MediaWiki - User contributions [en]

Multiversal singularity

2010-02-06T17:12:14Z

70.234.97.239: /* Known multiversal singularities */

Across the [[multiverse]], there are [[Optimus Prime (disambiguation)|many]] [[Megatron (disambiguation)|versions]] [[Starscream (disambiguation)|of]] [[Bumblebee (disambiguation)|many]] [[Ultra Magnus (disambiguation)|beings]], each existing independently of each other. They may share similarities, or they may be [[Shattered Glass (franchise)|complete]] opposites, but each is their own unique individual. However, there are a handful of beings of which there is only one, a single entity without a counterpart in the multiverse. Traditionally of great significance, these beings may exist across multiple universes (even all universes) simultaneously yet remain a single individual (as does Primus) or they may only reside in one universe at a time but have the ability to move from universe to universe at will (as does Unicron).

== Multiversal Dynamics ==

The exact nature of Multiversal singularities was expounded on by Hasbro in a recent Q and A response. It is interesting and complex enough to merit reproducing in full:

''"The complex nature of the multiverse demands much from singular creatures like the Fallen, Primus, Unicron, the 13, etc. These beings are of a fundamentally different nature from regular individuals, who are repeated endlessly throughout the infinite variation of creation. They must be designed or evolved to deal with certain situations that would drive lesser beings mad.''

''First of all, time flows differently from dimension to dimension. By necessity, this makes it possible for creatures like the Fallen to appear to exist in two places at the same time. Second, whole new universes are spawned every moment by the resolution of quantum uncertainty. Most of these universes are dead ends that exist for only a few seconds or minutes at most, and encompass only a few critical moments. Therefore, at certain critical junctures, the Fallen becomes a quantum event, experiencing two or more possible outcomes at once, until one of those outcomes proves to be a dead end and collapses. The Fallen then reverts back to the "real" universe. Every story has dozens or hundreds of endings we never see. But the Fallen sees them.''

''One of the side effects of the Fallen's quantum nature is that his appearance changes slightly from dimension to dimension, based on the expectations of others, and the unique history he has (or has not) established in a particular dimension. He is also bound by the "rules" (gravity, magnetism, etc.) of any dimension in which appears – many of which rules he may have actually helped shape when the multiverse was young. So if time flows backwards in a certain dimension, he is bound to live and experience – forgetting as he goes along – everything backwards.''

''Smart and savvy dimensional travelers spend time in reverse timescale dimensions, slow-time dimensions, or dimensions in which time does not move at all. This ensures that even if they are "killed," they continue to exist. As you can see, the idea of sequential experience as you and I understand it is pretty meaningless to guys like the Fallen. He does experience all these things, but his mind operates on a higher order so all of this stuff totally makes sense to him."''

==Known multiversal singularities==
*[[Primus]]
*[[Unicron]]
*[[Vector Sigma]]
*[[Sideways]]
*[[Thirteen original Transformers]]
:*[[Prima]]
:*[[Vector Prime]]
:*[[Nexus Prime]]
:*[[The Fallen]]
:*[[Logos Prime]]

[[Category:Biology]]

Talk:Transformers: War for Cybertron (games)

2010-02-06T06:15:32Z

70.234.97.239: /* It does seem like a seperate continuity */

Why are we linking to the G1 characters? I thought this was supposed to be something new. [[User:Dead Metal|Dead Metal]] 04:10, 11 December 2009 (EST)

:There's really no way of knowing for sure until we have more information about the storyline and characters. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 14:20, 11 December 2009 (EST)
::I really, really doubt they won't be Primax characters, new continuity or not. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 14:50, 11 December 2009 (EST)
:::Agree that's that most likely the case. But I do sort of wonder if maybe this game is going to end up being some sort of prequel-y tie-in to the new cartoon/franchise that's coming. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 18:15, 11 December 2009 (EST)

