File talk:Wii Wiimotea.png

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

The LED at the bottom of the Wiimote is on in the reflection but not on the actual remote. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.71.71.63 (talkcontribs).

Yeah, that looks odd... --- RockMFR 01:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's an excellent image, regardless. Have you seen how he compiled this image? I hope all articles can have this kind of art on their page. ALTON .ıl 03:37, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

also, it is clear that the remote does not rest on the shiny reflective surface. Qwilleranfan

Also, the reflection layer is clearly above the actual image layer. Hence the dark strip at the bottom of the Wii. Up close, the quality’s not that great. Max Naylor 18:48, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Take your constructive criticism to the guy who made it. His being a Commons account, he might not check here. ALTON .ıl 06:58, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, why is the string in the reflection connecting to the actual strap instead of the reflection strap? --Smoothtofu (talk) 19:19, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pages that link[edit]

There's a good 100 users that link to this image, do we really need that huge list on the image's page? Useight 02:08, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The list is automatically generated. There's no way to hide it. --- RockMFR 07:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why do so many users link there anyway?Drahcir my talk 02:29, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Because they make userboxes, similar to this:
This user prefers the Wii.


--haha169 (talk) 06:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Peer Review[edit]

I don't know how to do this, but I think someone should get a peer review to review this image for Featured Picture. It considerably adds to its respective article (since the article is FA status) and it is outstanding. This picture stands a good chance for FA picture. Comments? --haha169 (talk) 05:57, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

wiie adamrosnm tgfyrvhfhfg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.254.59.250 (talk) 13:38, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]