Talk:Mortal Kombat/Archive 1

Archive 1

delete stats

Frankly, I'm tired of constantly correcting fake statistics of height weight and age; how about we just remove them completely until we get an entire set of stats (possibly in MKA?) at which time we will know all characters heights and weights and ages hopefully.

I suggested that earlier, since the constant stat changes swamp the more interesting edits to the pages, but the other project members wanted to keep them in.Virogtheconq 19:12, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Mortal Kombat tournament merge

I think that page is frankly not important enough to have an entire article devoted to it, but is important enough to have a section in this page. Comments?Virogtheconq 18:11, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

It reads more like a fanfic than a Wikipedia article. I wouldn't bother merging it, I'd just flat out delete it. The tournament itself isn't as notable as the games (of which it was only featured in three, and one's canonity is questionable!) or the characters. Any information about the tournament can be gleamed from the pages we already have set up for the games, which explain the backstory just lovely. --L T Dangerous 15:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I say keep it as it is. It deserves its own entry, to distinquish the concept of Mortal Kombat from the actual game series. Itake 05:12, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Having reviewed it a second time, the article has been significantly revised and can stand by itself. If no one objects in the next week or so, I'm thinking of removing the merge tag and trying to link more articles to it. Virogtheconq 18:13, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why it needs to be seperate. The "Mortal Kombat Tournament" page is nothing more than the storyline that the games, tv shows, etc... follow. It seems more like something that you'd have as part of a larger article. --Marhawkman 01:30, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, there's enough information contained in the article that merging it to another would make that one quite long, which is why I think it should stay as-is. Virogtheconq 05:52, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Well The MK tournament is part of the MK Spectrum--Triple-Quadruple 20:12, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't think they should be merged. This page should deal strictly with the game information, and the other should deal with the tournament as a story device. --DragonMaster 00:08, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Page Created

Created this page from Mortal Kombat, which needed to be separated into distinct game and series pages. I've basically just copied and pasted the stuff I think should belong here, though this page now needs heavy cleaning and reformatting. Also, could someone perhaps get a copy of the MK dragon symbol and use it to replace the current screencap? Virogtheconq 04:01, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Well I think they should have a small section about the arcade culture and then put an external wiki link to the Mortal Kombat Tournaments instead of merging the article into one, that would be huge and the tournaments can be independant from this article.

I would really like this pic to stay

Yes, I know it's "yours" article... I renamed it and moved for a better layout, so please? There's a free space there anyway.

Unfortunately, a GamePro cover discussing Mortal Kombat II doesn't belong on a page discussing the entire series (especially since there is no mention of GamePro anywhere on the page). If there were some article where it's appropriate, I'd have no problem with it - it's just that particular image adds nothing to the page. Virogtheconq

Okay then.

---

Why are: Mythologies, Special Forces, and Shaolin Monks under both fighting games and non-fighting games? Dessydes 01:30, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

• I think they were leftovers from back when it was a list of all the games. I removed MKM:SZ and SF from the section. I haven't played SM, but from what I understand there is a small versus component, so I left it in for now. Virogtheconq 02:07, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

---

A tad questionable?

This is currently posted on the article:

Acclaim produced 2 Mortal Kombat-styled games based on the World Wrestling Federation: "WWF Wrestlemania: The Arcade Game" & "WWF In Your House". Both featured Mortal Kombat-like sprites, moves, and finishers.

Now I can't say I own either of these games. But I highly doubt this statement is wonderfully accurate. I'm aware the sprites for some of the old WWF games look digitised, but I can't quite believe the games are "Mortal Kombat-styled". Wouldn't they be, I dunno, wrestling games? Rather than beat-em-ups? And why would there be MK-like moves and finishers? I've never seen Shawn Michaels kick someone's head clean off, no matter how much the commentators say he may as well have, nor do I think Vincent "Family Entertainment" McMahon would approve of such content in a WWF/E game. Even if the games are fighting style rather than wrestling style, the text needs a rewording so its meaning is clearer. --L T Dangerous 15:08, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't own either of the games, but I've played Wrestlemania and have seen In Your House. Both games are very much extreme games that go beyond "realistic" simulation, kind of like with the backbreakers in NFL Blitz and the flaming 50 foot high slam dunks in NBA Jam. Undertaker uses a tombstone to bash the crap out of his opponent, Shawn Michaels pulls out a baseball bat from hammerspace, stuff flies out from your opponent when you hit them hard... I never thought of the similarity that way, but now that its mentioned, I think its a fair comparison... Clint 00:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

There are also MK style fatalities, not as gory as MK but still fatalities, for example, HBK summons a heartshaped bed to fall on the opponent, crushing them.

NBA JAM

I can't belive no one mention the NBA JAM crossover, so I added it.--4.250.6.88 16:14, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Arcade Championship history

I included the championship history for the MK arcade series and people are changing the names of the winners.

I'd like something done about this as I know for a definitive fact about these tournamets as I was actually the winner of the first MK tournament and I don't believe whoever is editing it is acting in good faith.

Unfortunately, there's nothing we can do about it. Provide a link and/or print source showing the results and we'll believe whatever's posted in the section - otherwise there's no proof one way or another and the section'll have to be removed.Virogtheconq 17:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I believe it would be very difficult to get a print source from 1993/4 about arcade tournaments, however I believe the winners were printed in an old issue of Computer and Video Games magazine which I'll try and find.

This arcade championship section has no place at wikipedia in the first place. There have been hundreds of MK tournaments over the years and people still play UMK3 and the 3D games competitively. This isn't the place for tournament results. To be honest nobody cares about a tournament 10 years ago you happened to win.

Actually no, there's only ever been 4 official tournamets as I said before.

Official in what context? Midway-sponsored?Virogtheconq 17:14, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Yep apparently. I got to meet a couple of the MK Cast and Crew. "To be honest nobody cares about a tournament 10 years ago you happened to win." Sounds like somebody's jealous.

This article isn't the place for tournament results no matter how "official" they are. It's already cluttered as is. You honestly think people are coming to read this article to find out the names of people they've never heard of who won a tournament 10 years ago? MAYBE it'd something for the actual section on MK1/MK2 and it'd be a lot more interesting if there was some details on the tournament and not just "there was a championship. Here's the names of the people who won".

• Dude let me put what your saying into a phrase... you think we should tell people theres stuff thats been done or won but no-one gives a crap about their name. That would be like saying "Oh some guy landed on the Moon but who gives a crap about his name."Zach 06:30, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Not just the names. None of it should be here.

How to fight Reptile

Some, but not complete, details were included in this page about how to fight the hidden character Reptile. I added what I think to be the complete requirements for the original arcade version ([1]).

Thrill Kill... a flop?

Thrill Kill was never released. However on this page, it claims that Thrill Kill was a flop due to excessive violence (???). I removed this due to its inaccuracy.

Comparatives

The comparatives should stay as they are (bloodier, etc.). They are a correct form, and the form that was originally there. Wikipedia policies tend to give weight to the initial variant in cases when two options are correct. --Eyrian

Well, IIRC comparatives usually are expected to have the same structure - so either use the "more ____" or "____er" form for every term, but not mixed together the way they are now. I'm not really going to argue about it, though.Virogtheconq 23:52, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

In this case, I think it may be a lost cause. "More Bloody" is awkward, and "brutaler" isn't a word. I think it's probably OK as it is. --Eyrian 00:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Would it be alright to add a story overview for each game?

? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.250.3.114 (talk • contribs)

Probably not. The article is long enough as it is, and if a reader is interested in the storyline of each game, they can read those individual articles (which need to be retooled to a standardized format anyways). Virogtheconq 16:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

External Links

This list really needs to be trimmed down, it's huge! I suggest someone look at each of the list and keep the links that are notable and have a good amount of information. M2K E 18:20, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. I don't have the time to go through every link right now, but I went ahead and removed the Spanish MK website (this is the English wikipedia; the link should be added to the Spanish MK article). EVula 18:26, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

John Vogel

Being considered for deletion due to lack of sources. Either someone should find sources or it should be deleted.

Controversy?

I'm surprised there isn't any mention of the controversy that the MK series started with respect to violence in video games. I know that's an ongoing theme and many games received similar treatment but I seem to recall the first MK game being singled out specifically when it first came out. I checked here and the page for Mortal Kombat (arcade game).

Yeah, I'd like to add a section on that to the page eventually, though I haven't really bothered finding sources (written from a neutral POV, which may be a tad more difficult) required to really add it.Virogtheconq 04:17, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Merged MK Tournament

I merged the MK tournament article as requested. There is also alot of spelling fixes and rearranging of the sections to get rid of anything repetitive. The boss section was also deleted since the List of Characters table now mark the bosses in the games anyways. Benjwong 15:57, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Large trivia sections

I can't help noticing a lot of MK related pages have large trivia sections. Strickly speaking, information that shouldn't really be on wikipedia is normally put into these sections, but the MK trivia sections are too big. Where best you must try and avoid clumping everything into trivia sections, information on how the character was depicted in a game or its developement can go into a Character devlopment section and a game information section. I've started this off on the Raiden, Baraka, Ermac, Cryrax, Johnny Cage and Goro pages. The only thing left to do with those pages is rewrite the stuff that sounds poor grammar or is badly written to make it sound better.

If anyone else thinks things should be done differently, please say so. Take in mind as far as encyclopedia value is concerned currently, many pages are being weakened by their large trivia pages and someone should go round and merge them all the best they can into the main section. Angel Emfrbl 08:37, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree some articles have to much trivia, but I personally don't have a problem with it, I enjoy reading through the trivia, though to be fair, that isn't very 'encylopedic' of me, so sure, cut down irrelevant Trivia where need-be, if I see anything that doesn't really have to be in a WP article, I will remove it, or if there is anything that could earn it's own section, I will add, or if I see anything repeated from an earlier section, I will remove. The Haunted Angel 13:58, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I like trivia sections, and think they fit in just fine with Wikipedia's policy of documenting pretty much everything; more often than not, information just simply can't fit elsewhere in the article.