== It does seem like a seperate continuity ==

I mean, seriously different. Should we ask Hasbro?
:Well, not sure about asking Hasbro, we'll know soon enough one way or the other. But IMO, bad information is worse than no information. Assuming that these guys are G1 is just that - an assumption. We should tread lightly. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] 18:29, 11 December 2009 (EST)
::They use the G1 logo, Cybertron's from [[Alpha Centauri]], and the roster includes only G1 dudes. I'd say "assumption" isn't really strong enough of a word. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 18:52, 11 December 2009 (EST)
:::I think we should wait for a confirmation that it's a G1 universe before making assumptions. The roster so far only includes G1 dudes. If we made that assumption, the movieverse would be part of G1 (early on only G1 based characters were announced. It could simply be like animated and it references things heavily. [[User:Eire]] 16.03 Dec 15 09 (OUTC)
:::The TFW2005 interview states it's "not connected to any particular generation" and that this will be the foundation for newer sub-franchises. That does indicate this isn't G1 but yet another continuity. [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] 16:31, 23 December 2009 (GMT)
::::It would certainly seem to. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] 11:44, 23 December 2009 (EST)
:::::Alrighty. Hopefully at some point we'll have a good parenthetical for this new continuity ... family. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:46, 23 December 2009 (EST)
::::::How about "WFC"? [[User:ThiAthEhn]]
:::::::I agree. It has been stated in interviews that this is a new continuity and the character designs seem to be taking influence from a number of previous incarnations; mostly War Within, Transformers Animated and the live-action movies. It would be difficult to make the case that these are meant to be direct variations on the G1 characters. I second the idea of using "WFC" to classify them. [[User: Clifftothemax|Clifftothemax]] 10:17, 19 January 2010 (GMT)
:::::: This IS a diffrent continuity- IGN Preview "Freed from the constraints of a movie license, the new Transformers game lives within its own universe." The TWF2005 preview and interview, multiple times in Game Informer's articles and alot in the Podcast on the same site. It's just heavily inspired by G1. I didn't want to change anything because I don't want to start an edit war over this. [[User:Drayco90|Drayco90]] 17:23, 16 January 2010 (EST)
::::::: Something can still be a new universe while being part of an existing [[continuity family]]. [[Henkei! Henkei!]] was a new universe that was still G1, as was [[Classics (2006)|Classics]] and the IDW stuff. What's important to the wiki is whether this will be a new continuity family, not just strictly a new universe. New universes happen all the time. New continuity families are much more rare. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 10:37, 19 January 2010 (EST)
:::::::: The thing is, it is (and always has been) a bit of a subjective value judgement alot of the time. How much similarity to G1 do we need to make something definately G1? Or does it work the other way? How big a New Element (minicons, cyberkeys,) do we need to make it difinitively it's own ConFam? Authorial intent definately has to be part of it too. Anything that specifically calls itself G1 is obvious, and anything that seems to be trying to pick up the original G1 characters/situations themselves even if it's in new forms or directions, alla IDW (although even that can be tricky to judge, agaiin HOW MUCH change makes a break?)... When we have as little info as we do right now on WfC it's almost impossible to judge what it will become. Do we have an editorial policy (and if not should we?) saying "Something new that seems G1-ish IS, until we see differences enough to prove it's not," or vice-versa "anything new is to be considered it's own continuity until we've seen enough to feel if it's G1-continuity family?" A set plan either way might make these situations a bit less random in the future. Maybe?--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206|76.28.76.206]] 10:48, 19 January 2010 (EST)
::::::::::::::lostcount: I would be ''highly'' surprised if WFC turns out to represent a whole new continuity family. We've already accepted too many retellings and revisions of G1 as being part of G1 for this one to fairly be split out, unless it has something that is an inescapable telltale mark of a separate confam, i.e. they're fighting for the Movie Allspark. "Its prehistory is very slightly different" will not be good enough, as is shown by the comfortable confam coexistence of FFOD, War Within, and Stormbringer. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 00:01, 21 January 2010 (EST)
:[http://www.allspark.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=66275 And the Club Magazine's leading questions] imply that this is indeed G1. Maybe even a previous G1. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:04, 25 January 2010 (EST)
By what you just showed, it'll be a part of the G1 Continuity family (I still question that its anything more than "influenced by it" I mean what constitutes a G1 Confam..yes IDW and Dreamwave are under it, but is the same true for an animated series? I mean honestly, If that were true, then Transformers Animated would be a part of the G1 Confam, and its not.) but shouldn't it have its own section near the bottom at some point, (for game, toys, series, etc.) sense apparently (and this is news to me) your link seems to state its based on its own upcoming series.--[[User:Chipmonk328|Chipmonk328]]
EDIT: Sorry to be posting an additional edit: but I have a distinct feeling, and am going to risk being wrong to call it now: An upcoming comic-tie in to it that basically further stretches whether it should be its own Confam or not.--[[User:Chipmonk328|Chipmonk328]]

