One once again as I said before, if that is the case then why is the 360 elite not in a generation of its own?

Do i really need to explain that to you?  It is a modification to current hardware, not a step up or means to move forward with new technology.

People were confused about this?

So you are then looking at hardware which then means that the Wii U may not be next-gen as it could be argued that it is neither a step uo or means to move forward with technology.

It is a step up from the Wii and that is pretty obvious.  if you argue that then their is no reasoning with you.  Ive already explained all that and I also want to point out that the Wii does not play WiiU games.  Now why is that? 

Anyways i'm sure you will reply with some other reason you have but this is still a never ending whole.  If you want to complain about this then you can try to change the worlds view on this subject.  

From the Wii, yes, but not compared to the PS3 or 360, therefore it's 7th gen, no?

If you don't compare all existing consoles to one another in terms of hardware, then how can you classify consoles which are not successors e.g. Xbox, Playstation etc?

No, the wii's competion was the X360 and PS3.  Something that is explained in the OP.  WiiU's competion will be the PS4 and the NeXbox.  hence 8th generation.  what is so hard to understand about all this?

@Mazty

Actually the Wii serviced three gaming audiences in the form of the Hardcore, the Core, and the Casual. While that consoles demographic may be skewed toward the last group. That doesn't mean it wasn't servicing the very same market that the others were servicing. It was just servicing a expanded market. Actually given the fact that Microsoft and Sony also invested in Casual interfaces later it could be argued that the 360 and the PS3 actually belonged in the previous console generation.

Nintendo placing their primary focus on interface isn't anything new, and like it or not that is part of the equation. Controllers are part of technological iterations just as much as raw processing power. Since the Wii U is a fairly dramatic departure from what came before is proof beyond a doubt that it is part of a new generation of gaming consoles. You don't have to like what Nintendo did, or how Nintendo does things to acknowledge that their console is contention, and respect their audience.

Nintendo at least probably feels it has radically improved its technology. I don't necessarily agree that it is the right choice for them, but they have served up some serious humble pie in the past. They put all of their money into that controller, and I suppose time will tell if that is what the market will find most important.

The primary competition of the Wii U is the PS3, Xbox 360 and even the Wii. And Wii U is doing pretty bad. I doubt the Wii U will last longer than two years once new consoles from Microsoft and Sony arrive. (no bash intended) So it's really kind of an 7.5-ish console. It is in direct competition with the last generation AND the new generation. 

Thar said, it's purely up to interpretation what is Next-Gen and what is not. It becomes more complicated if you look at other markets. What about smartphones for example? Are 99 $ Smartphones with Single Core CPUs Next Generation just because they release in 2013 and are a successor to some other phone? Doubt it. 

Making an unsubstantiated claim doesn't give it truth.

The Wii was marketed at a different audience than the PS3 and 360 because the games were a) completely different and b) no multiplatform titles.

You are now just saying that a Ferrari and Dodge Ram are gunning for the same audience because they are both motor vehicles.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/reggie-nintendo-not-good-at-core-games