Now, that said, I do agree that the trivia goes haywire sometimes, and we need to trim back the extraneous drivel that has crept into some of the articles. EVula 16:12, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

If anyone wants an example of such cases where there is a huge section of trivia, Reptile and Sub-Zero are perfect examples. I don't mind trivia sections either, but a lot of the information on such pages can be clumped together in their own sections in the main artcle its just a case of sitting back and working out how to do it. Angel Emfrbl 11:03, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

The trivia has a lot of rare info that would otherwise be lost if not kept. If the article is to be shortened. I suggest the "similar games". It doesn't make sense to mention so many of the competitive games in the games history. You don't see a giant "similar games" list on the street fighter wiki. Benjwong 00:45, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Endings

I think the character pages should have endings sections like the Tekken characters. - The 4th Snake 19:29, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Listing the non-canon endings of each character seems inpractical, not to mention highly irrelevant. Instead we just have the 'Possible Future' section, that debates whether or not the latest game's ending was canon. The Haunted Angel 19:43, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

It's just that there are some endings that some people won't know the canonciality (if that's the correct word) of some endings. - The 4th Snake 20:09, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, so you're saying that we should list all character endings for each game because some people won't know which endings are canon. But, if they wanted to know which ending was canon, all they would have to do is read their story and the 'Possible Future' bit. ~ The Haunted Angel 20:14, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

That's pretty much it, yeah. I seriously doubt most people who wanted to know if an ending was canon, they wouldn't read the whole article to find out. - The 4th Snake 20:42, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, anyone who is really that interested in what endings were canon (and didn't gather from the plot of the next game) would probably read through the article anyway. ~ The Haunted Angel 21:09, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

It was just an idea. - The 4th Snake 18:52, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Announcer

Who is the person who is the announcer for the Mortal Kombat series. I heard that it's the same guy as for the unreal tournament series

It's a different announcer depending on the game. I believe it was Steve Ritchie for MKII and 3/T (since he voiced Shao Kahn) and possibly 4. For Deception, it was either Ed Boon or Herman Sanchez - I'd have to check the credits again. I don't think it's the same announcer as UT, though Unreal Championship 2 did have an option to set the announcer to the MK announcer. Virogtheconq 06:13, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Similar Games

Yes, I'm still here, just not editing articles directly associated with MKA until I get the damn game. Anyway, to the point. Is the 'Similar Games' section really needed? I mean, I just removed a few things from there where there really was no proof that such a game existed, or just generally irrelevant info. Before I start to remove all other irrelevant or unencyclopedic information from this list (and there is a lot), I wanted to know what everyone else thought. Personally, I think we should remove the whole section, the article is already pretty big, this is just unencyclopedic and takes up unnecessary space. The list itself could go on forever; why not add Street Fighter or Tekken (etc...). I personally just think the whole damn section should be removed. ~ The Haunted Angel ^{(The Forest Whispers My Name)} 11:46, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Wow! Been like 4 months and no one replied! Some one voice their damn thoughts already!! =P ≈ The Haunted Angel ^{//The Forest Whispers My Name//} 12:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Alas I agree the section is heavily unnecessary and furthermore negligible to those seeking MK related information. I vote to its deletion. ≈ Kombat Krave ~ 17:20, 07 March, 2007 (CT)

Yay a reply! Lol I'll go and remove it. ≈ The Haunted Angel ^{//The Forest Whispers My Name//} 23:34, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Sub-character list?

I was thinking that "The Mortal Kombat Universe" (where it lists the main games, remakes, main characters, etc.) should also have sub-characters in it. Like Kia, Jataaka, etc. from the Adventure games that have never been playable.

I would have done it already, but I don't know how to edit that part, lol. 138.217.219.127 06:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

There is already a link to the minor characters list that deals with them already in the template. -SaturnYoshi ^{THE VOICES} 07:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

*slaps forehead* Sorry! I forgot the minor characters don't have their own page. 138.217.219.127 10:00, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

acceptance in Japan?

Was the franchise succesful in Japan and Asia? I can't find information about such thing. --189.135.69.59 03:25, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

I seem to recall reading in Gamefan Magazine that it wasn't. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.119.33 (talk) 10:19, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Navigation Template

Whoever split the navigation Template for the entire MK series in half, fix it back. It was better the old way and much easier to navigate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Donco (talk • contribs)

The template was split (not by me) to address concerns that it was far too large, a concern I happen to agree with. Do you have any suggestions for a unified, but smaller, template? EVula 17:42, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

At the very least, we ought to at least put a link to a media category or somesuch in the template - from what I can tell, none of the video/film productions are accessible within two clicks of that template (other than going through a character, of course). Personally, I think the primary reason the template was so large, the character roster, isn't that necessary, and ought to be removed - it can easily be replaced with a link to List of Mortal Kombat characters or somesuch.

Note: copied over to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mortal Kombat#Navigation Template. Please leave responses there. Virogtheconq 18:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

No progress

Moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mortal Kombat#No progress, since this is applicable to all MK articles Virog^{It's not}_{my fault!}

Height and Weight of these characters

Who has removed their height and weight again? These are very important items, these have to be notable. Pooter-the-clown 08:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

See here for a brief discussion in which we decided to remove the info (I seem to recall there are a few other places that addressed the same topic in the archive as well). If you really want to bring it up again, you can always ask on the project Talk page. Virog^{It's not}_{my fault!} 14:40, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the discussion happened at the template. Height and weight are both ultimately unimportant to the character and, more often than not, impossible to verify. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Mortal Kombat Wiki

Is there also a Wiki for Mortal Kombat? Morris Munroe 15:56, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Why Don't you google it and find out?→041744 15:47, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I started one, but never got around to announcing it (or doing more than creating just the basics). I should probably get back on that... EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I was looking forward to that! Then I just.. didn't hear anything about it... Hehe, finish it! :P ≈ The Haunted Angel 16:08, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

MK Wikipedians

Are there also Wikipedia-users from Midway? Morris Munroe 15:57, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Please answer my following questions. Morris Munroe 20:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Link discussion

There has been a lot of back-and-forth lately about the link section; specifically, an anon editor has been adding the same links repeatedly. So, I'm opening up discussion to talk about the merits (or lack thereof) for all the links. EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:22, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but it is not just one person adding links. It is a whole group of people who feel there should be more links added, and they've all agreed to keep adding the sites everyday until you leave them. If one website deserves to be listed, then any other MK website should be allowed the same privilege. Either remove them all, or allow other sites to be listed. The sites you keep removing contain 10x or more information and content than MKO. The Haunted Angel tried justifying MKO's listing because it's high on Google's list. That's just dumb. Being popular doesn't make it the best site on the net for MK content. And another thing, what is it hurting having more links at the bottom? Nothing? The public wants more links, and last I checked, two or three people who think they run Wikipedia don't speak for the entire MK kommunity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.44.133.66 (talk • contribs)

It has been several anon. editors, which can't be definitively said to be "a group" any more than it can be definitively said to be a single person.

I would like to see an argument for their inclusion to be made on some non-confrontational grounds; chalking up the opposing editors to "two or three people who think they run Wikipedia" isn't especially constructive (especially since, on the whole, "the entire MK kommunity" is largely irrelevant in this discussion; it is the upholding of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines that is more important here, not what "the public" wants). EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed this issue, so I figured I may as well throw in my two cents since I doubt it would hurt to have another voice on the matter (Although remember, Wikipedia is not a democracy. Majority doesn't necessarily rule):

• The Annals of Mortal Kombat – Even if it does try to fit in the non-canon as much as it can (I doubt Cooking With Scorpion occurred, but maybe...), I find this site to be fairly helpful and informative. It is, at the very least, a quite unique resource that covers plenty of information not found here or elsewhere. In fact, I plan to use this page from the site as a source for when I finally get around to improving the Mortal Kombat: Special Forces article, as its quite an incredible plethora of useful information. I would support the inclusion of this site on the basis that readers searching for the incredible minutia on the series (The stuff not fit for Wikipedia, since we should not be including every single last detail in existence) could at least be directed to somewhere where they can find something.
• Fuzzd0rk's Mortal Kombat – I would not support the inclusion of this site. Just about every section requires registration in order to view their contents, making it quite useless as a reference link. Even the advertised "quizzes" section wants me to register first. Not that helpful. Additionally, requiring a registration to view the website's information means that it fails one of Wikpedia's external link guidelines: namely this aptly named rule.
• Kamidogu – Kamidogu was a fine resource when the site was up, and I believe it had been listed here before, but as of now, I can't think of one reason to justify a link to what is currently a dead site. Maybe when it comes back up it can be added, but until then, a link to a site with nothing is absolutely pointless.

Anyway, to you, Mr. Anonymous or Anonymouses, I'd like to point out the actions of which the above anon IP person is condoning are in flagrant violation of one of Wikpedia's guidelines: Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. It's not very likely that trying to brute force these links onto this page is going to allow them to stay here. Read up on the external links guidelines and note the use of the word "minimum" in terms of how many we should be including. This is not an "include all or nothing" situation. MarphyBlack 23:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Since Fuzzd0rk's Mortal Kombat is ineligible because registration is required to view certain sections, doesn't MK Online fail then, as well? You need to purchase a flawless account to receive extra features on the site. Also, you need to be at least registered with a free account in order to download any type of video on the site. Let's not be hypocrites, here. You said FDMK doesn't make the cut because of that Wikipedia guideline. Well, MK Online is in violation of that guideline, as well.

"The web site itself is the topic of the article"

MK Online is not the topic of MK on Wikipedia.

"It has relevant content that is of substantially higher quality than that available from any other website."

There are, by far, more superior MK sites on the net for content than MK Online. Besides for the occasional exclusive news update, MK Online is fairly useless. Their games section is the same as any other MK site.

If MK Online isn't removed from the list, as well, it will only prove how you all choose to follow/not follow Wikipedia guidelines only when it's convenient for what you want.

