This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 15 |
Look at the source for the NA numbers, it says: "Total North American sales in its lifetime: 14 million. Total world sales: 29 million." 1989 year. Then look at 1999 two pages further: "Unit sales of video game systems in North America to date: Sega Master System 1.5 million, Sega Genesis 19 million, Saturn 1 million, [378.59]". That totally contradicts the 14 million NA sales number that appears alongside the Worldwide 29 million sales. At least the worldwide sales number should be removed from here, as it can't be seen as reliable anymore.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.209.80.50 ( talk) 10:17, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
{{
fact}}
tag. Might need to revisit the wording on that. —
KieferSkunk (
talk) —
00:10, 23 December 2009 (UTC)Can you really count in the Nomad as Genesis sales? They're two different products. I've never seen anyone count the Turbo Express and Turbo Grafx 16 together for instance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.233.58.89 ( talk) 17:12, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
-All wikipedia pages for Sega consoles seem to be biased. They feature sales that are higher than the actual figures. First with the SS, someone cited a random source by a book that opposed all the claims (that exist throughout the internet and in video game magazines & reports) that the console had sold 9 million and just added a random 17 million figure. Afterwards, you guys suddenly put a random 39 million figure which totally disagrees with what is mentioned in the rest of the web. Not that I really care about what wikipedia says, because it is known for being taken over by fans or people that present their own, biased opinions, but what is going on with the Sega pages is a total disgrace imo. I think that a sensible wikipedia editor should either report this page or just put the sales figure back to 29 million so that it agrees with what 100% of the reports claim in the internet and in magazines. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.129.204.78 ( talk) 16:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
The site blankly states: "There has been further research..." yet they don't provide any kind of source at all. Well, they do mention Sega & Nintendo, but how come I've never seen this information anywhere else. I can't believe how butthurt Sega fanboys still are: Nintendo pwned you, get over it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.130.22.204 ( talk) 21:29, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Still, all sources claim that the console is at 29 million. In other words, only wikipedia has "39,70 million" because of a New York Times Article? What is that all about. The 29 million figure is being supported by everyone and you put ONE source that claims otherwise, stating that it claims the truth. Wikipedia must reflect what is the general consensus and not what "one article claims". Anyway... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.166.118.112 ( talk) 20:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
There needs to be more reliable sources here. I kept the 35.70 estimate for now, but those marked with "unreliable source?" needs to have their reliability verified or be replaced. For the second content note, please add more figures there from reliable publications or post them here and I'll add them to note two. « ₣M₣ » 16:56, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Well, thanks for notifying me, FullMetal Falcon. So, you guys had to see fit to wake me from my inactive slumber, huh? All right, I haven't been here in a while myself, but I'll do my best to help out since I'm here anyway. Okay, let me start by saying that if a source is more reliable, regardless of the language it is in, it is the source that should be used. I've used articles in other languages myself when it's appropriate, and though English is far more preferred when you have two options of the same reliability, reliability and verifiability are more important than what language the article is in. Data and facts are data and facts regardless of what language they are in, provided you have someone who can read them and interpret them so you can use them in an English article without incorrectly citing a fact.
Now, that being said, I do vaguely remember this problem back when we (X201, I, and whoever else was editing at the same time) were trying to make this article a GA, although I don't recall finding reliable sources for both points. To address this fully, though, I feel that I need to address some more points you all have made, okay? First, FullMetal Falcon mentioned that the Genesis still sells in Brazil. As far as I know, that is still true, in which case the sales figures might be chronically updating, and a more recent article might be more reliable. But at the same time, whatever you can find that is the most reliable and verifiable source should be what you use.
Given this, I'm not here much, so if you guys would be willing to do me the favor of posting links to your sources either here or on my talk page or something so I can take a look at them and give you guys an honest opinion, I'd be more than glad to take the time to do so. Let me know what's up and I'll be glad to help out. Red Phoenix flame of life... protector of all... 03:39, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Okay, might as well address these... First off, it's doubtful that IGN, Gamepro, or Wired took their figures from Wikipedia. These three sites (or at least IGN, to my memory) have all been evaluated and deemed reliable sources. We get a lot of our info from them, not the other way around. I would cite IGN personally myself, but here's my personal opinion of the numbers: I think the 29 million is probably the number not including the Genesis 3 or any of the variations not sold by Sega. Basically, it's just the straight-up Mega Drive/Genesis as sold by Sega, and what makes the numbers confusing is how many variations of the console there were. Now, of course this is all speculation and uncited opinion, so that can't be said, but that may be a reason for this. I think SexyKick has the right idea: piece together what you can with the sources we have. I would personally throw IGN in there as well, but that's just me, as IGN is almost always considered reliable. If there's any questions about IGN, Wired, or GamePro, you guys should take that to WikiProject Video Games and see what they say, because they're really the experts on those sites and their reliability and verifiability related to Wikipedia. Jesus.arnold, I don't trust the magazine scan, sorry, but if anyone finds the magazine itself I'd be more inclined to say it could be used. And that spreadsheet, well, same reason. Find me the original data that was compiled for it and I'll believe it. Personally, I'm not one for numbers myself or preferring one set over another as a "fanboy", but I would just rather see the most reliable sources used for the numbers that can be found, and the most reliable sources used all across the article. Red Phoenix flame of life... protector of all... 07:03, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
If you can find the magazine itself, Jesus.arnold, and can get a full citation of the issue and the page the scan is from, then let's use it. As for the spreadsheet, you'll need to cite the numbers themselves from the original sources. The spreadsheet's not going to be good enough on its own.
