talk) 11:01, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

I noticed that under revenue and such is how much money it is in yen but I think their should also be the amount in USD. Jdietr601 (talk) 19:19, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Nintendo reports their financial info in yen, and because monetary conversions shift all the time, it would not be appropriate to make that change. --Masem (t) 19:21, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Nintendo continues to sell both hanafuda and western style playing cards, and has released some limited edition ones

• https://www.nintendolife.com/news/2020/06/nintendo_releases_hanafuda_and_playing_cards_based_on_mario_zelda_splatoon_and_more_europe - "Nintendo Releases Hanafuda And Playing Cards Based On Mario, Zelda, Splatoon And More (Europe)"

• https://www.nintendo.co.jp/others/hanafuda_kabufuda/index.html - (Japanese) - The Nintendo Hanafuda/Kabufuda site showing their current line up and a section of "how to play".

• https://www.nintendo.co.jp/others/playing_cards/index.html - (Japanese) - The Nintendo western style playing cards site. As well as a range of different designs, custom orders seem to be possible.

• In addition, there are also similar sections for Mahjong, Shogi, and Go on the nintendo japan website. 176.251.175.52 (talk) 09:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 10:54, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Under 5.2 of this article, "Vancouver" is ambiguous. It could refer Vancouver, WA or Vancouver B.C. Please clarify which Vancouver. 2601:1C2:5102:6140:598B:534C:3B5A:3BE (talk) 02:52, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

•  Done --Masem (t) 02:55, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Noticed that the company name got changed from Koppai to Karuta, and I don't see any discussion about that in archives. I don't necessarily object to change, but I'm trying to find the source for that, to figure out what's more correct. How do we verify this? --Sleeps-Darkly (talk) 08:29, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

• Actually, found the reason for that myself: Karuta. However we have an issue where there's a lot of information about company named Nintendo Koppai, so we kind of need a comment in the article about that, to dispel a long-running mistake. But I'm not sure how to do that. --Sleeps-Darkly (talk) 21:29, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

I have seen that the PLAYING CARDS section in products. is empty, i would like to add to it, using sources and information

BBC Article I want to change the playing card section from Empty, to "Nintendo's origins began with the creation of playing cards. Fusajiro Yamauchi would create Hanafuda cards, beautfully decorated and hand-painted. These cards became hugely popular in Japan, they continued to create these cards until the late 1960's" Or something along those lines, and maybe include a photo of the original cards.Citation

-Cheers --68.71.12.19 (talk) 16:50, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

68.71.12.19 (talk) 16:21, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:27, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Comment I find it interesting that this isn't used in the article at all considering it talks about the entire history of Nintendo. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) (Stupidity by me) 16:28, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Comment I thought so too, the article is great, and I will redo my request. --68.71.12.19 (talk) 16:45, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

IP, please do not edit previous posts even if it's your own, because it makes it hard for other editors to figure out the order the replies come in. Instead, always add new text to the bottom of the section.

I've removed the section, as hand-crafted items aren't really the same thing as a commercial mass-produced product. The "History" section starts off by mentioning the hanafuda cards. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 08:37, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

24.191.51.115 (talk) 17:22, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

It started in 1898 with playing cards

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Cannolis (talk) 17:30, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Connection Tour 07 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 22#Connection Tour 07 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. QuickQuokka ^[talk] 16:46, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Just a simple typo fix:

Old- "after Japan banned most forms if gambling in 1882"

New - "after Japan banned most forms of gambling in 1882"

Changes "if" to "of" Mjhea0 (talk) 01:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

 Done Cannolis (talk) 01:44, 5 May 2022 (UTC)

I don’t know if anyone is updating but there is lots of reports that Saudi owns 5% of the company and they are official sources that say that and it is still not mentioned. Here is the article.https://www.ign.com/articles/nintendo-5-percent-owned-by-saudi-arabia NakhlaMan (talk) 03:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

The line

"Nintendo had taken issue with the tournament using emulated versions of Super Smash Bros. Melee which had included a user mod for networked play, as this would have required ripping a copy of Melee to play, an action they cannot condone."