MK Online only requires an account if you want to download videos. However, all other text content is free to be viewed, including the forums. This Fuzzdork's site, on the other hand, won't even let me look at past news updates in its news archives because the forums are not free to view by the public. However, since last time I checked, I see that I can now access the quzzes section without having to register, but this doesn't really hold a lot of weight in terms of content. Anyway, this is a fairly pointless dispute since it's quite clearly just a silly battle between supporters of different websites, so I'll just do a simple Google test for the general term "Mortal Kombat". MKO is the first fansite result, third result overall. FDMK is no where to be found. Further research reveals that MKO has an Alexa ranking of 27,255. Fuzzdork's MK site has an Alexa ranking of 4,242,710, which is over 150 times that of MKO's. One general MK fansite link is sufficient for this article, and MKO fits the bill for that spot perfectly. MarphyBlack 08:52, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! That's exactly what I needed to hear. I removed MKO because of the registration thing, but as you rightly pointed out, that's just for small bits of content, unlike FDMK. Ah well, now this is sorted :) ≈ THA //See Evil//Speak Evil//Hear Evil// 09:47, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Taken from MK Online:

Flawless Accounts are available to Free Account holders who want extra features

You assholes are nothing but hypocrites. MK Online violates the same exact guidelines but it's ok because they rank highter on the web. That's complete and utter bullshit! You got alot of nerve talking about this being over supporters or different sites, when it's so completely obvious you are supporting MK Online by keeping them listed even though their site requires registration, as well.

[Flame Sama]I am a member of both FDMK and MK Online, I added a special section so both forums can get their sites advertised, I also added Kamidogu.com, another good site. There is a note at the bottom of the forum section saying Some sites may require accounts. Is that any better?

MarphyBlack - "Wikipedia does not negotiate with terrorists. Er, I mean disruptive vandals."

I have three problems with this. One, MarphyBlack, you are not Wikipedia. The public is Wikipedia. Two, labeling people as "disruptive vandals" when none of the actual text or data in the article pertaining to Mortal Kombat has been compromised is completely innaccurate. Third, stating that there is no chance for compromise implies to me that you think you are in charge, here.

The dictorship attitude, and the blatent favoritism being displayed, is very unbecoming of those who are supposed to help maintain this place in a fair and just manner. You people are bending and shaping rules and guidelines here as you see fit.

I, alone, am not Wikipedia, but I am a part of it, as all the other benevolent editors here are. Disruptive vandals, however, are not. Yes, an edit like this does constitute as vandalism as it is disrupting Wikipedia to prove a point. Calling people assholes is also violating the civility code of conduct. I also wish to reiterate that Wikipedia is not a democracy. Having an entire forum try and brute force their idea into an article is not how a consensus is determined.

Anyway, it's become quite obvious that edit wars will transpire if more than one website is included, as supporters of different websites will want to include their own favorites. Hence, a very simple compromise: only include one site. The basis as to which site this be should non-subjective (i.e. no debates questioning which has better content, which has more content, etc). Per WP:External Links, an external link should be "meritable, accessible and appropriate" Through several tests (See above, or see Google and alexa.com), Mortal Kombat Online has proven to be the most popular Mortal Kombat site currently in existence by a very large margin. This defines the site as being quite meritible for inclusion. It also happens to be accessible as it does not require registration to view basic content such as the news archives and forums, and it is appropriate for this article as it does, indeed, cover the Mortal Kombat series. There. It was a simple matter of finding what site to use. No fussy arguments and no subjective opinions. There is no favoritism here. (Note: Through a mere four clicks, I was able to navigate from MKO's main page to Fuzzdork's MK site only using already-existing links that are on their pages. If your argument is that you can't get to other MK-related sites using MKO as a hub, you'd be wrong.) MarphyBlack 20:06, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

This isn't about Fuzzd0rk's Mortal Kombat, anymore. It's about you people bringing up a rule about not allowing websites that require registration, and now you're blatently bending that rule to suit your own ends. So here's what's going to happen. You either agree to remove all MK fansites or you allow any fansite to be listed. There is no in between. Just because a website is popular doesn't make it a good site for content. We can continue to be a thorn in your side if you want, or you make that rule apply to all MK fansites. Plain and simple. You opened the can of worms, and now it's biting you in the ass. We're only asking for fairness. Either remove MKO and everyone's happy, or continue to make revert after revert for a long, long time. The choice is yours.

Mortal Kombat Online does not require one to register for any basic features. I can view all content sans videos just fine. But, like I pointed out before, Fuzzdork's MK site will not even let a user view the news archives without registering. I also can't get to the forums, can't see the "encyclopedia", and I can't even access the emoticons or avatars section. I don't see the benefit in that. Anyway, this is irrelevant. WP:EL allows for a minimum amount of acceptable external links to be included. One is enough, and MKO fits all the necessary requirements. Again, as I said before, a decision can and should be made entirely without any subjective opinion (That's when arguments like the ones from yourself originate). MKO is undoubtedly the most popular fansite currently in existence. It also provides links to other MK fansites, which makes it even more suitable to link here since it can act like a hub while we don't have to link tons and tons of different MK sites. Whether you like it or not is your opinion, and I'm afraid that's just something you're going to have to come to terms with by yourself. MarphyBlack 01:28, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Anon user, please do not threaten us. There will be no comprimise with vandals as Marphy said, and yes, what you are doing is vandalism. I'll put this plain and simple so it isn't hard for you to grasp. One link is acceptable. One link has been chosen. The chosen link is superior to the alternatives (including FDMK). That link is MKO. If you, or any others continue to vandalise, you will be blocked. Then your crusade to advertise through jealousy will be at an end. ≈ THA //See Evil//Speak Evil//Hear Evil// 17:59, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey there... webmaster of MK Online here, and just wanted to clear up a bit of a misconception. The only reason that registration was required for downloading video and audio files from our media system was to get around a bug. (Unlike a lot of sites, MK Online's CMS is written completely in-house.) We thought we had removed the registration requirement for the audio/video files, but it looks like a bug has caused it to reappear. CCShadow (our coder/admin) is working on fixing the issue now. Our apologies for the confusion. DArqueBishop 03:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem, although MKO will be staying anyway. ≈ The Haunted Angel ^{//The Forest Whispers My Name//} 18:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Music?

Maybe I'm just uninformed, but what do 3 Doors Down and Adema have to do with Mortal Kombat? 139.78.10.130 19:59, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

3 Doors Down, I dunno. But Adema did the music video for MKD; Immortal. ≈ The Haunted Angel ^{(The Forest Whispers My Name)} 21:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Adema did the Immortal video for MK:Deadly Alliance, not Deception...

Removed Music section. Dan Forden did most of the music and is mentioned elsewhere in the article. I have no idea where 3 Doors came in - band wasn't formed until 1996. Ent 23:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Would someone semi-lock Becky Gable for the new users?

The troll won't go away. --HanzoHattori 12:14, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

For the record, it is best to use either the article's talk page or WP:RFPP. However, I've semi-protected the page, and am about to deal with your own indiscretions. EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Characters

Can we add a characters template?→041744 22:57, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

There was a characters template once (And the characters used to be included in the actual main template), but thanks to the efforts of one user, it was deleted. You can read that entire previous discussion here. I'd love to bring it back, but the prospect of recreating a frequently deleted template (again, all due to said one user, who happens to be an admin) and going through the effort of adding it to over 60 articles just to have it all removed again is not the most tempting endeavor I can think of. MarphyBlack 08:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Can I add it to the regular template? It will look like this: \/ →041744 15:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

The consensus here regarding the main template was not to include all the names in it. The compromise was to split it off into two. However, as mentioned before, the characters-only template was deleted, albeit not with the greatest of reasoning. I would support the recreation of the characters template, but the main template in its current state is the result of a long series of debates. I don't think we should be rushing into any major revisions there without a discussion first. MarphyBlack 03:56, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

It is, admittedly, more organized than when the characters were in it, and I like the split. Still, the Information section is far too limited. There should be at least another link such as glossary with links to the many pages not mentioned. (Kombat Krave 23:00, 31 December 2007 (UTC))

Required Merge: Test Your Might

Closure of AFD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Test Your Might requests merger of Test Your Might into Mortal Kombat as the outcome. I have closed this AFD but ask that another more knowledgeable of the topic conduct the merger itself. Thank you. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 16:00, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Merging it to Mortal Kombat (video game) would make more sense.Master Bigode (talk) 19:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Merged Test Your Might into Mortal Kombat (video game)Master Bigode (talk) 19:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Why...?

Why does searching for "Mortal Kombat" bring up a redirect page instead of going directly to this page? Fllmtlchcb (talk) 03:23, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Someone moved the article. I've put it back where it was. :) RobWill80 (talk) 09:53, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Clean-up Requested

The page doesn't cite many sources, reads more like an essay at some points, and is pretty sloppy all around (for instance the Easter Egg section). As I get time, I'll clean up the article and point out where citations are needed, and if none are given within a reasonable amount of time I'll clean it out of the article, but I'm asking for some help here. Fllmtlchcb (talk) 03:35, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Instead of slashing away half the text, a seperate page should be made to include 'Easter eggs and secrets', 'Contributing Cultural Material', and Mortal Kombat Crossovers'. You'd just have to think of a title general enough to fit it all. (Kombat Krave 23:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC))

Wikipedia is not a game guide. Pagrashtak 18:56, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Then 'Easter eggs and secrets' can go, it's really not needed, though the other two both include information difficult to find consecutively outside of wikipedia and in no way fit in the NOT section. Still, they are heavy consumers of space, and I'd request another page to expand. Also, I don't think 'Plot Continuity' is necessary at all. Can someone second this?(Kombat Krave 08:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC))

The easter eggs section should at least be cut down, especially the parts like Goro in MKII. It's completely unsourced and boils down to "A lot of people thought this, but it's not true". Unless there are reliable secondary sources discussing this to show notability (doubtful), it's not suitable for Wikipedia. Anything necessary in the plot continuity section could probably be handled in the storyline section. Speaking of which, the storyline section also needs to be trimmed—ten subsections is a little much. Leave the individual game plots to those articles, and present an overview of general plot here. The tournament section might better fit in a plot section as well. It's written in-universe, and is basically plot points with another name. Hope this helps. Pagrashtak 15:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, I will find time to trim and merge along with anyone who can help. (Kombat Krave 14:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC))

The page has been altered quite a bit in small details. You'll find no false links and I removed a few big chunks. Overall it's pretty clean, even though I left the storyline mostly alone, as well as the crossovers. I think many would find it extremely useful to read through the entire legitimate storyline in one place, not hacked and transferred to fifteen different pages. I merged two to remove the headers though it didn't effect the length at all. The crossovers section has full information that's not exactly organized, but factual and useful. That's all I'm doing to 'clean the page up'.

