Template talk:Mega Man Zero series

Is it just me or does the new red background MegamanZero installed clash with the blue links? Wolf ODonnell 11:16, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmmm....Maybe. I'll change em' all then. -ZeroTalk 11:21, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Erm... sorry, I kinda changed them already... Note that it wasn't nice, but it did kinda get confusing.

Wolf ODonnell 11:24, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I've reverted. -ZeroTalk 11:25, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, now this is getting confusing. I reverted, you reverted... Now, I liked the way you created different heading background colours, which is why I created something that only had four different background colours... Just having the one kinda merges the Mega Man Zero heading and Games heading together, which is also confusing. Can we agree on sticking to my edit or at least one that is similar to it (i.e. more than one heading background colour, but less than three?) Wolf ODonnell 11:28, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * No. The Mega Man Zero series trademark color is red. Hence, I color-coded it as such. Blue is diroriently out of place. -ZeroTalk 11:30, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Okay, then. How's about I change the blue to a different shade of red or grey? Grey would be kinda neat. Wolf ODonnell 11:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I choose silver. :) -ZeroTalk 11:32, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

Great, because you know, changing the template so many times in the past few minutes was kinda getting annoying. Do you mind if I change a few more headings to silver too? (Just the one marked Resistance Characters and the one marked Neo Arcadia Characters, after all, they are sub-headings of sub-headings). Wolf ODonnell 11:33, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Please. Silver is a wonderful color. -ZeroTalk 11:36, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

What do you think of the slightly darker #DEDEDE colour? I darkened it slightly, because the background wasn't showing up too clearly on my monitor or that of another computer I went to... If you don't like it, feel free to say so and revert it. Wolf ODonnell 11:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
 * No problems. This is acceptable. -ZeroTalk

Decided to finish up the templates with links to the other series, after all, the story of Zero Series is partially inter-connected with the other franchises. Battle Network was not included, because that's set in an alternate dimension to the original timeline and is thus not related storywise. Wolf ODonnell 12:05, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

How is the Template Obtrusive?
I don't understand. How is the template obtrusive? Furthermore, adding that Related Series section means that the Mega Man Zero series and all related articles don't need the Megaman template added. That is the reason why this template was created. Wolf ODonnell 13:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Agreed. I've restored this section. No need for two, large templates centered needlessly at the bottmon of every article. -Randall Brackett 15:04, 15 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Take a look at Mega Man weapons. Mega Man Zero series already links to the related series (and I fail to see how Mega Man Legends is related but in name).


 * This box is obtrusive because it's large (and ugly, but I've been fiddling with that) and links to a great many articles that have nothing to do with most of the articles in the navbox. It's not as bad as some, but let's not make it larger by adding links that have nothing to do with 70-95% of the articles that use this. (I see no articles who have anything to do with MM/MML/MMZX, and four articles (of more than a dozen) that have anything to do with the MMX series. - A Man In Bl♟ck  (conspire | past ops) 01:07, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

They're related storywise and all are spin-offs of the original series. I'll concede the removal of the last line, but I will not concede having the names of the game abbreviated. Wolf ODonnell 11:49, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Why does there need to be a link to Mega Man Legends in every single MMZ article? Likewise for Mega Man Classic and Mega Man ZX? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 11:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * It's so people can have links to the other games in the Megaman franchise, which are all related. Wolf ODonnell 12:05, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't see why we need a link at the bottom of, say, Kraft (Mega Man Zero) to Mega Man Legends. The two don't have anything in common save the coincidence of being loosely associated in the same game franchise. In the cases where links are relevant, they can just be added to the articles themselves, instead of crammed into this template. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 12:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't see the problem. The links are there if sweeping across the wide range of franchises. The links are relevant to the series itself, not specifically the character article in question. Such links of relevance are inserted above.


 * Its far more appropriate than inserting the standard Template:Mega Man series below it. -Randall Brackett 12:38, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Why not just wikilink associated series in the articles when appropriate? Why does every single article that might be related to a page that this template is used in have to be linked from this template? Mega Man Zero series already has two wikilinks to Mega Man X (series). Likewise Mega Man Zero (video game). - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 12:41, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Respectfully, your earlier comment: "and I fail to see how Mega Man Legends is related but in name" demonstrates your lack of knowledge in the series and their relation. I think that is the crux of the problem. The appropriate idea is to explain how the series internconnect together. I'm not sure how its relevant to the template; seems more of a prose-in-the-articles-problem. -Randall Brackett 12:46, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I understand how the series connect together (oh, but thanks a whole lot for implying that I don't know what I'm talking about, I really appreciate it!) What I don't understand is why we need a link to MML in every single MMZ article, especially since none of these articles make mention of the Legend series at all. (I just checked.) - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 12:53, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I and an editor above explained why we thought this necessary. You disagreed and think it intrusive. Must a sensible view on a matter be in compliance with yours..? All the time..? -Randall Brackett 12:55, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I would like an answer. Why does this template link to articles that aren't mentioned once in any single article in which this template appears? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 12:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

We told you why. All the series are related to each other. Limited knowledge of the other franchises means I cannot legitimately edit them to include minor trivia knowledge stating that these franchies are all interconnected.

