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) (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]

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]
  • 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]
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]
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)"
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]

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.

"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]
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.