Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of video game consoles (eighth generation) (2nd nomination)

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Delete as speculation. The sources upon which the substance of the article is based are not concrete, with everyone except for Sony sidestepping the official confirmation of the next-gen console. Even the Sony quote is given in the context of management changes rather than a confirmation of the development of future technology. The Sony quote from Eurogamer; "...I think it would be rather short-sighted for anyone to predict there might not be a next generation of PlayStation product." Is not a press release endorsing future product development; the same goes for the X-Box 720 - "In reference to the 'Xbox 720', Bach told SJ Mercury News "you know how these things work. The engineering team is always thinking about the future," adding that, "right now we are thinking about how to cost reduce the Xbox 360. That seems to be the first order of business.". The Melbourne Age article on Apple is op-ed, referring to burnt fingers from previous failed ventures and their current revenue streams rather than future products. Occam's Razor now applies to this summary of the article sources. (aeropagitica) 23:14, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History of video game consoles (eighth generation)

History of video game consoles (eighth generation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

No console of this generation is even in development yet, leaving the page nothing but speculation. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. This page was deleted once before. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of video game consoles (eighth generation) Indrian 08:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep That section of NOT begins "Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation" and verifiability was also lacking in the previous AFD. It has sources now and other than a bit of original research at the bottom that I'm removing, the article is well-written and well-sourced.--Kchase T 09:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, most of the article is unverified speculation. The dates given for the generation are unverified speculation, the sources on the camera technology has to do with speculation related to the 360 only and is therefore no source at all, making the camera information unverified speculation, and the timing of any attempt by Apple to enter the market and therefore what generation a console by the company would belong to is not known, making that unverified speculation. This bascally leaves the article with the only verified information that a PS4 will exist and that a next-gen Nintendo console will include high definition. That is not much of an article. Indrian 09:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I've just added a source for the year 2010 release. Jecowa
  • Keep i don't know if i'm allowed to vote since i'm the article’s creator, but not a single thing in that article is not located in one of the sources i've sited. With the exeption of Apple each of the companies in question have made some announcements or statements concerning their eighth gen console. i waited to post this article until that was the case. The Wii 2 will have HD capabilities, the 720 is on the backburner at the moment, and the PS4 is going to be released after 2010. o, and thanks for the complement Kchase. J.L.Main 09:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
comment i went back and looked and i must admit i did have some original research. i've removed it and can now say what i've already said and be telling the truth.J.L.Main 09:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • You're welcome to contribute to the AfD. It's suggested that people disclose if they are editing an article, which you've done. Thanks for removing that bit of OR. I'm sure you'll find a source if you need to.--Kchase T 09:32, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and possibly Rename? Seems to me that "history of..." is the wrong way to describe it. I think the material has merit though as per above. --Chrisd87 11:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment the name is so that the artical is in line with the articals on the past seven generations. if we change the nae to this one we would kind of need to change the names for all the others.J.L.Main 11:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment because it will be years before this page needs to be recreated and none of the information on it will be valid or will be so trivial that it won't be included anyway. Not even the names of the systems, except the PS4. The other two are just names made up by fans. I'd be willing to be money that the next Nintendo system will not be called the Wii 2. Koweja 03:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Gaming companies plan their next system many years in advance. By having this article readers will know what information is available. We will not know everything for sure until these systems are released, but we can mention they companies have planned. I don't think the article was trying to say that the successor to the Wii will be named "Wii 2." This is just what the console is referred to at this time. Jecowa 04:16, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Except that this page is not needed to get that information. There is nothing wrong with the pages on Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft including what little information is known about next-gen systems. This page, however, will never consist of more than idle speculation for several years and therefore goes against the crystal ball policy. Besides, I think a member of the general public looking for this information has no idea what "generation" of systems we are currently in and is more likely to look on the company pages anyway. When the generation exists, or at the very least has taken a concrete form, then we can have this page. An enclyclopedia is about facts, not rumormongering. Indrian 04:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
According to Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, future events should only be included if the event is notable, is almost certain to take place, is verifiable, and is not original research. The eighth generation of video game consoles is notable, and it is almost certain to come about, so we just have to make sure to include verifiable sources and exclude original research from this article.