Adding that extra line means that I don't have to add the Megaman template to the end of every single Mega Man Zero game article. It means I don't have two templates like here, here, here, here, here, here and in this unrelated article here United States of America etc. etc.

Wouldn't you agree that having more than one template is far more obtrusive than just the one? Surely, adding one tiny extra line can't make a template more obtrusive than it already is?

No, no... on second thoughts, let him have his way... again. I'll remove the line. It'll probably be easier to edit the major Megaman franchise template should a new franchise appear, than to edit the Megaman franchise template and the Megaman Zero template (which is a much better reason than it's ugly and obtrusive - I just couldn't stand your superficial reasons that's all). However, I'm keeping the link to the Mega Man (series). Is that fair enough?

However, I must insist that you stop editing the links so they point to non-existent articles. I'm not sure if it's you or not, but it must really stop. There is no Neo Arcadia page.

Wolf ODonnell 14:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Yes there is. See Neo Arcadia. -Randall Brackett 14:24, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Oh, fair enough. Hey, I think I can actually get rid of the "In Universe" POV for that particular article, if only I knew where I could find some Neo Arcadia concept art. Wolf ODonnell 14:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * A Man In Black has a view the article does not meet the standards outlined on WP:WAF, despite my attempts to conform to the pages's reuqirements. I'm inclined to think otherwise. Perhaps you could try rewriting it. I'm lost. -Randall Brackett 14:29, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Yet again...
I'm begining to get very sick and tired of a certain user, who shall rename nameless as of now, who insists on making gross changes to other people's work without overall general consensus, and with generally no insight of the topic at hand. So, I've decided to start... yet again... another discussion on how to streamline the damned template.

So, here is a proposal to meet halfway.

We streamline the template down into four sections.

1. Games. All games will be listed using their full names to avoid looking like some hackneyed amateur twadddle. 2. A section listing links to important game mechanics, namely, the Cyber Elf link and the Bosses. 3. The Remastered Tracks Rockman Zero links stay. They shall be placed at the bottom.

No changes will be made to this template until a consensus has been agreed upon. Wolf ODonnell 18:37, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Take a look at WT:CVG. The reason the RTRZ links were collapsed to a single link is because they're fairly obscure even in Japan and because we have an umbrella article covering the lot of them. As for the "important" game mechanics, they're already linked in the umbrella articles, and their importance is already explained in the articles to which they are actually important. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 21:44, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to state one thing that I only realised after looking at your version, AMIB. The italics for games and non-italics for non-games is a bad idea. The only reason somebody would realise that the non-italic links are to non-games is if the link itself is obvious from its name or by clicking on it. No Wikipedia user is going to go to WT:CVG and look up what your italics and non-italics means.

So, if we separate the data in the navigation template into two sections and label those sections clearly, they'll know for sure, without a shred of doubt. The subtitles are not metadata. They help organise the links.

Organisation is key here, and I will not sacrifice organisation for your petty visual concerns.

Wolf ODonnell 13:13, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not a code. Italicizing the names of longform works is standard English usage. The rest is standard appearance. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:20, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

And how on earth is the average Wikipedia user going to know that? Wolf ODonnell 12:37, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Presumably they're literate readers of English? - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 04:50, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm literate in English and I didn't know that. What does longform works mean? I've never italicised works before in my time as a science graduate. The only thing I italicise are gene names, where the protein product is of the same name. Wolf ODonnell 11:41, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Longform works, like books, movies, publications, encyclopedias, etc. are italicized in print or underlined when italics aren't appropriate. (For example, in handwriting.) Shortform works (short stories, episodes, articles) are in quotations. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:19, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

And how does that apply to the navigational template? And how will the average kid know that? Being literate in English does not equal knowing how the above information. And what do you mean by episodes? TV episodes? Surely, the Remastered Tracks Rockman Zero would come under publications, longform works, and thus would be italicised. But the average person wouldn't know the difference between that and a game.

It makes far more sense, to spell it out to them clearly by putting the links into separate categories.

Wolf ODonnell 13:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't know what it has to do with anything. You brought it up.


 * Please stop adding pointless metadata to the template. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:10, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Stop making the nature of the links unclear. This "metadata" is important, to ensure that people know what the Heck the links are about. I'm telling you, the average user will not know the difference between a longform piece of work and a shortform piece of work. Wolf ODonnell 14:29, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * As may be, we're going to use standard rules of English. Please stop adding the completely unnecessary and nonstandard horizontal rule. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:38, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Why is there such a huge space near the bottom?
I've been trying my best, but I can't seem to get rid of that huge space near the bottom of the template. The only way I could get rid of it, is to italicise the last link, but that would violate the current agreed consensus on what navigation templates should look like, namely the one where only links to games can be italicised. (Which I reluctantly accept to agree).

Why is that? Is there some way of getting rid of that space, or do I have to violate the consensus on videogame navigation templates?

Wolf ODonnell 22:14, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

It's caused by the horizontal rule. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:39, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * No, it's not. I've tried without the horizontal rule, and there's still a huge gap there. Look, I'll show you. Wolf ODonnell 13:34, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Okay, now that's strange. Last night when I got rid of the horizontal rule, the gap was still there, so I decided to leave in it. After all, if the gap was there with or without the horizontal rule, what was the point of changing it? Now there isn't one, so I guess no horizontal rule anymore. Wolf ODonnell 13:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)