My suggestion is a realms section though. Each realms page has been removed and even though I'd vote for a page with all the realms on it, this page could be the only substitute to hold a lot of information that was removed. Any thoughts? --Kombat Krave 23:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

A realms section sounds fine to me. Mortal Kombat Realms for a title page should suffice. I would say that the story section is fine since it recaps all the plots from the games. Fllmtlchcb (talk) 19:34, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Controversy

There was a paragraph under the Controversy heading that gave brutally graphic details about the death of a young girl. I have removed it, pending this talk. It is my opinion that the inclusion of this CNN/AP article [2], while it may be presented as factual evidence, does not convey a neutral point of view in that it does not consider related facts (for example, that the "Mortal Kombat moves" are primarily basic martial arts techniques, not at all unique or special to the game, other than the fact that the teens had been playing the game). Further, I would suggest that the story might be appropriate in the Video Game Violence article mentioned in the same section. I fail to understand how a brutal murder is considered to be encyclopedic information in a video game article. I look forward to your thoughts. Thanks, Sabin4232 (talk) 22:32, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I merged the Controversy section with Legacy since it had been trimmed to a sentence. It links to Video game controversy. --Kombat Krave 23:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Reality Kombat Murder

The Murder of the young 7 year old girl is factual information about the Mortal Kombat Game Series, and it should be included as a small part of the page, stating that it happened. If you word it correctly you can let people know about what happened to the girl, and im sure if you searched the net you might be able to find a qoute from someone to do with Mortal Kombat and the Murder, and put that together as a small thing upon the page. Its all a matter of wording this thing Rupert 59 (talk) 02:31, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

The girl being murdered, although admitted to be based on Mortal Kombat, has nothing to do with Mortal Kombat itself. Including it in the video game controversy page would be more sensible. --Kombat Krave 15:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

a note on #8

Please don't put in a name for it (other than Mortal Kombat 8) unless you have a source.--Rockfang (talk) 13:32, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Update: A source has now been cited. --Rockfang (talk) 02:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

"Inspirations from popular culture"

Unless some of this can be sourced, it should all be removed. The entire section sounds like it was written by some fans who were trying to find similarities to other works. "Having similarities" is not the same as actually being "inspired by." Powerslave (talk|cont.) 09:17, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Always been pretty clear to me that the game took a few cues from Big Trouble in Little China

Issue in History Section

In the Mortal Kombat film, Kitana claimed Kahn killed both her parents. Is the movie considered canon? If so, perhaps it would be worth it to add a short clause at the end of that sentence stating that Kitana is unaware of the fact of her mother's suicide.Quintopia (talk) 09:39, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Hardware

What was the hardware used for the arcade machines? When reading about Street Fighter II and other arcade games it lists the hardware used. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.119.33 (talk) 10:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, i see it listed on the "mortal kombat video game" article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midway_T_Unit
originally released on "Midway Y Unit" which seems to be the same http://www.system16.com/hardware.php?id=610

Main CPU : TMS34010 @ 6.25 MHz
Sound CPU : M6809 @ 2 MHz
Sound chip : YM2151 @ 3.57958 MHz, OKI 6295 @ 8 KHz, DAC
Not sure about graphics
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.122.119.33 (talk) 10:30, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
OH! The graphics processor WAS the CPU. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TMS34010
neat

Palette swapping and character depth

Not to sound like a troll, but this section, as a serious fighting game player, is sort of ridiculous in regards to the to the part talking about Mortal Kombat's radically different special moves. Mortal Kombat is quite well known for it's hemogony and various combinations of the same "projetile/teleport punch/advancing move' concept over than other fighters. Though honestly,theres no real encyclepedic source for these claims on any side, so I think it's safer to remove this information as it's likely inaccurate and unverifiable anyways. It also seems to side more with trying for neutrality where it isn't appropriate. --Kayin (talk) 04:11, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree that the parts on the repercussions of palette swapping could be removed as, even though I personally agree on what's said in the article on the subject, I accept that this is basically a matter of opinion. But I do think it's important to keep the section explaining that the arcade-versions of Mortal Kombat heavily used palette swapping due to memory limitations. Shinmai (talk) 14:46, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

request for comment at fighting game

A few editors have been working on the fighting game article. Although it is not meant to be an exhaustive compilation of every fighting game, let alone every variation on a fighting game, we'd appreciate some comments at talk:fighting game to tell us if there are any huge errors or omissions. Randomran (talk) 20:02, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

C vs. K?

Most of the recent edits appear to be a small war over replacing every C in the article with a K. Personally, I think we should keep the spelling in the article correct; this is an encyclopedia. Therefore, how much vandalism should a page go through before it becomes a candidate for semi-protection? Is this page a candidate? -- LedgendGamer (talk) 07:25, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

• People who think jokes that weren't funny then are somehow funny now should be shot. I understand some vandalism deserves to exist [I still fondly recall that spoiler tag someone added to the heading 'process of dying' in the article 'death'] but this is just useless crap. Herr Gruber (talk) 12:24, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Rain is not a samurai

The article claims that all ninjas were supposed to be from the same clan initially. Not only is THAT wrong, but it also claims that their connections to each other 'thinned out' and that Rain went from being a Lin Kuei to a samurai. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Rain has always hailed from Edenia. Should I fix this OR can someone provide evidence that this is even true? Tubularbells1993 (talk) 16:07, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Triangle vandalism

Whoever keeps adding weird statements about your hatred of triangles, please STOP. I just removed those silly things and would appreciate it if you did not do this anymore. Thanks. Tubularbells1993 (talk) 16:11, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Easter eggs section

I propose we remove that section per the fact that Wikipedia is not a game guide. I think that if someone wants to know how to get the secret characters, how to perform Raiden's Fergality on the Genesis, OR anything else (I note there are plenty of things not covered here as it is), then we can include a list of external links or something to an authoritative source offsite. Wikipedia is not devoted to that kind of information, though I'm okay with briefly touching on it if it's necessary. Tubularbells1993 (talk) 16:29, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Agree. That section seems to be trivia.Tintor2 (talk) 18:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

A few questions about this page

Okay to begin, under the character depth section, why is gameplay depth mentioned? And Also why i it compared to Street Fighter in term of gameplay as I quote: "Critics felt that the gameplay of Mortal Kombat was inferior due to having less complexity in the normal moves compared to Street Fighter and other series.[citation needed] Supporters however felt that normal move complexity mostly added to the game's learning curve without adding real strategic depth, and that greater strategic depth and fun factor was created by having more radically different special moves, and thus believe that Mortal Kombat had better gameplay."

I'm glad "citation needed" was put for both of those statements, because such arguments have only been seen on message boards not with game critics (who personally are no better than those who argue on the message boards.)

Also, it seems someone only saw the movie and did not play the game as under Notable Tournaments subsection, it says that Johnny Cage defeated Goro. While this is true in the sense of the movies, it is not true in the canonity of the games. Someone please, edit that. I'll get various sources to corroborate it. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 01:34, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you, I think the first thing's a little POV and not reliable. Tubularbells1993 (talk) 18:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Complete rewrite

I see so many templates here, so many wanting various issues addressed and corrected, I feel the need to take them ALL down and plaster the complete rewrite template at the top. If I or anyone else should carry this motion, please give me some feedback. Tubularbells1993 (talk) 18:40, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Just so we know where we're at, and so we know what must be taken care of, I will list several issues here:

• In-universe style
• Lacking citations
• Original research
• Wikipedia is not a game guide
• It might be important to discuss where MK characters have appeared outside the series, but I doubt we need the 'In pop culture' section per the policy against trivia sections

Tubularbells1993 (talk) 18:44, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Yes this article is needing a lot of work. I guess the article could have the following sections.Tintor2 (talk) 19:56, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

• Games
• Gameplay
• Plot
• Films
• Comics
• TV series
• Development
• Reception

Can I get this straight, Tubularbells, are you recommending a complete rewrite (the title says it, duh) of this page? As in deleting everything and strating from scratch? Until I get my response, i'll add a little more.

To add onto what Tintor said. Let's add a Trivia section for all types of trivia in general after the Reception section because Mortal kombat has been mentioned in popular culture a good many times.(Wait, what is this policy against Trivia sections?) We must also get a Subsection for the Palette swaps (which besides Fatalities, have made this game popular) under games. That's imperative. Maybe a subsection under Plot for the notable tournaments section already mentioned in this article? I don't think it's completely nessecary for this article for experts on MK but people new to the franchise who want to bone up on their MK without going to the flawed Wikia version for their MK reference. Just another thing to say, can we make sure to add "this is a FICTIONAL fighting game..." at the beginning of every MK page so we don't have that tag that says we must make a clear distinction between fact and fiction (even though its obvious to fighting game fans in general).

More to add, in the Section of Cultural Contributions, it mentions the organizations. I would like to ask How exactly is The Brotherhood of Shadow a cultural contribution? I believe That the Brotherhood of Shadow should be mentioned, but merely in their own characters' section because of its' lack of importance in the franchise.(Perhaps we could move the organzations portions, without where they came from to a subsection under plot. To keep the Brotherhood of Shadow within that list.But as to a deep description, it should be mentioned deeply in Noob's article. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 21:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, actually Wikipedia is against lists of miscellaneous information, which are generally named Trivia. We can instead probably create seperate lists for the series in 2-D and when it went into 3-D, containing such technical info as the palette-swapping you described. The palette-swapping could go under such a list for the 2-D era (for example). With regard to its presence in pop culture, the way the article has it now are only a few relatively obscure references, and none of them (like the rest of the article) are sourced. I'm not even sure we need a 'Notable Tournaments' section; we can include in the Plot section that there were some, and indicate where in the paragraphs, but I'm not sure we need a separate list for it. And I'm sure there's a way to indicate reliably that the storyline IS fictional, and perhaps include references to things going on during development at the time (i.e. how Noob Saibot got his name, since it's relevant because he's an important character).