== The New trailer ==

should we make a summary of the trailer?--[[User:Defect|Defect]] 14:25, 12 January 2010 (EST)
: The link to the trailer is probably enough. A play-by-play would be a bit excessive. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 14:27, 12 January 2010 (EST)

== Logos ==

I'm guessing the answer is no, but have the developers released any images of the characters on a white background that we can use to make some logos for the Main Page? I know we're not sure who the characters ''are'' yet, but we can link them to the WFC page for now. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 14:34, 13 January 2010 (EST)
: No. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 15:13, 13 January 2010 (EST)
::Of course, the current logo doesn't look too bad on the main page.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 15:14, 13 January 2010 (EST)
:::I think he means the center TFwiki one with the rotating characters. If we want to cut people out of screencaps with photoshop, we could probably add some WfC ones to the rotation. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 15:21, 13 January 2010 (EST)
::::I cropped a WfC out of his concept art and inserted him into the rotation. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 15:59, 13 January 2010 (EST)
:::::Awesome! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 16:08, 13 January 2010 (EST)
::::::And a Megatron. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:10, 13 January 2010 (EST)

== Starscream? ==

Who says that '''black and grey''' seeker in the "Megatron and Starscream prepare for the ground assault" picture is Starscream? It's much more likely it's Skywarp.-[[User:Roni134730|Roni134730]] 01:00, 26 January 2010 (EST)
: He has blue and red, though. It's just overwhelmed by the lighting. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:30, 24 January 2010 (EST)

== Toys Confirmed, mention here? ==

So we've had the existance of WfC toys confirmed by non-leeky sources (Game Informer, Fun pub) now my question is do they rate a mention here on this page. Generally they'd ust be mentioned on the character pages but this is pretty much the first time ever a TF Video game has gotten its own toys. Worth a Trivia entry? Or it's own sub-section? --[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206|76.28.76.206]] 11:52, 25 January 2010 (EST)
:We do need to start mentioning it as news becomes official, but it's not true that this is the only Transformers game that's had its own toys. Several of the designs from the both live-action film games had toys made of them, and a Decepticlone from the Armada video game got made into an Attactix figure. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:30, 25 January 2010 (EST)
:: Can we count on you for the photos? --[[User: ThiAthEhn|ThiAthEhn]]
::: What? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:15, 27 January 2010 (EST)

We have official stock photos for two toys now, that aren't from the club. Not sure where we want to put them.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:00, 27 January 2010 (EST)
: It would help if we knew the name of the toyline they were being featured in. For now, put them on this page, I think, just because we're building this article as an attraction. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 02:03, 27 January 2010 (EST)
::Done. --[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:08, 27 January 2010 (EST)
:::Is it just me or do those look like movie-ized versions of the Animated designs? [[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:39, 27 January 2010 (EST)
:::: I'd say more "Classics-ized" versions of the Animated designs myself. Regardless yes it's pretty clear that the Animated, Movie, and Classics aesthetics all influenced their development, which makes sense, those being the last three main TF lines.--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206|76.28.76.206]] 10:43, 27 January 2010 (EST)

Talk:Transformers: War for Cybertron (games)

2010-02-06T06:12:04Z

70.234.97.239: /* It does seem like a seperate continuity */

Why are we linking to the G1 characters? I thought this was supposed to be something new. [[User:Dead Metal|Dead Metal]] 04:10, 11 December 2009 (EST)