I don't think an article being hard to find is grounds to remove it, but we can make redirects from "Xbox 720," "Xbox 3," "PS4," "PlayStation 4" Playstation 4," and "Wii 2" to this article until there is enough information available on the individual systems to warrant separate pages. Also, if we let this article remain Google will index it, allowing this article to show up in Google searches for the queries "Xbox 720," "Playstation 4," and "Wii 2." Many users of the internet use Wikipedia as a primary source for information as it is much easier to find information on Wikipedia than it is to search through a bunch of web pages for it. Jecowa 05:12, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am not advocating it be removed on grounds of being hard to find. Even with the sources provided, most of the article is unverifiable speculation. It runs afoul of the crystal ball policy. Indrian 09:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep, per Jecowa. The article complies with WP policies and theres no doubt more details will trickle in over time - not years, more like scraps per month. Just watch the hardware claims, anything short of a hardware R&D contract or concept demo is probably speculation, regardless of the source. --MegaBurn 08:59, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
In which case, wouldn't an article of this sort be better suited in a Future of video games consoles? The current title and significant quantities of the information are, as stated in above arguements, speculated, and are of little or no use to someone reading it, given the information could completely change when we reach closer to this generation. When we have some concrete information about this generation, i would support such an article, but again along the lines of Future of video game consoles. I may have even supported a rename of the article if there was less speculation and more concrete information. Bungle44 09:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Furthermore, accurate information about upcoming consoles is extremly hard if not impossible to get, for example in the current generation accurate information about the consoles didn't appear until months before the consoles themselves were released. It is entirely plausible that final specs for the first 8th generation console won't be released until 2011. Dionyseus 09:33, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Future of video game consoles or something similar. Article is fine, but it's not really history. The next consoles are in early development (or at least planning) due to the fast nature of the industry. As covered before, this article doesn't violate WP:CRYSTAL so I don't see anything wrong with it. Just make sure all the information is cited. Also, an article being deleted before is not grounds for deleting it again. People can fix problems, just like they have. This isn't raw speculation, it's reporting official ideas for the future. -Ryanbomber 12:57, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would support a movement of the current article to a title which doesn't portray the information as past tense (e.g: Future of..). However, speculated information (such as some console names and dates) should be removed, even if that leaves only a stub of information which is at least verifyable and can be confirmed. As for those who say changing the name of the article would disrupt the sequence, I would much rather support an article with a name that reflects the information contained within it, as opposed to an article name which is misleading (History of), with content which is of the complete opposite. Bungle44 13:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment i'm fine with renaming the article. i would like to point out however that if you go back an look at the first entry of just about any video game article you will find that the one i've crated is infinity superior and yet they were allowed to remain while mine is being considered for deletion.J.L.Main 20:44, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'm all for trimming all the unsourced speculation. -Ryanbomber 12:27, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Yeah, I see how the word "History" in the title would confuse people. Maybe we should move it to "Future of video game consoles" like Bungle44 suggested. It would make the History of videogame consoles infobox more clear to have generations of the past labeled "History" while the generation of the future is labeled "Future." Maybe along those lines we should also move "History of video game consoles (seventh generation)" to "Presence of video game consoles (seventh generation)"
  • Seriously Strong Keep, because the article concerns something of cultural and economic importance, that is indeed being planned by console makers and gamers alike, and barring the apocalypse will come about. Best and thanks for creating this fascinating article! Sincerely, --Wikipedian, Historian, and Friend? 21:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • However it is completely speculation. Wikipedia is WP:not a crystal ball, and we're still at least 4 or 5 years away from when we would first get verifiable non-speculative information on the next generation consoles. Dionyseus 21:07, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I still support a delete or possibly a weak rename/move on the above suggestions, but certainly not keeping it in it's current state. There have been too many valid points raised in opposition for it to stay, but with the same respect, a few valid points for support. I still support deletion of the article, but maybe a rename with unverifyable information removed might be a fair outcome. If the latter however, chances are it would remain a relatively small stub for quite some time yet, and may just be worth deleting the article, until such a time comes when there is sufficient official information that will suffice reasons for the article's existance. Bungle44 21:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Its not all speculation, its not even half