Talk:R. Mika

message: You can't just declare that valid content is unencyclopedic. As can be seen above, there was a hashing-out of the breast-trivia issue on the talk page, where edits are supposed to be discussed. User:JuJube has ignored this consensus opinion, has not contributed any argument or coherent opinion to the talk page, and insists upon vandalizing this article to suit his Christian viewpoint, which is apparently that mammary glands and their relative size are offensive tidbits to be blocked indefinitely. 216.139.219.148 01:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can you atribute the information to a reliable source?Geni 01:35, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Is there a source for the importance of this character's breasts?  As far as I've observed, many- maybe even most- female video game characters have unusually large breasts; unless there's some reason that this character's are special, I don't get why there's a need for a paragraph about them.  Of course, if there is a source verifying that this character's breast size is unusual or significant in some way, I'd be happy to rethink that opinion.  -FisherQueen (Talk) 01:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cited below, from 3 Capcom-licensed or internal sources. Was that just rhetoric, or are you actually willing to rethink your opinion in the face of information which contradicts your viewpoint on the relevancy of breast-size information? 85.13.251.106 02:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Cited where?Geni 02:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure when exactly I became Christian, as my user page makes my religious affiliation quite clear.  In any case, it's not being removed in the interests of any sort of censorship, but because it's encyclopedically irrelevant to her character.  As FisherQueen said, big busts are not surprising, and the picture makes it clear what her appearance is. JuJube 01:40, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Your opinion is what's irrelevant. As discussed above, if hair color is assumed to be a valid topic for inclusion, so too is relative breast size.
As for sources (as if it matters, with the Wikipedia thought police instantly disposing of anyone's additions into the memory hole without any discussion), they are actually quite plentiful: the Udon comic and Street Fighter Legends: Sakura v1 contain references to R. Mika's unusually large mammaries, as does All About Capcom Fighting Games 1987-2000 ("the incredibly busty wrestler") do you have references which suggest that Mika's milk-glands are normal-sized relative to the rest of the Capcom world? 
Now that valid sources have been cited, I'm interested to see whether your prudish mentalities will allow you to revert your own censorship. As the contributor above has already opined, there's no point in engaging in edit-wars with Wikipedia hawks who will relentlessly article-squat until their viewpoint is solidified as fact. 85.13.251.106 01:57, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

text: Please assume good faith. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 02:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Does that go for everyone, or just those who believe that R. Mika's elephantine mammaries deserve a mention in her article?  85.13.251.106 02:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I consider it very offensive that with all the other far more important political disputes going on in Wikipedia, you choose the size of a fictional character's breasts to hang your hat on. JuJube 02:21, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Anon: Yes, it goes for everyone. I have it targeted primarily at you because you are most clearly not assuimng good faith (or at least, were not at the time you spoke of censorship and assumed to know JuJube's worldview); however, everyone in this debate should do so. And that's all I have to say for now. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 02:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "JuJube"'s non-NPOV vandalism 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on R. Mika. 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://www.webcitation.org/6hSTGr71n?url=http://www.idigitaltimes.com/r-mika-butt-slap-censorship-street-fighter-v-really-hill-were-going-die-496810 to http://www.idigitaltimes.com/r-mika-butt-slap-censorship-street-fighter-v-really-hill-were-going-die-496810
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:43, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article is not detailed anymore, and needed some work or it will be delisted soon. GlatorNator (ᴛ) 04:32, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Then it'll drop to B and just get worked on until it gets relisted. The reception works at least, it's just a matter of getting the rest to line up. I don't think personally this should've passed GA to begin with, even looking at the 2016 version there's just not really enough info, despite the info being out therethere.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 04:48, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Issue