:There's really no way of knowing for sure until we have more information about the storyline and characters. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 14:20, 11 December 2009 (EST)
::I really, really doubt they won't be Primax characters, new continuity or not. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 14:50, 11 December 2009 (EST)
:::Agree that's that most likely the case. But I do sort of wonder if maybe this game is going to end up being some sort of prequel-y tie-in to the new cartoon/franchise that's coming. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 18:15, 11 December 2009 (EST)

== It does seem like a seperate continuity ==

I mean, seriously different. Should we ask Hasbro?
:Well, not sure about asking Hasbro, we'll know soon enough one way or the other. But IMO, bad information is worse than no information. Assuming that these guys are G1 is just that - an assumption. We should tread lightly. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] 18:29, 11 December 2009 (EST)
::They use the G1 logo, Cybertron's from [[Alpha Centauri]], and the roster includes only G1 dudes. I'd say "assumption" isn't really strong enough of a word. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 18:52, 11 December 2009 (EST)
:::I think we should wait for a confirmation that it's a G1 universe before making assumptions. The roster so far only includes G1 dudes. If we made that assumption, the movieverse would be part of G1 (early on only G1 based characters were announced. It could simply be like animated and it references things heavily. [[User:Eire]] 16.03 Dec 15 09 (OUTC)
:::The TFW2005 interview states it's "not connected to any particular generation" and that this will be the foundation for newer sub-franchises. That does indicate this isn't G1 but yet another continuity. [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] 16:31, 23 December 2009 (GMT)
::::It would certainly seem to. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] 11:44, 23 December 2009 (EST)
:::::Alrighty. Hopefully at some point we'll have a good parenthetical for this new continuity ... family. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:46, 23 December 2009 (EST)
::::::How about "WFC"? [[User:ThiAthEhn]]
:::::::I agree. It has been stated in interviews that this is a new continuity and the character designs seem to be taking influence from a number of previous incarnations; mostly War Within, Transformers Animated and the live-action movies. It would be difficult to make the case that these are meant to be direct variations on the G1 characters. I second the idea of using "WFC" to classify them. [[User: Clifftothemax|Clifftothemax]] 10:17, 19 January 2010 (GMT)
:::::: This IS a diffrent continuity- IGN Preview "Freed from the constraints of a movie license, the new Transformers game lives within its own universe." The TWF2005 preview and interview, multiple times in Game Informer's articles and alot in the Podcast on the same site. It's just heavily inspired by G1. I didn't want to change anything because I don't want to start an edit war over this. [[User:Drayco90|Drayco90]] 17:23, 16 January 2010 (EST)
::::::: Something can still be a new universe while being part of an existing [[continuity family]]. [[Henkei! Henkei!]] was a new universe that was still G1, as was [[Classics (2006)|Classics]] and the IDW stuff. What's important to the wiki is whether this will be a new continuity family, not just strictly a new universe. New universes happen all the time. New continuity families are much more rare. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 10:37, 19 January 2010 (EST)
:::::::: The thing is, it is (and always has been) a bit of a subjective value judgement alot of the time. How much similarity to G1 do we need to make something definately G1? Or does it work the other way? How big a New Element (minicons, cyberkeys,) do we need to make it difinitively it's own ConFam? Authorial intent definately has to be part of it too. Anything that specifically calls itself G1 is obvious, and anything that seems to be trying to pick up the original G1 characters/situations themselves even if it's in new forms or directions, alla IDW (although even that can be tricky to judge, agaiin HOW MUCH change makes a break?)... When we have as little info as we do right now on WfC it's almost impossible to judge what it will become. Do we have an editorial policy (and if not should we?) saying "Something new that seems G1-ish IS, until we see differences enough to prove it's not," or vice-versa "anything new is to be considered it's own continuity until we've seen enough to feel if it's G1-continuity family?" A set plan either way might make these situations a bit less random in the future. Maybe?--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206|76.28.76.206]] 10:48, 19 January 2010 (EST)
::::::::::::::lostcount: I would be ''highly'' surprised if WFC turns out to represent a whole new continuity family. We've already accepted too many retellings and revisions of G1 as being part of G1 for this one to fairly be split out, unless it has something that is an inescapable telltale mark of a separate confam, i.e. they're fighting for the Movie Allspark. "Its prehistory is very slightly different" will not be good enough, as is shown by the comfortable confam coexistence of FFOD, War Within, and Stormbringer. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 00:01, 21 January 2010 (EST)
:[http://www.allspark.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=66275 And the Club Magazine's leading questions] imply that this is indeed G1. Maybe even a previous G1. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:04, 25 January 2010 (EST)
By what you just showed, it'll be a part of the G1 Continuity family (I still question that its anything more than "influenced by it" I mean what constitutes a G1 Confam..yes IDW and Dreamwave are under it, but is the same true for an animated series? I mean honestly, If that were true, then Transformers Animated would be a part of the G1 Confam, and its not.) but shouldn't it have its own section near the bottom at some point, (for game, toys, series, etc.) sense apparently (and this is news to me) your link seems to state its based on its own upcoming series.--[[User:Chipmonk328|Chipmonk328]]

