Talk:Mega Man 2

Robot Masters list

I've added a list of Robot Masters to the article. I've read over past discussion in a few places, and there is consensus to at least have them listed inline (as opposed to a table). --- RockMFR 01:43, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

The only problem is that it seems to disrupt the prose. Removing the table formatting doesn't turn a list into prose. The names of the Robot Masters alone doesn't help the uninformed reader, and we don't have things to say about each one. I think I'm against it. Jay32183 (talk) 06:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with Jay on this. I removed the robot master list on other Mega Man articles for two reasons: tables were full of trivia and fancruft, and the information didn't add anything meaningful to the article. I'd also like to see where this consensus was made. Lumaga (talk) 14:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

What is "meaningful" is entirely subjective. --- RockMFR 21:51, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

That list would be useful here in some form. I came to this article looking for that information, so saying that it doesn't help a reader uninformed on that specific information is patently false. I'm considering putting it back, and haven't done so already only because it appears to be in dispute here. Beyond495 (talk) 23:20, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Per WP:GAMEGUIDE, we avoid such information in articles. While the content would be useful to gamers, such level of detail is excessive for the layman and is not required for them to grasp the topic. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 03:30, 13 November 2011 (UTC))

That doesn't make sense to me, how does listing characters in the game detrimental to this article. Are listing characters in a movie detrimental to articles on those movies? Who decides these guidelines? Beyond495 (talk) 04:33, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

At the very least there should be a link to somewhere else that has this information. You would think a project that claims to provide "the sum of all human knowledge" would actually have all human knowledge in it. Beyond495 (talk) 04:53, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Typically, characters are only mentioned in movie articles only if they are relevant to the over-arcing plot. A similar approach is taken with video games. While there are many examples of other game articles that do include such information, any article that has undergone a quality review (like WP:GAN and WP:FAC) will omit that information to confirm with guidelines.

The guidelines are decided based on consensus determined by the Wikipedia community.

Who is the Wikipedia community? Where are they? Where was this particular determination for this standard made? Beyond495 (talk) 05:19, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

While there is not a link to a page on Wikipedia for the content, I can assure that the information is contained in several of sources used as references. Some are print, while others are web. A google search also turns up the information. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 05:04, 13 November 2011 (UTC))

I'll check again to see if a link was provided. While I don't understand or agree with these standards, they're beside the point. With the reasoning here, Wikipedia should just be shuttered and replaced with Google, which I don't agree with either, since often it's very valuable. Beyond495 (talk) 05:19, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Huh?

Wait, the list was there in the first place embedded in the article? When did this happen? Ugh, never mind everything I just said. Beyond495 (talk) 05:24, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

A-class assessment

• Support Nothing I can really say negative about the article...you've done your research and it clearly shows. I have no qualms supporting giving this A-class.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:19, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support I looked through some of the references, and they all checked out. I can easily support this for A-class, good work. -- Nomader ^(Talk) 04:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Merging in the Robot Masters

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

It's been over three years since this discussion and it has remained open ever since. I think we can safely close this as no consensus. WTF? (talk) 02:52, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

---

Overall, the Robot Masters do not really form a very worthwhile list. It really seems like it would be best to split them between the different games. This is the only GA, so it seems best as a test to see if people agree. TTN (talk) 17:35, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't like the idea of having a lot of detail about the Robot Masters in the Mega Man articles (not that I support the Robot Masters article either). This article was recently promoted to A-class with only a mention of the eight Robot Masters in the game with a brief mention of two of their abilities. I don't know if the detail listed in the Robot Masters article is necessary. This article is cited well, and we would need to find a source that confirms the information listed. Additionally, listing the weapons and description of all the Robot Masters in the game does not further a reader's understanding of the game significantly more than what is already listed. See number 6 in WP:VGSCOPE. Just my thoughts. Lumaga (talk) 18:55, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

It wouldn't really improve on anything, but it also really wouldn't be too detrimental to anything. If the annoyingly large table and the cruft in the descriptions are removed, it probably wouldn't be more than 2KB, which could help that tiny plot section a bit. The main reason that I would like to merge them is because there is no way the the Robot Master article would ever be deleted in an AfD, and if it is just simply redirected, it would probably be restored daily by anons because "it's important." TTN (talk) 19:17, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree that the crufty descriptions would have to go, but then you're left with the name, a very brief description, and a weapon name. It might help out the plot section, but how much plot is there to any original series Mega Man game anyway? The Robot Masters list might just be a necessary evil. I would much rather improve that list than move the content into the game articles. Let's test it out first and see how nice of a merge we can get, but I have my doubts. Lumaga (talk) 19:37, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree Robot Master is in terrible shape and I don't think there is much there to salvage. There probably won't be much in the way of development either because most of them are fan submissions from regular contests held by Capcom. What about merging or redirecting to Mega Man (original series)? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:04, 10 August 2009 (UTC))

I don't read any Japanese, but I'm sure somebody could get some information about Capcom's contest from print sources. That might be some great info to get this to FA status. And as for Mega Man (original series), that article is in desperate need of some work. Lumaga (talk) 15:52, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I think the contests started after MM3; so the Robot Masters from MM4-8 are contest cubmissions. EGM reported on it a couple times. I think Inafune mentioned it too in some interviews. But it can all be summed up in a sentence or two. That's why I said there won't be much in the way of development information for the Robot Masters, because most of the characters were created by non-staff members and probably not documented outside of Capcom. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:09, 10 August 2009 (UTC))

I really don't care about what happens to the contents of the article (except for the first six, which should probably be merged to the character list), so if you think you can keep it redirected without an anon trying to revive it every single day, I'm fine with that. TTN (talk) 16:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, the million dollar question: how to get the fans to agree? :-p You got me TTN. Maybe post it at Wikipedia talk:VG#Some input. That'll should get some more input and maybe some suggestions to maintain whatever consensus we arrive at. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 16:25, 10 August 2009 (UTC))

I suggest a transwiki for the Robot Masters article, then a delete, or failing that, a merge.--_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 09:20, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Tracklist removal

I removed the tracklist for the so-called "original soundtrack" because there was never an original soundtrack released for this game. The only music officially released for this game is the "Capcom Music Generation Famicom Music Complete Works Rockman 1~6" released by Capcom on the Suleputer label, and the names here didn't even correspond with the names listed there.

http://vgmdb.net/album/255

The track names aren't anything you couldn't guess just by listening to the track, so rather than pretend there has been a special release for this game's music, I think it's best just to remove the listing entirely.

Hellacia (talk) 11:02, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Box art

Did anyone notice that Mega Man has two RIGHT HANDS on the box art image used in the article? Is that the real box art?? Hypermegamanboy (talk) 19:01, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

• It is the real box art. It was illustrated by some one not involved with in-game art. I don't think QA was too concerned with box art in those days; lots of games have unusual box art. Jay32183 (talk) 01:36, 5 May 2010 (UTC)