should be changed to

"Nintendo had taken issue with the tournament using emulated versions of Super Smash Bros. Melee which had included a user mod for networked play, as this would have required ripping a copy of Melee to play, an action they do not condone." 2604:2D80:9E80:1200:65FD:6F97:3CA8:94A5 (talk) 07:23, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

 Done Cannolis (talk) 10:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

I've worked on a first draft of this around two years ago, but it seems like we need a page to document the criticisms of Nintendo over time just like the other big tech companies:

Criticism of FacebookCriticism of AppleCriticism of GoogleCriticism of Yahoo! WeJustWantToPlay (talk) 17:50, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

The issue with B3 has nothing to do with Nintendo. That's strictly a Platinum Games issue. And we absolutely avoid criticism pages unless it overwhelms the company page (which hasn't happened here yet). --Masem (t) 17:53, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

In the Subsection of Nintendo's Various Marketing campaigns featuring the slogans used across the years in commercials, the sentence detailing Nintendo Switch Commercials did not mention the "Nintendo Switch My Way" advert series. Please change the Sentence from "The Nintendo Switch uses the slogan "Switch and Play" in North America, and "Play anywhere, anytime, with anyone" elsewhere." to something more similar to "The Nintendo Switch uses the slogan "Switch and Play" in North America, however more recently, commercials with the slogan "Nintendo Switch My Way" and "Nintendo Switch Is My Way To Play" have been used often. The Slogan "Play anywhere, anytime, with anyone" is commonly used in other regions.[205] RazorMaize (talk) 16:47, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

•  Not done We need a source for that. --Masem (t) 19:04, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

The link to "Lists of Nintendo games" redirects to the "Lists of games on Nintendo consoles" page which includes games not made by Nintendo, considering the topic of this page and the section in which this link is found, most people would probably be more interested in the page about games published or made by Nintendo, "List of Nintendo products", and if that is accepted that section could be fused with the "Toys and Cards" section considering that it simply links to the list of products of Nintendo 2-Voyager (talk) 22:21, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

Update "Production output", "Revenue", "Operating income", "Net income", "Total assets", and "Total equity" in the infobox using the source provided:

https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2022/220510e.pdf 174.240.240.23 (talk) 01:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Source too long, @174.240.240.23 could you give us the number being changed to? Lemonaka (talk) 02:51, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. RealAspects (talk) 03:45, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Is there a specific reason why the SNES is mentioned in the lead section as one "of the most successful consoles in the video game industry"? It sold rather mediocre measured by both hard- and software figures and is far from being one of the most successful consoles.-- Maxeto0910 (talk) 22:10, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

They say that the SNES is one of the most successful consoles in history because it actually helped video games to recover after the video game crisis of 1983, and because it was very popular and even to this day, videogamers call it one of the best video game console in history, not just Nintendo Atarinintendo (talk) 01:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Word change could be useful:

Mario has gone from being just a corporate mascot

to...

Mario has went from being just a corporate mascot 130.217.3.254 (talk) 03:58, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: It would be Mario went from being.... With has in the sentence, the grammar is correct. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 13:33, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

I propose merging History of Nintendo into Nintendo. I think the content in History of Nintendo can easily be explained in the context of Nintendo, and a merger would not cause any article-size or weighting problems in Nintendo.~ Arkhandar ^{(message me)} 14:08, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Let me propose another suggestion, which does include part of this merge, but instead turn "History of Nintendo" into "Nintendo video game consoles". The idea here is that whereas we have an article for the PlayStation family and the Xbox family of consoles, there's no equivalent for any Nintendo console since they are not a family. However, if we kept these all grouped on this page, then the main Nintendo page can focus mostly on the corporate aspects (touching on consoles when necessary). Masem (t) 16:42, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

