Talk:Mega Man 2/GA1

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

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Protonk comments[edit]

Images[edit]

  • Image:Mega Man 2 for NES screenshot.png Why is this image not replaceable by text? What element does this image illustrate that has been the subject of critical commentary? Also, the fair use rationale states that the only purpose of the image is to identify the game (which doesn't really work because even though I've played 1 through x2 I would need the caption to tell me this was in MM2), so how does this image meet NFCC 8?

Sources[edit]

  • fn 6 should include the full manual citation and fn 7-9 should just summarize with an editor, year and page #.
    • Changed to separate notes and references section to solve this one. Jay32183 (talk) 07:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • fn 1: Why is GameFAQs a reliable source for the european release date? I don't know where the border between user submitted content and edited content is so I can't say myself.
  • fn 17: The rockmanpm.com forum is not a reliable source for the portion of the text it is meant to verify. I know the post links to a japanese page, but I have no problem with the article linking directly to the japanese page.
  • If you have a Lexis Nexis or Proquest account, you can get a Washington Times review of the game.
  • Same with a local paper in PA.
  • Other sources are pretty thin on the ground, at least from a web search.

MOS[edit]

  • Mega Man in the lead links to a disambiguation page. Should link to Mega Man (character)
  • The four citations in the lead are not necessary. No statements that are particularly controversial or pithy are made there, and all factual points in the lead should be repeated in article.
    • Removed citations from the lead section. Lumaga (talk) 03:14, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lead should also be expanded very slightly to include a summary of the development section.
  • This is a fairly short article, so outside of the infoboxes terms should be wikilinked only once. Various terms are overlinked in this article.
    • I don't see any terms that are linked more than once outside of the infobox. Lumaga (talk) 02:20, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have no strong opinion about linking exact dates, though the manual of style says they should not be linked without a good reason.
    • Dates no longer linked, except for access dates in citation templates, which are auto-linked. Jay32183 (talk) 07:07, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Manami Ietel (Manami Matsumae)" why is this two names?

Small problems[edit]

  • The wording on the 2nd external link probably needs to be clarified. Is it a full video of a game run through? A level? Or just not a clip?
  • Why is the Help:Japanese question mark in the bolded section of the lead?
    • This appears to be part of the {{nihongo}} template. Lumaga (talk) 03:01, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The game features several graphical and gameplay changes from the first..." There is no reason that "the first" can't be replaced with a more descriptive wording that notes the title of the first game.
  • "The game is the highest selling Mega Man game having sold more than 1.5 million copies." Could be reworded to something like "At 1.5 million copies sold, the game is the..."
  • "Mega Man 2 has received high praise by many publications as the best title in the series as well as being one of the greatest video games of all time." This is awkwardly worded. try to rewrite it without the phrases "as the" or "as being"
  • 200X shouldn't wikilink to the 2000's. Although that is literally correct I think it is more accurate to leave it unlinked or link it to something like Future history.
  • The story section should also be written to conform to WP:WAF. The plot summary should contextualize the elements. Since this is a game, we should speak about Mega Man as a player character and Wily/robot masters as bosses first. We can then talk about how the story is presented (e.g. as story panels or implicitly). Check out Category:FA-Class video game articles for some examples. The changes that need to be made (since the plot is pretty slim) are small, a sentence or two at most, but the article will be better for it.
  • Gameplay section: although it may seem obvious, we should note that the Robot Masters are "boss characters"
  • "Mega Man 2 added new gameplay elements that have stayed with the series in some capacity." Consider moving this paragraph to the reception and legacy section.
    • There was already a similar statement in the reception and legacy section, so I changed this sentence slightly. Lumaga (talk) 02:02, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...although unlike in Mega Man there are no hidden special powers that would make the ability to replay levels important." Is there a source that says this? I recognize that the absence of special powers accessible only by redoing levels is obvious and shouldn't seem to need sourcing, but this is sort of an editor generated conclusion without them.
  • "Mega Man creator Keiji Inafune claims the development of Mega Man 2 was a "rogue effort"." This should not be the second sentence in the section. Try swapping it with the third.
  • "Yuukichan's Papa also composed the music for the original Mega Man.", this can probably be included with the previous sentence in some form such as "...and Yoshihiro Sakaguchi, who also composed..."
  • Also, I think that the pseudonyms should be explained rather than included with the real names in parenthesis.
  • "Though later Mega Man games would use Mega Man's robot dog companion, Rush, as a replacement for these different vehicles, the genesis of the idea was in Mega Man 2. Rush's abilities would also be acquired from defeating a particular Robot Master." What source makes this claim?
  • "Mega Man 2 was rereleased for the Sony PlayStation in the second of six Rockman Complete Works discs, in Japan only circa 1999" should be: "In 1999, Mega Man 2 was rereleased for the Sony Playstation as the second of six Rockman Complete Works discs, though only in Japan."
  • "...and was published by Scholastic in 1990" should be ", published by Scholastic in 1990".
  • The differences between the book and the game are pretty trivial. I would suspect that a novelization of an 8 bit game would contain some more story than the game itself. Consider editing this section down a bit.
  • We should note in the rerelease section (even though this is noted in the bolded part of the lead) that in Japan, Mega Man is referred to as Rockman.

Overall[edit]

I'm going to place this article on hold. I think, given the available sources, this is a comprehensive and fair portrayal of the game. I also think that seven days (give or take) is more than enough to resolve all of the issues addressed here. Thanks for giving me a chance to review an article like this. Protonk (talk) 04:14, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm passing this article. About the fair use image. I thought (at the time of review) that the "mega man series" article would have plenty of images explaining the platformer nature. When I looked, it didn't, so I think that you can make a good justification to have one in this article. I would write a fair use rationale specifically for this article and write a caption that points out some features of platformers and return the image. Thanks for the quick work. Congratulations. Protonk (talk) 03:20, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mega_Man_2/GA1&oldid=244910767"