speculation. with the exception of the names, the entry on the Wii 2 is pure fact along with the one on the PS4. the speculation that is included is backed up with 2 or more sources. the names aren't speculation as no one is saying they will be called by these names. all the article says is that these are names that are being used for the systems at present. If i were to include all the speculation you guys seem to think is in this thing it would be longer than the one on the Wii.J.L.Main 22:10, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • "The eighth generation in the history of video game consoles will begin at the end of the seventh generation, probably somewhere between 2010 and 2014." If that's not a crystal ball situation then I don't know what is. The entire article is pure speculation, no one knows what can happen a year from now, much less 7 years from now. I remember when Nintendo said the Gamecube would be their last console, and now we have the Wii. I remember when Sega said Dreamcast would not be their last console, but that certainly changed when the PS2 launched. Dionyseus 22:22, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • first, i have moved the article to "Future of..." and i checked all of the pages that link to it. if i broke some rule than i'm sorry and will be happy to put it back if i did. second, Dionysius, you just dislike me, it has nothing to do with the article, but i will humor you anyway. it has already been agreed by every user on here but you that this is not crystal balling. it is well sourced and verifiable. And when a company says that they will do something it is not speculation for you or me to then turn around and tell someone what the company said it would do. also, speculation can not be done on fact. that is to say, i would not be speculating if i said the sun is going to rise to marrow. It wouldn't be specializing because we all know the sun is going to rise tomorrow. The statement "the Eighth Generation will start at the completion of the Seventh" is a fact, not crystal balling. if you don't believe me than go read the article on it.J.L.Main 22:35, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. To hell with that. Even 7th Gen has only just started. SYSS Mouse 23:04, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. I don't believe the age of related articles affects whether or not policy allows this article. Furthermore, the History of video game consoles (seventh generation) article was started in early 2004. Jecowa 23:14, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • 2004 is 5 years after the release of the 6th generation console Dreamcast, 4 years after the release of the 6th generation console Playstation 2. Here we are discussing whether we should have an article about the 8th generation consoles when the 7th generation has just started! Dionyseus 23:24, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • I would now more so drop my possible weak movement of the article and fully stand by my deletion decision given that statement above. Far too many things can change in what we currently have many years until we can at least expect concrete information as to whether these consoles are going to be developed, and who by. Maybe in a year or so time, we can review what information there is, and if decided there is enough solid concrete information, then under a name other than referring to it as it's history. Bungle44 08:25, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. J.L.Main posted on my talk board asking me to reconsider my vote because "the PS4 has been confirmed, not just hinted at and i never claimed any of the others were confirmed". My two problems with this statement are that not only is there no citation on the PS4 claim, but things like this NEED CONFIRMATION. You can't just post speculation. Lemmy12 23:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • but there is a source, that has had a source since this article was created. go to the section on PS4 and look. its source number 4, "There will be a PS4 - Sony." also, here are some other links that support my claim, in addition to the one i sited in the article,
http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/04/dont-bother-picking-up-a-ps3-ps4-is-right-around-the-corner/
http://gamesnews.virgin.net/Virgin/Lifestyle/Games/virginGamesNewsDetail/0,13470,1757938_playbetandwin,00.html
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=150418&skip=yes
thanks for coming back. i do appreciate it. i don't mind if my article is deleted. i have a copy on my user page and if it is deleted i can wait till more information is announced and then re-post it when it is more likely to be kept. what i don't want is for it to be deleted for being something its not. this article is well sourced, and strives to present as little speculation as possible. if you vote to delete it please do so on either the grounds that it still needs more information or that it is too soon. it is not crystal balling and it is not pure speculation.J.L.Main 01:05, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just checked it again, nevermind, IT'S ALL SOURCED TO SOME DEGREE. Why are we arguing about sources? -Ryanbomber 12:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It's not so much the fact that there are external sources citing parts of it's content, but that such cited information could very easily change, and indeed has done in the past, so it is near impossible for those sources to in fact accurately predict what will and what wont happen in the next gen of gaming consoles. As stated in previous comments, the article should remain non-existant until we are well into the current console generation, when there is more of a likely chance that external sources (and console creators for that matter), have a better idea of whether they are going to participate or not, and with which consoles. Bungle44 17:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's going to change a lot, and the information is almost certainally going to change, but I still don't see the problem with