@Masem: While I agree in principle (it's true that we have essentially have 3 articles - Nintendo, History of Nintendo, and Nintendo video game consoles - covering the same ground), I believe that the main Nintendo article should still cover the company's historical events (which includes console and major game releases, among other). So what I propose is that Nintendo would cover the company with a focus on the historical events (release dates of consoles and major games, and other corporate events) in a more brief fashion, while Nintendo video game consoles would have a more product-oriented focus (like PlayStation and Xbox) on each console in a more detailed fashion. ~ Arkhandar ^{(message me)} 17:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I am not saying that the history section of Nintendo should eliminate all mention of consoles and games, but both the current section and the History of Nintendo articles go into far too much detail on technical aspects of the consoles, which, in comparison to the PlayStation (or even Sony Interactive Entertainment) and Xbox (or Microsoft) pages, is just too much. Noting that Nintendo went blue ocean with the Wii and made one of the best selling consoles is a key point there, but knowing that the Wii included accerometers and gyroscopes isn't really necessary to spell out when talking a corporate or financial aspect. Masem (t) 17:51, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I will add that I agree some merger needs to be done, as History of Nintendo feels duplicative. Masem (t) 18:06, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

I think the problem is that both articles need significant improvement. I oppose the merge, but I think the articles need more work done on both of them (partly the reasons Masem and Arkhandar mentioned above) to justify my thinking. DecafPotato (talk) 21:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I think a big reason also is that the Nintendo article goes into too much depth about the history. Content should be moved to History of Nintendo, and the main article should be kept to WP:SUMSTYLE. DecafPotato (talk) 02:15, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Oppose merger of History of Nintendo into the main Nintendo article. The article is developed well enough to stand on its own, and merging everything would be too big. Consider more so on trimming down on the main Nintendo article's history section. Nintendo video game consoles itself can be a split of the History of Nintendo article which offers a deeper insight to Nintendo's role in the console wars, though I would not actively oppose that merger as well. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 19:47, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Strong Oppose: History of Nintendo already has enough information to have its own article, with more to come. 9March2019 (talk) 14:44, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Can we add more to the page relating to controversy such as etika and them shutting down the Splatoon 2 North American finals Livestream due to the free melee movement 2601:801:200:15A0:5D5A:C8CD:32D8:43DC (talk) 10:37, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Fan controversies that do not get significant coverage are not included. Masem (t) 12:29, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

Can we add the stuff relating to pointcrow into the article or is it still too early to talk about it 2601:801:200:15A0:206A:7A07:A517:CA3B (talk) 22:35, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Update business figures (specifically Operating Income, Revenue, Net Income and Production Output (Hardware and Software) for the fiscal year 2023, according to the Financial Results Explanatory Material published on May 9, 2023.Link: https://www.nintendo.co.jp/ir/pdf/2023/230509_3e.pdf

Change Production Output (Hardware) to 17.97 million (downtrend)Change Production Ouput (Software) to 213.96 million (downtrend)Change Revenue to 1.601 trillion yen (downtrend)Change Operating Income to 504.3 billion yen (downtrend)Change net income to 432.7 billion yen (downtrend) FabricPanda (talk) 14:26, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

 Already done — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 16:36, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

The page was edited today noting the takedown of the Steam page for Dolphin, however while the source given claims to have received legal documents there seems to be some question as to what actually happened according to a former developer: https://mastodon.delroth.net/@delroth/110440301402516214 BFeely (talk) 22:26, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

In addition, is it currently to the threshold of WP:N? BFeely (talk) 22:29, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

"With 13.5 million units sold worldwide, the Wii U is the least successful video game console in Nintendo's history."

But I thought the Virtual Boy was only in the 700,000s, making it the least successful game console in Nintendo's history? StrawWord298944 (talk) 17:47, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

The distinction is probably suppose to be "home" consoles. -- ferret (talk) 18:12, 5 June 2023 (UTC)

Cruis'n was removed from their franchise list months ago (here), but they do own the trademarks on the franchise (an older one and a newer one, as well as of the newest game). Isn't it a Nintendo franchise? Poppstar (talk) 04:20, 18 June 2023 (UTC)