And since you brought him up, well, I am sure that the Brotherhood of Shadow should be mentioned in some way, because they DID worship Shinnok (who launched the battle in MK4). At the same time, you're right, they really aren't very significant and they probably shouldn't be very elaborated on in this article. But you're right on this as well: It would do much better to place it in HIS article, yes.

Thank you for your feedback, what's our next move gonna be? Tubularbells1993 (talk) 22:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Since I took a look at the cultural contributions I am just as puzzled as you are. Based on the Lin Kuei, big deal, I think that it's just a creation of the developers' own design. Tubularbells1993 (talk) 22:39, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not exactly advocating we get rid of those, just those that are clearly stated in other Wikpedia articles, like The White Lotus was based upon the real society, same with the Lin Kuei and the Black Dragon. We should mention that they were derived from something, not a complete original creation of the developers' design. But as for the complete original designs (like the red dragon, brotherhood, Wu Shi academy, etc. we should make mention of those in the articles of the characters themselves).

Speaking on the Wu Shi academy we don't know for a fact they based it off of Thervada buddhism, of course it seems like common sense when you see the scenes of MK:SM with the Wu Shi academians dressed similarly to Therevadan monks the MK team has not clearly stated (unless I am not aware of it) that they based the Wu Shi academy off of the Theravadan Monks perhaps since it is speculatory maybe we can add something along the lines of "although it has not been clearly stated, the Wu Shi Monks share a striking resemblance to the the Monks of Therevadan Buddishm, then provide a link to the Therevadan buddishm page to corrobroate this hypothesis (Even though it looks blatantly obvious).

I also ask for all of the derivations from other cultures be listed all in one list, with no subsections since there are small amounts of those derivations. (You know, only 3 groups based off of real-life, 3 concepts based off of a religion, and only a few character's names taken from old myths and religions (these being Fujin, Raiden, Kintaro, Shiva, and Motaro). All collectively placed in one list.

To add to what you said about trivia sections, it mentions in the article this: This guideline does not suggest removing trivia sections, or moving them to the talk page. If information is otherwise suitable, it is better that it be poorly presented than not presented at all. Much of the information presented in the Trivia sections of the MK games are suitable since we want to make this a reference source for all things MK in its entirety, even something as lame as the "Fergality". The section itself is not a waste of space since it does add ot the response of Wikipedia being an online encyclopedia. (How to do the Fergality should be mentioned in Raiden's page but in as few as words as possible since we don't want to attract attention to that in the article or make Wikipedia look like a game guide.)

That's all I see for now Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 23:04, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I meant that the Brotherhood of Shadow were actually the ones created entirely by the MK team, I wasn't referring to the others mentioned there. With regard to linking to Theravada Buddhism, I am not sure, especially since we don't have a source to support it, no matter how obvious it is (it would appear that we are doing original research - no I'm not picky, yes I do try to follow WP policies as best I can). Yes, I think that the facts regarding the influence oriental culture (among others) have had on the MK franchise are important. Of course, we would need to cite this. And no, I guess I didn't read the Trivia policy entirely, but I glean that if there is a way to include such information, we should do it to the best of our ability, leaving nothing to chance. About Raiden's Fergality, perhaps we can briefly touch on it in his article, but we needn't describe how one pulls such a thing off (i.e. no cheat code for the menu should be listed, etc.) I think that to truly distinguish WP from a game guide, we must not include how-tos for those things. (And if we were to include even the button combination, I think that to balance it out we would need to include OTHER finshers for ALL characters for whom articles exist.)

And yes, I do agree that it is better to poorly present info than to not present it at all. At least on a wiki, we can take poorly presented info and reach a consensus as to where it truly belongs and present it better. That said, there are some things so trivial they are of little to no importance whatsoever. For example, somebody barely referencing the franchise, even in passing (such as the Fresh prince episode, which does exist but is not sourced), unless such a thing truly had any effect on the franchise whatsoever. The role the game played (no pun intended) in the VG controversy is of importance, but since we already have an article devoted to it, we can touch briefly on it and then link to that article. Such a reference in pop culture (more like legal culture) is important, because it DID impact the series somewhat (e.g. the first game was censored heavily on the SNES, for example). Because that conflict seems to have endless effects on this and other series, it would seem to me that such info IS important. Barely even mentioning it on the air, on the other hand, is not. It has probably been quipped about more times than we can even count, which is another reason I don't think that the pop culture section belongs. Tubularbells1993 (talk) 23:46, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

The fergatlity, how noob saibot obtained his name could be simply used in their respective articles (fergality to MKII, noob to noob). There is no source about the creation of the white lotus of other stuff, it seems original research. If we are going to add that, it could be simply add it to a development section.Tintor2 (talk) 23:39, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

That also seems to support my point about the threavada buddhism, I think that no matter how obvious something is, we cannot ever publish original research or thought. On the topic of a dev section, I think we could swing that... Tubularbells1993 (talk) 23:50, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

In it we could have a subheading regarding 'contributing material' much like the one that exists in the article now Tubularbells1993 (talk) 03:44, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

I maybe a little ignorant but what is a development section? Subzerosmokerain (talk) 00:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not convinced it needs a complete rewrite, but it could definitely use some work. "Development sections" in video game articles simply refer to a section about the creation of a game; its design philosophy, engine and other technical assets, etc. Usually it's written from interviews found on gaming websites with representatives of the game company, like designers, writers, and composers.

The two main things to take into account here are notability and verifiability. All those "trivia" things mentioned earlier in this discussion should only be included if they include an inline citation to a reliable source. The MK series has definitely had a large impact on the gaming community, and a significant impact on culture in general. It would not be difficult to find reliable sources for many things related to Mortal Kombat. That being said, I'm generally opposed to the inclusion of pure Trivia sections on Wikipedia. If something is trivial, it's not notable. Many bits of information typically characterized as "trivia", however, may actually be notable, and should then be included in another section (like "Cultural impact" or the aforementioned "Development") using proper prose. — Levi van Tine (t – c) 07:22, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

I think that trivia, in general, refers to minor, various bits of information that do not fit elsewhere in the article. If it has a place, I am not sure how trivial it is. I think a complete rewrite is in order, there is so much that needs to be fixed, we would be better off to restart this whole article (and perhaps many of its associated articles, like character and game articles) rather than sift through all this junk and only keep a few small pieces of info that originally appeared there. There are MANY articles on MK on the Internet, why haven't we located any for this page? I seem to recall that it USED to have some sources, but I am not sure what happened to them. People seem content with adding stuff, but even though they may have read up on it in the news, they don't care to cite any of it. It's ridiculous, I will dig up some articles and place them here... Until we can decide for sure that the article does not need a rewrite, I might be working on a new version of it Tubularbells1993 (talk) 13:25, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Generally I think the Mortal Kombat articles are the worst articles on Wikipedia. None of them are free of issues, we're always trying to start new, stupid articles for MK but nothing gets done, so I think the general series article (this one) is not the only one in need of a rewrite

Not to offend anyone but just my two cents there, do we carry out this rewrite or not? Tubularbells1993 (talk) 03:28, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

There are definitely worse articles on Wikipedia. I think this particular article has the potential for greatness and is definitely worthy of further work. — Levi van Tine (t – c) 14:24, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Regarding the trivia section, see Wikipedia:Trivia sections, Wikipedia:Handling trivia, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines#Organization: "Trivia: Such information should be integrated into appropriate areas of the article." JACOPLANE • 2009-03-27 08:10

But that trivia info is basically original research.Tintor2 (talk) 01:38, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I say Nay to the rewrite. There has been much work done here already and since you are not the only MK expert here, it is not like the weight solely falls upon your shoulders Tubular. We must decide upon where things can go appropriately before we begin adding and deleting. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 02:47, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I wasn't saying I was the only one who knew anything about this subject, nor was I saying that I was doing all the work. I can see why, however, why we probably don't need a rewrite. But I do think that rearranging this article will take a lot of work, almost akin to a rewrite, but I'm sure we can get it done. Regarding the 'work' already done here, said work would be more worth it if we could track down some sources and citations. I still think we should remove the Easter eggs section at the very least. There are plenty of sources out there, beyond MK fansites and I will help to track some down. Tubularbells1993 (talk) 13:14, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

So, all in all, I guess there won't be a rewrite but I will be busy with this page. From here, does anybody agree with the way Tintor2 proposed to arrange the article? (earlier in this section) I know I do Tubularbells1993 (talk) 13:53, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

What I meant by working on a new version of it, I was experimenting with the way things could look & be arranged according to Tintor2's proposed arrangement. To be perfectly honest, I wasn't actually writing anything yet. Tubularbells1993 (talk) 01:07, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

I am hoping to either eliminate the citations template completely or at least drop it down to the need more citations Tubularbells1993 (talk) 01:10, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Well, you don't have to do much searching as I saved the previous MK series page, so it may still have it. (As well as all the individual character pagess until you guys merged them all.) I think we may have to modify it as well as put the Trivia section at the end. (It basically goes against everything that wiki is but we must have it). I'll start getting those sources from that saved page this weekend to help the burden of using google. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 21:29, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protection (or whatever it's called)?

This article is a frequent target of vandalism, what say we protect it from unregistered users? Tubularbells1993 (talk) 03:35, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

This I agree on Tubular. Subzerosmokerain (talk) 02:49, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

I put in the request on requests for protection, but somebody took it down... Tubularbells1993 (talk) 13:18, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Becky Gable

I ebelieve should be merged (failed to find anything else notable about her). --Ostateczny Krach Systemu Korporacji (talk) 18:49, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

I recommend we make an entire page devoted to the actors who played the MK1-MK3 characters. That way we have minimal stubs and the information remains available.Subzerosmokerain (talk) 18:28, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Removal of Trivia Section

I'm open minded to changes in this page, but I do not believe the trivia should have been removed. One sentence in the Wikipedia:Trivia sections guidelines corrobates with my argument

This guideline does not suggest removing trivia sections, or moving them to the talk page. If information is otherwise suitable, it is better that it be poorly presented than not presented at all.

