CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
EN/FR
Search
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Pilotwings 64

1996 Nintendo 64 video game

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionSep 2, 2026
Entity authoritySource title only
Source-derived summary

Pilotwings 64 is a 1996 flight simulation video game developed by Nintendo and Paradigm Simulation and published by Nintendo for the Nintendo 64. It was one of three launch titles for the Nintendo 64 in Japan as well as Europe and one of two launch titles in North America, along with Super Mario 64. Pilotwings 64 is a sequel to Pilotwings for the Super Nintendo Entertainment System, which was a North American launch game for its respective console in 1991. Also like that game, Pilotwings 64 received production input from Nintendo producer and EAD General Manager Shigeru Miyamoto.

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Pilotwings 64” is 1996 Nintendo 64 video game. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Pilotwings, Nintendo and video, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA practical starting point whose main value is the path it opens into stronger specialist and primary sources. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1996, 1991—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Pilotwings, Nintendo and video is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “1996 Nintendo 64 video game” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 2, 2026. The first chronological checks are 1996 and 1991.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Pilotwings 64”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Pilotwings 64 primary sources, Pilotwings 64 archive and Pilotwings research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Pilotwings 64”?
  2. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from “Pilotwings 64” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.