Talk:ED-209

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

Contents 1 Merging "ED-209" with "Enforcement Droid 209 (ED-209)" 2 Better picture? 3 Clean-up 4 Kinney vs Kenny 5 "defining and most remembered" weasel wording 6 ED-260 7 Number of ED-209s in RoboCop?

[edit] Merging "ED-209" with "Enforcement Droid 209 (ED-209)"

• Merge What's to discuss on this issue? Both articles are talking about the same thing, the ED-209 article has more information and a picture, while the Enforcement Droid 209 article has a more complete name.

Viewer 17:51, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Better picture?

Would it be possible to find a better picture? The current one doesn't quite show the article's subject too well what with the guy standing in front of it thereby obscuring the view...

[edit] Clean-up

This article needs quite a bit of clean-up. It's written entirely in-universe, and where "Production difficulties" talks about fictional difficulties in its fictional production, it could definitely talk instead about production of the animatronic or stop-motion model that is ED-209. The article is totally uncited and means nothing to a reader who has never seen the film. --Newt ΨΦ 21:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kinney vs Kenny

According to this, "the senior vice president calls upon Kinney", not Kenny. That would mean the "Cameos" section is wrong, the robot did not kill a man named Kenny. --DragonHawk 06:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "defining and most remembered" weasel wording

Your right, Primalchaos, the contentious phrase "Its unique design, intimidating look and numerous faults make it one of the defining and most remembered fictional robots of the 1980s." is clearly not citable, because it is subjective, specifically the "defining and most remembered" part. After reading about its numerous cameos and references, a reader MIGHT be led to agree with you on its "place in history", but arbitrarily stating this goes to far, and doesn't make this article more interesting, beyond acting as a mouthpiece for someone's opinion, which is pretty clearly what Wikipedia is trying to avoid. ---Jackel 16:45, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Change it back if you wish. I am not interested in getting into an argument with a grey face over a leading introductory paragraph. Your accusation of weasel wording is terribly inaccurate, however. Weasel wording is often used to warp articles to fit someone's opinion while trying to pass responsibility for that opinion onto some nebulous other, not give a fair elaboration based on the facts presented in the article. If you think it is inappropriate for the article, that's fine. But weasel words aren't an excuse to rip out elaborating text whenever you see it and reduce Wikipedia's prose to the dullness of a badly written textbook. Just say you don't think it should be there and make a bold editorial choice, rather than trying to prop yourself up with the wrong bit of Wikipedia policy. Be brave enough to just stand by your opinions, man.--Primal Chaos 21:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

In this case, I admit, this is less an example of weasel wording, and more an example of peacock terminology. They so often overlap, that I choose the wrong stylistic policy to "prop myself up on". Rather than "being bold" and simply reverting things we do not agree with, its sometimes more productive to discuss our differences. As such, I'll point out that rephrasing the contentious remarks is many times be a better choice than simply purging them. However, it seems your better suited at hurling insults (what exactly is a "grey face", that's a new one) than working for a compromise. Good luck with that. ---Jackel 15:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Primalchaos, your revision of this phrase is agreeable, and a very suitable compromise, nicely done. ---Jackel 15:27, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ED-260

In the cartoon series and the Kenner toy line, the ED-209 is rebranded the ED-260. That might deserve a mention in this article. Also, does anyone know why they did this? -- JSAtkinson 10:25, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Number of ED-209s in RoboCop?

"It is unclear whether there is more than one operational ED-209 throughout the film. Either the film features different ED-209s, or there is only one prototype which is repaired between appearances." At the end of the film, before Robocop arrives at OCP headquarters and destroys the ED-209 with the "Cobra assault cannon," Jones tells the board "I've got one downstairs guarding the building right now." His use of the word "one" implies that multiple versions exist. I'm not arguing for this "fact" (since it's not a fact); I just wonder if the question of how many models exist needs to be raised at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.107.0.86 (talk • contribs)

We can only speculate as to how many there were, so I wouldn't mention any specific number because we simply don't know. It's been a while since I watched the first movie, but we could probably say the ED-209 appeared at least 3 times (from what I remember) 1. at the beginning when Mr. Kinney is gunned down by one, 2. when Robo is attacked in Jone's office and one chases him down the stairs where it trips and falls (major design flaw!), and 3. the one guarding the building. They could have all been the same one for all we know. Cyberia23 13:41, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

10 Villains We’d Like to Forget? How could the robot actually be referred to as a villain? The creator was the villain, the robot was just a badly designed device. Maybe wouldn't have been so bad armed with non lethal ADS weaponry, or rubber bullets. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.195.15.6 (talk) 12:01, 20 February 2008 (UTC)