So, it seems like the core of the issue here is that we've got sources that contradict each other, and the question that comes in is which is more reliable. The Mega Drive might be the hardest console to do this with since there were so many variations that scramble all of the numbers and make so many variations of the numbers themselves and how we interpret them. Like the IP above just said, there's a 14 million US number, but the Times article showed a 20 million US number. That's six million in itself alone. On the subject of IGN, GameSpy is an IGN-affiliated site, so it would make sense there would be no disparity in that case. That doesn't mean, though, that they use Wikipedia as a source. In fact, as I've said, IGN is deemed a reliable source per the Video Games WikiProject. We might have to mention the disparity in the numbers in the article, though, in the article if we can show sources for both, as long as we avoid the word "controversy". Sound fair, guys? Red Phoenix flame of life... protector of all... 01:45, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
In the hope of giving more real information to the discussion (since I was bored anyway), I did a bit of googling for relevant sources. I found:
I couldn't find anything in Google that looked reliable at first glance for 33.7 million or 35 million. It would be nice if anyone knew where the "Sega of Japan Press Release Early 97" in the spreadsheet screenshot mentioned above might have been published; the current Sega and Sega-Sammy websites don't seem to have press releases going back that far, and I didn't manage to find anything in the Wayback archives of Sega's websites from around that time. Hope that helps. Anomie ⚔ 22:12, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
I tried to make the footnote a little more clear, using more reliable sources for the 29 million and not pretending that all the regional numbers are completely disjoint when we don't have any reason to assume that, but Mr. 130.76.96.23 reverted with some BS reason. Your "smart writing" stinks of bias to me. 108.109.43.36 ( talk) 19:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Just a small note, I found the Business Week article mentioned on Islandnet here, so I've replaced the Islandnet link in my earlier write-up with a more useful link to the actual article. Jesus.arnold ( talk) 21:00, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 5 | ← | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | Archive 12 | → | Archive 15 |
Look at the source for the NA numbers, it says: "Total North American sales in its lifetime: 14 million. Total world sales: 29 million." 1989 year. Then look at 1999 two pages further: "Unit sales of video game systems in North America to date: Sega Master System 1.5 million, Sega Genesis 19 million, Saturn 1 million, [378.59]". That totally contradicts the 14 million NA sales number that appears alongside the Worldwide 29 million sales. At least the worldwide sales number should be removed from here, as it can't be seen as reliable anymore.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.209.80.50 ( talk) 10:17, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
{{
fact}}
tag. Might need to revisit the wording on that. —
KieferSkunk (
talk) —
00:10, 23 December 2009 (UTC)Can you really count in the Nomad as Genesis sales? They're two different products. I've never seen anyone count the Turbo Express and Turbo Grafx 16 together for instance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.233.58.89 ( talk) 17:12, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
-All wikipedia pages for Sega consoles seem to be biased. They feature sales that are higher than the actual figures. First with the SS, someone cited a random source by a book that opposed all the claims (that exist throughout the internet and in video game magazines & reports) that the console had sold 9 million and just added a random 17 million figure. Afterwards, you guys suddenly put a random 39 million figure which totally disagrees with what is mentioned in the rest of the web. Not that I really care about what wikipedia says, because it is known for being taken over by fans or people that present their own, biased opinions, but what is going on with the Sega pages is a total disgrace imo. I think that a sensible wikipedia editor should either report this page or just put the sales figure back to 29 million so that it agrees with what 100% of the reports claim in the internet and in magazines. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.129.204.78 ( talk) 16:51, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
The site blankly states: "There has been further research..." yet they don't provide any kind of source at all. Well, they do mention Sega & Nintendo, but how come I've never seen this information anywhere else. I can't believe how butthurt Sega fanboys still are: Nintendo pwned you, get over it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.130.22.204 ( talk) 21:29, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Still, all sources claim that the console is at 29 million. In other words, only wikipedia has "39,70 million" because of a New York Times Article? What is that all about. The 29 million figure is being supported by everyone and you put ONE source that claims otherwise, stating that it claims the truth. Wikipedia must reflect what is the general consensus and not what "one article claims". Anyway... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.166.118.112 ( talk) 20:32, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
There needs to be more reliable sources here. I kept the 35.70 estimate for now, but those marked with "unreliable source?" needs to have their reliability verified or be replaced. For the second content note, please add more figures there from reliable publications or post them here and I'll add them to note two. « ₣M₣ » 16:56, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Well, thanks for notifying me, FullMetal Falcon. So, you guys had to see fit to wake me from my inactive slumber, huh? All right, I haven't been here in a while myself, but I'll do my best to help out since I'm here anyway. Okay, let me start by saying that if a source is more reliable, regardless of the language it is in, it is the source that should be used. I've used articles in other languages myself when it's appropriate, and though English is far more preferred when you have two options of the same reliability, reliability and verifiability are more important than what language the article is in. Data and facts are data and facts regardless of what language they are in, provided you have someone who can read them and interpret them so you can use them in an English article without incorrectly citing a fact.