I know that other Wikipedians are picky about such miscellaneous section so I believe we should keep the information there until we can present it better. Hopefully, those for it's removal and those against can come to a compromise. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 18:36, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

I for one agree with keeping it. --uKER (talk) 03:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

A question about the name

Why is it called Mortal Kombat instead of Mortal Combat? —Preceding unsigned comment added by LucaTurilli89 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Complete guess but probably because it either looks better or is easier to copyright. 86.163.215.37 (talk) 09:19, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Answer: They call it Mortal Kombat for looks, and sound. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.203.112.147 (talk) 12:43, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Court Cases Concerning Mortal Kombat

The section seems sloppy, verified, but sloppy. Could someone perhaps reword that section and make it appear more attractive to the visiting wikipedian? Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 02:45, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

The Storyline What we want and we don't wnat

Okay in regards to this edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mortal_Kombat&diff=311091770&oldid=311042946

I do believe that the edit done is well written as well as cited many sources. Removing some of the copyright sources, it sort of fixed that section, but I don't think so much should have been removed. We know for a fact that we should include: The storyline of the Mk1-MK7 and every part which is considered canonical (Liu Kang winning MK1-MK3, Shinnok trying to take over the world, Liu Kang's death and the formation of the deadly alliance, etc.) But what about the portions of the realms, the description of the realms, the elder gods, the one being, etc. the parts you wouldn't know unless you played MK:D's Konquest as well as the reason why the MK warriors went to Outworld (the kidnapping of Sonya). Do we include those portions, or are they not pertinent to the storyline? I'm just asking to come to a consensus what should be considered pertinent to the storyline and what could kept out. Any and all replies are asked and will be taken into account. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 15:20, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, what species is he? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.41.213.30 (talk) 06:48, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The realms could be explained in a setting section. Including everything that happens in the MK titles would make the section terribly long and it will be better to focus only in the mayor notes from the series.Tintor2 (talk) 12:43, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Bias and weasel words

Specifically, from the beginning of the section 'Overview': "Whereas better fighting games ..."

Does anyone else pick up on the bias in that whole section? I realize it may be removed due to lack of citation, but still ...

--The Nails (talk) 01:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

...I never picked up on that. Kudos to you, that section does indeed need work, and that will be a starting point. However, not soon mind you. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 01:39, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Characters list

Why was the character list removed? I wrote it according to the articles of other game series, such as Street Fighter and Tony Hawk. I noted that the characters roster is being removed from some game articles, such as MK Deception, so a list in the series article would be very informative. Actually, all of the other lists could be removed. I'm aware that Wikipedia "is not a game guide", but remember that the characters of a game are so important as the story itself. That list was only telling the name of the characters and the appearances they had in the series, not different from the articles I already cited as well as movie series articles like X-Men (film series). So please, tell me why it was removed and where it is writen that no characters list can't be in articles, because "unneeded list" is not a good answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.5.210.212 (talk) 03:10, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

To Begin, I would like the list but the games you referenced are poor articles in themselves. We can't hope for an upgrade by downgrading thee article to lower standards. As per why, it is a bit uneeded, as it is unneeded on the other articles. No one has removed it from the other articles, basically saying, in terms of characters, this article is fine. This article's main problems are grammar, prose and references. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 03:19, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

I know what you mean, but I don't really agree that a list of characters makes an article worse. I mean, see the Spider-Man (film series). It says the name of the characters and in wich movies they appear on, and it's fine. They even built an article only for the characters in the X-Men movies! I know MK also has an article for it's characters, but that page is too damm confuse and it's hard to understand wich games the characters appear on, wich should be the most important thing. And this article is not good in terms of characters. It only mentions some of the ones who got spin offs and some secret ones, and that's all. MK has much more than that, and would be great to show that on the series own page.

I think the list is informative and I would like it back, but it seems the last word is yours. I just want MK to be a good article and I think it should have all the Sreet Fighter page has and more. You say SF is a poor article but, sincerely, these two articles are in the same quality level. For a moment I even thought SF page was better because of that list, so I built a MK one, and now it's gone. Anyway, with or without the list, tell me what can I do to make this page better. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.5.210.212 (talk) 03:49, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Like Subzerosmokerain said, citing WP:OTHERSTUFF is not a valid argument. Besides that table is about 7 kylobites making it WP:Undue Weight.Tintor2 (talk) 12:13, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Tintor2, why can't I even express my opinion anymore? I do think you always cutting content out (even my comments!!) is holding back the progress of the article and is preventing the world from seeing how great MK is, and that's my opinnion and you will have to accept it. I did not offended you with any word, but if you felt offended learn it was not my intention. I was talking about the quality of the page, wich is really bad. And if to you "it seemed" I was not talking about the character list, why would I write my commentary on this section? I'm just sad it was cutted out because I think it made the article better and made the series look bigger than what this article is currently, and I said that, even joking with the character Fujin. Maybe you misunderstood what I said and felt offended. I'm going to write in a more serious form from now on, as your English seems to not be good enough to understand jokes right now. You seem to be a very obedient guy that follows Wikipedia's rules like a soldier, always citing WP:THIS or WP:THAT. But come on man? Undue weight? It was a list of the characters of the most sucessfull fighting game series ever!! Dont you think it has some importance? And if that's the real problem I can make it smaller, no sweat. God bless you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.222.58.137 (talk) 03:11, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

In your comment you were again citing Tekken and Street Fighter. This is not a character list section, it's the article of a video game franchise. If somebody wants to go to see the MK characters they just can go to the MK character list which can mention the game in which a character appears in prose rather than in a big table.Tintor2 (talk) 12:08, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

But aren't the characters important part of any video game franchise? Or maybe the most important thing? And I do not understand what you said: "This is not a character list section, it's the article of a video game franchise". Man, what I'm talking about is indeed a character list section, that the article NEEDS. Maybe not the list as it seems you hate it, but a CHARACTERS section for sure must be in it. Just say who are the most important ones (not in list form but real text) and put a link to the List of MK characters article, wich this bad page doesn't even link to... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.48.235.117 (talk) 02:07, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes but a character table is completely unnecessary. And I don't hate them, it's just that they would be more useful in the MK wikia than here.Tintor2 (talk) 16:03, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Making all articles in the same format

Hey guys! I was recently reading the Shadow of the Colossus article and noticed it has a featured star, so I edited Mortal Kombat: Deadly Alliance following SOTC order of topics, but in reality just organizing what was already written and adding some new things that are sourced. I think it's pretty good but it would be better if someone could fix some spelling errors I didn't noticed and the links to characters pages. Now I think all MK game articles could be like that one, and I would like to edit all of them. But I came here first to ask if I can do this or if there's something wrong with what I did in MKDA. Anyway, the goal here is to make all MK pages to have the same style, and when you go from MK1 page to MKDA it would be nice if they have the same feeling. Thanks! Please reply! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.222.57.147 (talk) 03:29, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

All edits are welcome, but some articles (like the early games) don't have much substance for what you're recommending. If you can add more to them so that your idea works, that'd be great. No one here will stop you if the edits are productive. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 03:56, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Film series

In a recent interwiew with Ed Boon, he said Warner Bros was planning not only a new game but also "other media" releases, including movies, so I think an article called "Mortal Kombat (film series)" could be made here, in the same way of X-Men (film series). I would like to work on that, but I'm asking first because it would suck if someone just erases everything because it "goes against copyright" or something like that. Please reply! MK Rules!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.222.58.66 (talk) 02:40, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Anyone there?

Purely speculative. Even Ed doesn't know for a fact whether or not the movie is going in the production, even Hans Lo stated that the third MK film has been in development hell for a while now. And to be honest, two feature films plus a short film doesn't really make a series page. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 18:50, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Storyline

According to the new MK 2011 game Shao Kahn won Armmageddon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.222.227.22 (talk) 19:52, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Might be need a reliable source considering it is still an upcoming game.Tintor2 (talk) 20:08, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Jax needs his own article

• in most games since the 2nd one (and was supposed to be in the first too)
• his own game
• a large role in the 2nd film, plus the main in the recent short, also in the animated series

--Asperchu (talk) 10:11, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Check wp:notability; it isn't about role in the series, but notability by third-party sources.Tintor2 (talk) 12:49, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

NO U check notability - several lists, famous Fatality. --Asperchu (talk) 13:33, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't get you. If you say that he has enough notability for a reception section, then be bold and work in that.Tintor2 (talk) 13:36, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't get YOU. In plural. (lol wut, had to fix it myself - but do you except me alone to do EVERYTHING?) --Asperchu (talk) 13:40, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Please be clear. What's with those links? What I didn't get is that first you pointed in-universe importance and then that you that's not important for the article.Tintor2 (talk) 13:45, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I'll be clear: Shao Kahn had just no reception until about one month ago, WHEN I GAVE HIM SOME. Exactly what made him notable for you all the time before this? Also, exactly what makes Kano notable right now? --Asperchu (talk) 13:54, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Nothing. Apparently, no editor in charge of revising checked it.Tintor2 (talk) 14:01, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Great. Now, speaking about notability: why is this guy conducting a one-man war against notability tags (reverting them repeatedly), and vandalizes my reports regarding this, and yet no one cares? --Asperchu (talk) 14:07, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Kind of offtopic, but you may want to discuss it with that user or report it if the former does not work.Tintor2 (talk) 14:14, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I rather ask why nobody cares. {There was only one exception.) Oh, and what makes Becky Gable notable? Because it was nominated for deletion, BUT PASSED IT. And in summary: Jax needs his own article. --Asperchu (talk) 14:22, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't even know those articles. Just report it to seek other opinions.Tintor2 (talk) 14:28, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

But it WAS reported BUT they decided this is okay for Wikipedia. Somehow. And yes, this is a Mortal Kombat article. And no, she was not in MKII. Oh and Sonya Blade has no reception too. --Asperchu (talk) 15:15, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Then I guess she should be merged. Some months ago, I tried searching reception for characters, but found only a few ones that I already added.Tintor2 (talk) 16:10, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