an article saying what the current plans are. Tons of Wiki articles document current/future events, what makes this one different (besides the fact that it's labeled "History of?") -Ryanbomber 17:37, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Current plans (even those quoted directly from official sources or console creators), are still speculated by the console makers to some extent. Dionyseus mentioned that Nintendo stated the Gamecube would be their last, yet, we have the Wii - not even the console makers really know at this point what will happen, hence it can easily put doubt on any external source, cited or not. Fact of the matter is, it is simply just too early. Bungle44 17:43, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. The sources mentioned are not reliable (probably based on guesswork), and will most likely be false in the future. Shigeru Miyamoto does not decide Nintendo's future by himself, and neither does Paul Holman for Sony Computer Entertainment. Robbie Bach claims they are "thinking about" a successor to Xbox 360. All of this is just guesswork by members of the companies. There are no press releases, no official decisions, nothing. Until those exist, this article will violate WP:NOT. --TheEmulatorGuy 23:31, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Horrible crystal-balling. I see that it has references... how that is possible is beyond me... --- RockMFR 00:13, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Per WP:NOT... a crystal ball. When enough sourced content is available for an article on this generation, give it an appropriate title, please. Rockpocket 04:16, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment even though the companies have said they are going to release one, it is still speculation even if it on the part of the companies. It is like a movie industry announcing a movie is in development before filming has started - it quite possibly might be canceled. Another example would be a musician announcing that they are planning on releasing a new album when they are still writing the lyrics for the songs. Both of those types of articles are not appropriate for wikipedia until they are confirmed to be released. Koweja 04:42, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Your analogy is flawed because in both the movie and music examples work on the project has already started. While console companies have begun talking about what they might develop in the future, actual development has not started yet. Indrian 05:50, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete and protect from recreation. 100% pure speculation. Andros 1337 22:13, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete and Salt The Earth; Wikipedia is NOT a crystal ball, this is 100% speculation, and has no place here. --Mhking 22:22, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Regarding the crystal ball, "Individual scheduled or expected future events should only be included if the event is notable and almost certain to take place. If preparation for the event isn't already in progress, speculation about it must be well documented. Examples of appropriate topics include 2008 U.S. presidential election, and 2012 Summer Olympics. By comparison, the 2028 U.S. presidential election and 2036 Summer Olympics are not considered appropriate article topics because nothing can be said about them that is verifiable and not original research. A schedule of future events may also be appropriate." It's notable, certain to happen, and there is certainly preparation going on. Things such as th Wii successor having HD and the PS4 have been confirmed.

  • comment THIS ARTICAL IS NOT CRYSTAL BALLING!!!! the official wiki-definition of crystal balling is as follows,
"Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation." this article is not unverifiable speculation. it is not claiming that this is what’s going to happen, it is claiming that these are the current plans for the eighth generation. plans are verifiable even if in the end it doesn't happen that way.
"All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred." everything in this article is referenced, many things by multiple sources. and as far as the wide interest goes, it was edited sixteen times in the last 24 hours. every day the number of daily edits has grown. it has even been vandalized twice, most unnoticeable articles don't get vandalized.
"It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, provided that discussion is properly referenced." like i said, everything in this article is referenced, many things by multiple sources.J.L.Main 22:58, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Could you please show me the place that says that speculation cannot come from people developing the product? -Ryanbomber 12:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I shall confine my putdown to the PS, since it;s the only I'm interested in to research. Oh, look. No PS4 according to my sources. And what's the this, MULTIPLE articles saying there is no PS4. I believe so. The Kinslayer 16:22, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, excellent. That would be the perfect thing to add to the article! Thanks for finding it. If you want, I can add it myself. -Ryanbomber 16:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- One problem, although I'm sure you already thought of it. This article says it's about the history of the 8th Generation of video game consoles, not what analysts predict is going to happen. The Kinslayer 18:45, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Well referenced and meets the letter and spirit of WP:CRYSTAL for inclusion. Kinslayer's references also help rather than hurt the article. Even though they are just guesses by outsiders that are critisized in them.
Also I can't believe the people arguing for salting when this is clearly not a rehash of the original article. Dimitrii 18:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/History_of_video_game_consoles_(eighth_generation)_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1209373909"