Now, that being said, I do vaguely remember this problem back when we (X201, I, and whoever else was editing at the same time) were trying to make this article a GA, although I don't recall finding reliable sources for both points. To address this fully, though, I feel that I need to address some more points you all have made, okay? First, FullMetal Falcon mentioned that the Genesis still sells in Brazil. As far as I know, that is still true, in which case the sales figures might be chronically updating, and a more recent article might be more reliable. But at the same time, whatever you can find that is the most reliable and verifiable source should be what you use.
Given this, I'm not here much, so if you guys would be willing to do me the favor of posting links to your sources either here or on my talk page or something so I can take a look at them and give you guys an honest opinion, I'd be more than glad to take the time to do so. Let me know what's up and I'll be glad to help out. Red Phoenix flame of life... protector of all... 03:39, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Okay, might as well address these... First off, it's doubtful that IGN, Gamepro, or Wired took their figures from Wikipedia. These three sites (or at least IGN, to my memory) have all been evaluated and deemed reliable sources. We get a lot of our info from them, not the other way around. I would cite IGN personally myself, but here's my personal opinion of the numbers: I think the 29 million is probably the number not including the Genesis 3 or any of the variations not sold by Sega. Basically, it's just the straight-up Mega Drive/Genesis as sold by Sega, and what makes the numbers confusing is how many variations of the console there were. Now, of course this is all speculation and uncited opinion, so that can't be said, but that may be a reason for this. I think SexyKick has the right idea: piece together what you can with the sources we have. I would personally throw IGN in there as well, but that's just me, as IGN is almost always considered reliable. If there's any questions about IGN, Wired, or GamePro, you guys should take that to WikiProject Video Games and see what they say, because they're really the experts on those sites and their reliability and verifiability related to Wikipedia. Jesus.arnold, I don't trust the magazine scan, sorry, but if anyone finds the magazine itself I'd be more inclined to say it could be used. And that spreadsheet, well, same reason. Find me the original data that was compiled for it and I'll believe it. Personally, I'm not one for numbers myself or preferring one set over another as a "fanboy", but I would just rather see the most reliable sources used for the numbers that can be found, and the most reliable sources used all across the article. Red Phoenix flame of life... protector of all... 07:03, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
If you can find the magazine itself, Jesus.arnold, and can get a full citation of the issue and the page the scan is from, then let's use it. As for the spreadsheet, you'll need to cite the numbers themselves from the original sources. The spreadsheet's not going to be good enough on its own.
So, it seems like the core of the issue here is that we've got sources that contradict each other, and the question that comes in is which is more reliable. The Mega Drive might be the hardest console to do this with since there were so many variations that scramble all of the numbers and make so many variations of the numbers themselves and how we interpret them. Like the IP above just said, there's a 14 million US number, but the Times article showed a 20 million US number. That's six million in itself alone. On the subject of IGN, GameSpy is an IGN-affiliated site, so it would make sense there would be no disparity in that case. That doesn't mean, though, that they use Wikipedia as a source. In fact, as I've said, IGN is deemed a reliable source per the Video Games WikiProject. We might have to mention the disparity in the numbers in the article, though, in the article if we can show sources for both, as long as we avoid the word "controversy". Sound fair, guys? Red Phoenix flame of life... protector of all... 01:45, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
In the hope of giving more real information to the discussion (since I was bored anyway), I did a bit of googling for relevant sources. I found:
I couldn't find anything in Google that looked reliable at first glance for 33.7 million or 35 million. It would be nice if anyone knew where the "Sega of Japan Press Release Early 97" in the spreadsheet screenshot mentioned above might have been published; the current Sega and Sega-Sammy websites don't seem to have press releases going back that far, and I didn't manage to find anything in the Wayback archives of Sega's websites from around that time. Hope that helps. Anomie ⚔ 22:12, 27 February 2010 (UTC)
I tried to make the footnote a little more clear, using more reliable sources for the 29 million and not pretending that all the regional numbers are completely disjoint when we don't have any reason to assume that, but Mr. 130.76.96.23 reverted with some BS reason. Your "smart writing" stinks of bias to me. 108.109.43.36 ( talk) 19:53, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Just a small note, I found the Business Week article mentioned on Islandnet here, so I've replaced the Islandnet link in my earlier write-up with a more useful link to the actual article. Jesus.arnold ( talk) 21:00, 21 March 2010 (UTC)