It's only because you don't want how to search. I showed you how Kasumi was merged last year for, I quote, "redirecting to the character list per WP:N". Yes, we're talking about THIS Kasumi. And I didn't even use magazine for her, just the Internet. --Asperchu (talk) 16:51, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

If I "don't want how to search", then why do you complain "do you except me alone to do EVERYTHING?". I have no interest in helping with that.Tintor2 (talk) 16:54, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

"You don't KNOW how to seaarch." Okay? Also, I just used the English-language Internet. Kasumi's pretty big in Japan, and elsewhere too. Oh, and it would be easy to find sa plenty of stuff about Sonya. Yet somehow, no one ever did! They just decided she's notable. Well, she is. Unlike Becky Gable. But they decided BG is notable too (in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, no less). And yet, Kasumi (KASUMI) was deemed not (by some Kung-Fu -something guy). Explain? --Asperchu (talk) 16:58, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't care about that or you quoted statement. Kungfu just merged it cause nobody had worked in such article's notability. As far as I have known Kungfuman, he has done some nice work in characters article and I wouldn't expect somebody to work in an article they are not familiar or just they are not interested. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 17:05, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, the Kungfu dude evidently showed enough "interest" to merge the article. Anyway, this is how you do it: one two three. It was quick. --Asperchu (talk) 17:26, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Again with the bad faith? Then be bold and work in that.Tintor2 (talk) 17:32, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

bad faith indeed. I showed you how find the stuff, because just a moment ago you wanted to merge her for the alleged lack of it, like a second Kungfu guy. --Asperchu (talk) 17:48, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I just said merge cause you said there is no notability, but then you contradicted yourself.Tintor2 (talk) 17:55, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Let me repat what I wrote: "Oh and Sonya Blade has no reception too." Did you click the link to the article I was talking about? You'd see my tag. Oh, and yeah, I was talking about the article. When, you know, I linked it for you. To show you. A MK character article with no reception whatsoever (I created the section) for what? Over 6 years? Yes I'm pretty new to MK on Wikipedia, so tell me how you guys roll, because I'm sorry I don't get it. --Asperchu (talk) 18:18, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Jax has some notability but only in the mention that he is the first black person to appear in MK. But that would only provide a smidgen of notability, he would need more. I am typically against it but in this case, Jax just can't handle his own article. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 17:30, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Not really. If you check out the Fatality article after my total rewrite, there is now a section about the notable ones, and he has some of the most in/famous Fatality ever (in several rankings in various publications). And another being one of the lamest too, if you need some negative feedback. According to GamePro guide as well as several other magazines, he was the single best fighter in MKII against everyone but Mileena (this goes to Gameplay). This. This. Got to VsDCU too ("based on their popularity"). A good start? --Asperchu (talk) 17:48, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

"How we MK editors roll"

You asked, and you shall receive.

• First, although it takes some getting used to, we must adhere to WP:Notability. It is a guideline, but it helps us sort out the cruft and get the factual information into the articles. A brief summary of WP:N is that an article cannot exist unless it has inherent notability overtime. So let's use Jax, he has just been announced for MK9 however, during the rest of the years no one cares about Jax. He, as you have stated, has some notability for his fatalities and gameplay and also receives notability for being the first African-American character of MK but it remains insufficient. I mean, look at Noob Saibot#Reception, it is quite a small section and is borderline insufficient for reception and thus is hanging by a thrad to keep his own article.
• Second, Yes we know all characters exist and they are awesome but we can't use the argument that it WP:EXISTS as if we could create them. Then we'd have articles about "the 23rd SAT ever taken" or "my cat fluffy"(I have no cat named Fluffy by the way).
• Third, Mortal Kombat: Special Forces is one of the worst MK games and articles right now.
• Fourth, the article Siro (fictional character) is still around even though it was stated to be merged years ago.
• Fifth, Fatality (Mortal Kombat) is severely lacking in references overall, even extensive work that has been recently provided has not fixed the referencing issue.
• Sixth, we must be careful about using TRMK, TMK, Tabmok.com, Mortal Kombat Online, and other MK fansites for references as it violates WP:SPS. Yes, I know I want to keep a section that is referenced by TRMK right now but i'll get to work on it later.
• Seventh, We must follow WP:Reliable Source for articles to add content. This means we need to use sites established by WP:VG/Sources for references.
• Eighth, Reptile (Mortal Kombat) is the basis for all Mortal Kombat character articles right now as it has been rated WP:GA by a nonbiased third part editor. I personally dislike Reptile but it is suitably referenced and has a good portion of notability so it is, without a doubt, the best MK character article right now. No exceptions.
• Ninth, it takes a bit of time and effort for articles to become GA, Mortal Kombat: Deception is good article because of the work put into it overtime and Mortal Kombat vs. DC Universe is a GA because of the work put into it.
• Tenth, just because you have extensively edited an MK article does not mean you own it, this means just because I have made many edits on Mortal Kombat (2011 video game), does not mean I am the only one who can make edits on that page. Wikipedia is a collaboration, not one diehard fan writing the articles.
• Eleventh, reordering an article does not make it better, it is the CONTENT that makes a page better. Reception could be the first section for all that matters, it only matters that the content is relevant and reference.

Well, that's all I have right now. Any other veteran editor can edit my list as they see fit. Please take this listing into consideration Asperchu. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 22:59, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

It looks very good. I mean, it could be used at the top of the talk page. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 01:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

In no particular order:

1. First of all, IMO Noob should be merged into Sub-Zero. (You might disagree on this.)
2. Siro? What Siro? I don't see no Siro.
3. What the world badly needs is an article about Christian Weston Chandler. Also, it's interesting like almost every single Marvel, DC Comics, Transformers and GI Joe character have their own article, even if it's just a few sentences with no sources. Their "List of ... characters" articles are just lists of links to the articles (thousands of them in these 4 franchises altogether). And no one cares (except me, and yes, I repeatedly tried to make them do something about it, but they just ignored me).
4. Reptile - you think it's perfect? ReallY? I tried to cleanup it, then some dude reverted me. I said to myself: "screw this".
5. If you think Fatality still needs references, put a where there are some controversial statements pr uncited quotations or whatever. Btw, this article used to be just horrible.
6. MK 2011 article stopped to be horrible only when I first edited it (it was me who cleaned it up, and put the characters in the prose line instead of the list for the first time).
7. Uh, but it's you who's reverting my deletions of TRNK as a source ("confirmed by TRMK" and what not crap) all the time! Btw, as for Kollection being confirmed as a hoax/misunderstanding/stupid rumor: 16 November is today, the game is supposed to be out, yet even the picture is still "coming soon". Is this "the proof" you wanted, in absence of any proof the game actually exists?
8. So how do you like the new Special Forces article? --Asperchu (talk) 09:50, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I remember that the MK 2011 article's character section was remade various times but it kept being reverted. If you have an issue with Reptile's article format, discuss it with the user who reverted your edit.Tintor2 (talk) 20:08, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I want to add something that I feel is missing and needs to be addressed. We cannot allow for material that makes Wikipedia read like a gameguide. Asperchu directly addressed something that would go towards a Gameplay section, and while perhaps something ought to be addressed there, that fact (Jax's superiority over other characters) is not where we should start nor should we give it any thought as it is based on a point of view and may not hold true for every player. It also dispenses gaming advice which is what contributes to the gameguide nature of the article. It would inform people what WP thinks is one of the best characters to choose, but that information is strictly forbidden. Now that that has been removed from the equation, my view is that his notability is considerably less and there is now less reason to give him an article. (Pretty late, I know, but I'm just sayin'.) Tubularbells1993 (talk) 17:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Asperchu (who was blocked and I think is currently using another account) made the gameplay section with third-party sources, but that would be more helpful to a reception section. A gameplay section is necessary if we have primary sources (the creators' mention) about a character's moves and it can have its divided section.Tintor2 (talk) 01:37, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Daniel Pesina v. Midway Manufcaturing co. link

http://elr.lls.edu/issues/v21-issue2/matzkin.pdf

The link that references it now has suffered linkrot so here's a replacement for anyone interested in removing the current dead link for this one. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 20:49, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

1997 Court Case

Could someone check the validity of this court case; the link to the plaintiff Philip Ahn suggests he died in 1978. I think perhaps the plaintiff is a different Philip Ahn. 76.226.77.106 (talk) 00:30, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Plaintiff is indeed Dr. Philip Ahn, the one being linked died in 1978 so would not have appeared in the magnum opus of the Philip Ahn we know, Mortal Kombat II which was released in 1993. The link is incorrect, I recommend we do not Wikilink the name at all. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 03:41, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Banned in Australia

Should we mention the Australia banning of MK9 in the Reception section? Tubularbells1993 (talk) 14:12, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Seems worthwhile, possibly in reception due to the fact the games section does tell every region's release. Sorry for the late reply.Tintor2 (talk) 17:40, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Official Fansite?

The site listed as a source at the bottom of the page leads to a website of phatality.com, though when I clicked onto it, there was nothing even remotely discussed about Mortal Kombat. No articles, no references at all. Although I could be wrong and didn't check out the site well enough, but my first impression is that somebody is looking for free advertisement and trick people into visiting the site. I'm going to remove the website. If this is an issue, please correct. ResidualD — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.253.196.212 (talk) 07:02, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

Some new development info

Cool stuff, things regarding the dragon logo, another history on Toasty and a bit of tidbits on MK1-MK3. http://blog.us.playstation.com/2011/08/26/mortal-kombat-memories-development-tales-from-netherrealm-studios/ Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 00:37, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

http://www.nowgamer.com/features/921572/the_history_of_mortal_kombat.html Another one. A bit long, and talks about Midway's relatio with Nintendo and an analysis of the whole series.Tintor2 (talk) 01:10, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Various stuff by Tobias on Twitter

• I believe a pinball designer named Steve Ritchie came up with "Mortal Combat." It seemed so obvious as a name... I know we submitted "Mortal Combat" to our trademark attorney and it got vetoed. So we changed the C to a K and were able to trademark it.