== The New trailer ==

should we make a summary of the trailer?--[[User:Defect|Defect]] 14:25, 12 January 2010 (EST)
: The link to the trailer is probably enough. A play-by-play would be a bit excessive. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 14:27, 12 January 2010 (EST)

== Logos ==

I'm guessing the answer is no, but have the developers released any images of the characters on a white background that we can use to make some logos for the Main Page? I know we're not sure who the characters ''are'' yet, but we can link them to the WFC page for now. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 14:34, 13 January 2010 (EST)
: No. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 15:13, 13 January 2010 (EST)
::Of course, the current logo doesn't look too bad on the main page.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 15:14, 13 January 2010 (EST)
:::I think he means the center TFwiki one with the rotating characters. If we want to cut people out of screencaps with photoshop, we could probably add some WfC ones to the rotation. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 15:21, 13 January 2010 (EST)
::::I cropped a WfC out of his concept art and inserted him into the rotation. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 15:59, 13 January 2010 (EST)
:::::Awesome! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 16:08, 13 January 2010 (EST)
::::::And a Megatron. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:10, 13 January 2010 (EST)

== Starscream? ==

Who says that '''black and grey''' seeker in the "Megatron and Starscream prepare for the ground assault" picture is Starscream? It's much more likely it's Skywarp.-[[User:Roni134730|Roni134730]] 01:00, 26 January 2010 (EST)
: He has blue and red, though. It's just overwhelmed by the lighting. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:30, 24 January 2010 (EST)

== Toys Confirmed, mention here? ==

So we've had the existance of WfC toys confirmed by non-leeky sources (Game Informer, Fun pub) now my question is do they rate a mention here on this page. Generally they'd ust be mentioned on the character pages but this is pretty much the first time ever a TF Video game has gotten its own toys. Worth a Trivia entry? Or it's own sub-section? --[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206|76.28.76.206]] 11:52, 25 January 2010 (EST)
:We do need to start mentioning it as news becomes official, but it's not true that this is the only Transformers game that's had its own toys. Several of the designs from the both live-action film games had toys made of them, and a Decepticlone from the Armada video game got made into an Attactix figure. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:30, 25 January 2010 (EST)
:: Can we count on you for the photos? --[[User: ThiAthEhn|ThiAthEhn]]
::: What? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:15, 27 January 2010 (EST)

We have official stock photos for two toys now, that aren't from the club. Not sure where we want to put them.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:00, 27 January 2010 (EST)
: It would help if we knew the name of the toyline they were being featured in. For now, put them on this page, I think, just because we're building this article as an attraction. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 02:03, 27 January 2010 (EST)
::Done. --[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:08, 27 January 2010 (EST)
:::Is it just me or do those look like movie-ized versions of the Animated designs? [[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:39, 27 January 2010 (EST)
:::: I'd say more "Classics-ized" versions of the Animated designs myself. Regardless yes it's pretty clear that the Animated, Movie, and Classics aesthetics all influenced their development, which makes sense, those being the last three main TF lines.--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206|76.28.76.206]] 10:43, 27 January 2010 (EST)