• Minamoto Yoshitsune was NOT Liu Kang prototype, but here's Michael Grimm (Johnny Cage prototype): [3]

• Rokuro was cut and eventually turned into Goro. A wise move me thinks. Rokuro: [4] (also Liu Kang-proto)

• The MK story that we know today didn’t solidify until MKII with the introduction of Shao Kahn and the Outworld. Original archetypes (and names) and story: [5] (SZ & Scorpion: The Hunter&Hunted concept was going 2 B about a ninja escaping from his clan and hunted by another member. We used that later for SZ in MK3.)
• Sub: Here is the very first sketch of MK’s ninjas... http://twitpic.com/6fkfd8 The spark for the Lin Kuei clan came from a book I read called The Chinese Ninja Connection by Li Hsing. Hsing posits historical evidence for the existence of the Lin Kuei and their influence on the Japanese ninja… I was aware of there being some controversy about the author’s claims. So when we split the character in 2 for palette swaps… … I thought it would be fitting that one was of Chinese origin and the other Japanese to kind of embody the argument. I never did any real research into the existence of the Lin Kuei beyond Li Hsing’s book and I didn’t want to…

• Though BigTroubleInLittleChina kind of Americanized my obsession for supernatural kung fu films from China, it was not my biggest influence. My biggest influences came from Tsui Hark films -- Zu Warriors & The Swordsman. We had to get them from bootleggers in Chgo's Chinatown.

• Here is the first page from that notebook. Shang Lao of course eventually became Shang Tsung... http://twitpic.com/6eotx2 I haven't seen that Shang Lao sketch in at least over a decade. Real obvious influence from Big Trouble in Little China's Lo Pan... Though the final in-game Shang Tsung changed quite a bit. I was really going for a look of ancient Chinese royalty.

• Because of screen res and color limits on MK, we were forced to keep costumes simple. Too much detail created a mess of pixels...

• Goro was originally called Gongoro, but we decided to shorten his name. During MK3's dev Kabal's temp name was Sandman. Sindel was called The Bride... Goro: [6] (My original concept sketch had Goro with 3 fingers and a thumb on each hand. Curt wisely changed it to 2 fingers and a thumb...)

• (American Ninja's Kurtis Jackson inspired Jax. Originally Kurtis Stryker) I'm surprised it took someone almost twenty years to make that connection. Steve James was an absolute inspiration for Jax. ("Hey John. Is it true that martial artist Cynthia Rothrock was the inspiration for Sonya Blade?") Only in a very general sense...

• Cyber ninjas inspired by Tin Man of Oz. (No, really.)

• And more!

Also http://www.destructoid.com/ono-mortal-kombat-represents-western-game-design-198318.phtml and http://www.gamespot.com/gamespot/features/video/hist_mortalk/index.html (use Internet Archive for this one later on, page 16 is completely broken). --194.145.185.229 (talk) 16:21, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Eh. Appearantly it's not interesting to anyone here, after all. Never mind. --194.145.185.229 (talk) 12:09, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

MK Arcade Kollection

This shouldnt be mentioned somewhere in the article? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lbertolotti (talk • contribs) 01:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Title

Why is Mortal Kombat written with "K"? The normal form would be written as Mortal Combat. Furko Nellis (talk) 12:32, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Why is Furko Nellis asking question on talk pages instead of reading the articles? --Niemti (talk) 12:44, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

Could someone re-assess Mileena now?

I don't think it's Start-Class, or even C for that matter. --Niemti (talk) 00:59, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Kitana (Mortal Kombat) too, for that matter (maybe even more). --Niemti (talk) 01:04, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

The proper place to file a request for the reassessments at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Assessment/Requests#New request. Thanks, Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 01:11, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mortal Kombat/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ChrisGualtieri (talk · contribs) 16:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm gonna be reviewing this. I've already glanced over the material yesterday and found you were updating the controversy section, give me a bit of time to do this one. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:38, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Review

Gameplay section seems fine, just a few awkward wordings to deal with.

"Midway would keep their single styled fighting moves with four attack buttons which were a different array of punches and kicks and block until they changed this in Mortal Kombat: Deadly Alliance by differentiating characters normal moves and even giving them multiple fighting styles." - Awkward sentence. It says too much and confuses the reader. I'd split into two sentences.

"Most of the fighting styles featured are based on real martial arts, though a few of them are not." Prose again seems a bit weird, not too major, but for emphasis "While most of the styles used are based on real martial arts, some are entirely fictitious."

Development section needs some inline citations.

"Ed Boon stated for six out of the eight months while they were in production of Mortal Kombat, "nobody could come up with a name nobody didn't hate."" - Direct quote needs inline source.

" Some of the names suggested were "Kumite", "Dragon Attack", "Death Blow", and even at one point, "Fatality". Someone had written down "combat" on the drawing board for the names in Ed Boon's office and someone wrote a K over the C, according to Ed Boon, "just to be kind of weird." - Again, direct quote needs inline cite.

"More so than other fighting games at the time, Mortal Kombat was famous for re-coloring certain sprites to appear as different characters." - Could be polished up a little.

"The Sega Mega Drive/Genesis versions had some unique eggs: in Mortal Kombat, a head shot of the President of Probe Software, Fergus McGovern, flew in front of the moon in the Pit stage, while in Mortal Kombat II, Raiden could perform a "Fergality" on the Armory stage." Cite required for this please.

"One example is "Toasty", which found its way into the game in the form of a small image of sound designer Dan Forden, who would appear in the corner of the screen during gameplay (after performing an uppercut) and yell the word "Toasty". - Easy fix, just pull it from the Gamestop article. Also, the Gamespot page is white text on white background, not your problem, but is odd. Ref 32 just needs to be mirrored over to it.

" In 1994, Malibu Comics launched an official MK comic book series, spawning two six-issue series ("Blood and Thunder" and "Battlewave"), along with several miniseries, and one-shot character issues, until its publication ended in August 1995. Two more comics were also made for Mortal Kombat 4 and the DC Universe crossover game." - Both could use a source.

"The franchise sparked two television series, the 1996 cartoon series Mortal Kombat: Defenders of the Realm and the 1998-1999 live-action series Mortal Kombat: Konquest. Neither series ran for more than one season due to budget constraints." - Again sources would be nice here.

"An animated prequel to the first movie, titled Mortal Kombat: The Journey Begins, was released straight to home video in 1995. The stage show Mortal Kombat: Live Tour was also launched at the end of 1995. The tour expanded to 1996, and featured Mortal Kombat characters in a theatrical display on stage." - And here.

Other then that it is very well sourced.

The Controversy section when I first viewed it was a single liner, but that has been expanded somewhat. Could this please be expanded a bit?

Technical notes.

John Vogel points right back to Mortal Kombat. Its not a major concern.

Ref 76. [7] is dead. http://bloody-disgusting.com/ links don't seem to be reliable. A better source would be nice. Ref 135 [8] is dead. So's #14 [9] and #67 [10]. Lastly, ref #6 [11] redirects to the newindianexpress site. Cannot view content.

Everything else seems fine and passable. Putting it on hold to address those issues. Overall, very nice broad and detailed view of the series. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:42, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

The content from the last reference or the beginning of the paragraph is presumably sourced by the reference in the end. GameSpot is always losing the backgrounds for their old pages before they go 404 completely, it's normal for them. --Niemti (talk) 17:18, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

How about now? I did also some more edits, including expanding and rewriting the development. --Niemti (talk) 18:23, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

The www.gametrailers.com ones are connection time out... and you sure you cannot get a replacement for the broken Guinness one? The article is definitely getting better, but a broken link to a review is really small and I doubt I can fail over that. Its just that according to the records its been dead for years. Time for a replacement I think. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 01:21, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

I just expanded/updated the article a lot again, but I'm basically done (with MKII too). --Niemti (talk) 19:12, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Passed. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:52, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Th lead might need an expansion

A fourth paragraph with summary of "Reception and cultural impact". --Niemti (talk) 20:36, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

I just realized the article lacks an info about MK humor (besides a remark about the Friendships)

The series is full of macabre humor, comical references, parodies, and in-jokes, while an uninformed reader might think it is all dead serious. Addings this should vastly improve the article. --Niemti (talk) 15:39, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

The Reboot timeline does not "erase" the Armageddon timeline

Whoever says it does is, IMO, unimaginative and ignorant, and needs to watch Back to the Future in order to understand how timeline rifts like this REALLY work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.180.97.233 (talk) 21:43, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Sorry about what I said in my previous post, I edited my post so that I don't sound so much like a prick. 24.180.97.233 (talk) 13:41, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

The two parallel universes in Injustice Gods Among Us backs up this theory even further... 75.129.123.163 (talk) 10:56, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Could you embolden the actual sequels on the list?

I've been counting and counting and I can only come up with nine. Serendi^podous 12:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mortal Kombat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ugo.com/games/fergality

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:19, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Recent reversions

@Kellymoat: I don't accept your rationale for reverting all of my changes. If you would like to explain, please do so here. I find your "Wording" rationale extremely inadequate. You should also be careful about reverting consecutive edits as I'm quite sure not all of it would be disagreeable to you: One link to the producer of Street Fighter was actually linked to an old Japanese politician who presumably had nothing whatsoever to do with Street Fighter, so the link required a disambiguator which I wrote in. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist ^{(Speak quickly)} _{(Follow my trail)} 06:01, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mortal Kombat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130319060304/http://www.ugo.com/games/mortal-kombat-characters-noob-saibot to http://www.ugo.com/games/mortal-kombat-characters-noob-saibot

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:57, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mortal Kombat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110707061209/http://gamevideos.1up.com/video/id/22707 to http://gamevideos.1up.com/video/id/22707

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:56, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

When I was looking through the Mortal Kombat article I noticed that it does not have 2 sections that are important. These sections are overall reviews and overall sales. I was surprised to see that these sections were not includes especially because Mortal Kombat is one of the biggest fighting game franchises ever created. My plan is to gather research on these two topics and work on two sections in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nelsonnnkyle12 (talk • contribs) 16:53, 17 April 2018 (UTC)