Talk:JaAm

2010-02-06T04:56:41Z

70.234.97.239:

I think that the Wiki can and should include some fandom-specific information that isn't directly related to Transformers. For example, we should eventually have an article for each BotCon/OTFCC convention. We should have an entry for FIRRIB. I think Jam falls under the same umbrella. Obviously there should be some limit to how obscure/irrelevant a meme we include, but Jam, for instance, has highly-visible exposure on Ben Yee's site, so I think it is worth including. --[[User:Steve-o|Steve-o]] 16:55, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
:Your arugment is sound, but I would definitely have to differ. I agree that we should have entries for each BotCon/OTFCC, because the convention is officially supported by Hasbro (even though this was admittedly not always the case. I would argue that the fact that these conventions ''gained'' official status grants legitimacy to the pre-official conventions to at least the degree where I'm comfortable with them being on this Wiki, though). I don't think that FIRRIB or the JaAm comics, as ''strictly'' fan-based endeavors, should be here, though. At the very least, if we do include them, we need to set up guidelines detailed the criteria under which non-official entries should be permitted.--[[User:G.B. Blackrock|G.B. Blackrock]] 18:42, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

I vote we move to a properly-spelled page, such as JaAm. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:31, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

:I think JAam is a perfectly cromulent subject for this Wiki. Like Hot Shot, my shoulders often hurt, and I wonder Why- WHY was I created to feel pain? You wouldnt' want it as a section in Hot Shot's main page, but a link out is good. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 07:51, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I think this JaAm article should stay. Personal webpages can come and go, and there was a considerable length of time during which the JaAm comic wasn't available, but all these references to JaAm were, causing me to say, 'WhAt jAam?'. All those references are still out there, buried in Usenet archives, forum discussions, and things like the BWTF rating system. One thing this encyclopedia can do is help to understand the meanings of weird things like this without having to say 'My life is pain'. At least it would give everybody somewhere stable to direct people to when they wanted to know what was going on. - Autobus Prime

== mY liFE iS PaIn ==

WhY mY '''ShOuLdErS''' hUrT? --[[User:Slander|sLAnDeR]] 18:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

:i eAt yOuR bAbIEs --[[User:Andrusi|aNDruSi]] 20:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
::I have articulation! --[[User:Slander|stupid little helecopter guy]] 15:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
:::Oi! Get away from my pie filling! I like pie!--[[User:Dynamus Prime|Dynamus Prime]] 15:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
:::: I HaVe FEET Yay!--[[User:Darthluke123|Darthluke123]] 2:42 11 June 2009

==Redshirt==
Is anyone else having trouble getting Redshirt.co to come up? -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 19:26, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
:404'd on me too. [[User:Sindersaur|Sindersaur]] 06:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Yep, 404'd for me too. Can it be hosted anywhere else? [[User:Bride of lister|Bride of lister]] 12:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

==this is wierd==
Why was he dancing?!?!? [[User:Amanda Pudding|Amanda Pudding]] 16:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

== Actual substance ==

Okay, I'm going to propose something here. As a result of Hot Shot's bio, we now have a first ''in-fiction'' reference to JaAm (complete with stutter-case). Seeing as we ''do'' treat packaging bios as fiction and thus a form of ''canon'', we probably should reorganize this article as if it were an actual substance and give this article a proper (albeit brief) fiction section.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 01:55, 12 April 2009 (EDT)
:Makes sense to me. I feel like most of "What is Jam" could be shoved into one of the "Origins" sections we sometimes use before fiuction sections, like on [[Prowl II]].
:...which I see that someone has moved to "origins and complications" ''below'' the fiction section, even though we put it ''before'' the section because it was a necessary primer to make sense ''of'' the fiction section. *sigh* -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 02:40, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

==Link plz?==
"Ben Yee commissioned Hot Shot fan David Willis to create a series of images based on the mini-comic" As a Hotshot fan, I must see this.--[[User:Chipmonk328|Chipmonk328]]