MediaWiki - User contributions [en]

MediaWiki:TFWiki.net 2017 Transformers Hall of Fame Auditions/Movie

2017-07-11T16:54:30Z

IKY: /* Poll entries */

[[File:Transformers2007teaserposter.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
This is the page for the '''TFWiki.net Transformers Hall of Fame Favorite Movie Character Auditions''' entries. The rules are as follows:

#You must pick your top '''three''' favorite LIVE-ACTION FILM SERIES ''Transformers'' characters.
#Per the the informational email, they must characters that '''appeared on film'''. They must also actually '''be''' Transformers; sorry, but no humans, non-Transformer aliens, or anything else of the sort are being considered for the Hall of Fame. Any votes for such entities will '''not''' be tabulated. It is the sole discretion of the contest organizers to decide what does and does not count.
##"Favorite Transformers Character" (fictional robot character) votes '''[[Transformers Wiki:TFWiki.net 2017 Transformers Hall of Fame Auditions/Character|go here!]]'''
##Do not vote for the same characters in both categories.
#Take your top three list and '''put it in alphabetical order'''. Order of preference does not matter.
##You '''can''' vote for any film character who was previously inducted! This includes '''Arcee, Bumblebee, Grimlock, Hot Rod, Ironhide, Jazz, Megatron, Optimus Prime, Ratchet, Shockwave, Soundwave, Starscream, and Wheeljack.'''
#Only one entry per user.

Please put your characters of choice and user name below in the following manner:

*Cogman, Frenzy, Hound --<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Poll entry period ends at 3pm on '''[[July 16]]th, 2017'''. --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] ([[User talk:Monzo|talk]]) 20:34, 10 July 2017 (EDT)

==Poll entries==


*Dragonstorm, Drift, Grimlock [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 20:51, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Nitro Zeus, Sqweeks -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 21:03, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Hound, Laserbeak, Nitro Zeus --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 21:06, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Laserbeak, Ratchet, Ravage --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 21:11, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Hound, Nitro Zeus --[[User:Jrgolden42|Jrgolden42]] ([[User talk:Jrgolden42|talk]]) 21:22, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Devastator, Sentinel Prime -[[User:LV|LV]] ([[User talk:LV|talk]]) 21:48, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Frenzy, Nitro Zeus - [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 22:04, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Dickbot the blender guy, Dispensor, Ejector - [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] ([[User talk:Semysane|talk]]) 22:16, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Ironhide, Optimus Prime - [[User:SeanTF1967|SeanTF1967]] ([[User talk:SeanTF1967|talk]]) 22:35, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Dispensor, Nitro Zeus [[User:Grum|Grum]] - ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 22:40, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Hot Rod, Ratchet - --[[User:Ladystrikeback|Lady Strikeback]] ([[User talk:Ladystrikeback|talk]]) 22:44, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Hound, Jetfire, Lockdown --[[User:BattleBlade|BattleBlade]] ([[User talk:BattleBlade|talk]]) 23:02, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Laserbeak, Nitro Zeus, Watch That Killed Hitler -- [[User:Chip|Chip]] ([[User talk:Chip|talk]]) 23:22, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Hound, Lockdown [[User:LordTacos|LordTacos]] ([[User talk:LordTacos|talk]]) 00:19, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Crosshairs, Jetfire - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 00:56, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Bumblebee, Frenzy --[[User:Flicky1991|flicky]][[User talk:Flicky1991|1991]] 01:22, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Hound, Nitro Zeus --[[User:Fredbob|Fredbob]] ([[User talk:Fredbob|talk]]) 01:40, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Jazz, Laserbeak --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 02:15, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Lockdown, Optimus Prime --[[User:Nanox|Nanox]] ([[User talk:Nanox|talk]]) 02:17, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Crosshairs, Drift, Jetfire -- [[User:DalekSupreme13|DalekSupreme13]] ([[User talk:DalekSupreme13|talk]]) 08:18, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Dispensor, Nitro Zeus --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 09:17, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Dispensor, Hound --[[User:MaximalBroadjaw|MaximalBroadjaw]] ([[User talk:MaximalBroadjaw|talk]]) 10:39, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Blackout, Cogman--[[User:Munkky|Munkky]] ([[User talk:Munkky|talk]]) 12:05, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Dispensor, Nitro Zeus--[[User:IKY|IKY]] ([[User talk:IKY|talk]]) 16:46, July 11, 2017 (EDT)





[[Category: TFWiki.net]]

MediaWiki:TFWiki.net 2017 Transformers Hall of Fame Auditions/Character

2017-07-11T16:53:55Z

IKY: /* Poll entries */

This is the page for the '''TFWiki.net Transformers Hall of Fame Favorite Character Auditions''' entries. The rules are as follows:

#You must pick your top '''three''' ''Transformers'' characters, from any era. They must actually '''be''' Transformers; sorry, but no humans, non-Transformer aliens, non-Transformer robots, or anything else of the sort are being considered for the Hall of Fame. Any votes for such entities will '''not''' be tabulated. It is the sole discretion of the contest organizers to decide what does and does not count.
##"Live-Action Film Transformers Character" (fictional robot character) votes '''[[Transformers Wiki:TFWiki.net 2017 Transformers Hall of Fame Auditions/Movie|go here!]]'''
##Do not vote for the same characters in both categories.
#Take your top three list and '''put it in alphabetical order'''. Order of preference does not matter. Feel free to denote the character's franchise of origin, although these distinctions may or may not figure into the final results.
#You '''cannot''' pick a specific version of '''Arcee, Bumblebee, Cosmos, Dinobot, Grimlock, Ironhide, Jazz, Megatron, ''Beast Wars'' Megatron, Optimus Primal, Optimus Prime, Predaking (combiner), Prowl, Ratchet, Rodimus, Shockwave, Soundwave, Starscream, Ultra Magnus, Waspinator, or Wheeljack.''' They've already been inducted!
#Only one entry per user.

Please put your characters of choice and user name below in the following manner:

*Blackarachnia, Hot Shot, Sentinel Prime (Animated)--<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Poll entry period ends at 3pm on '''[[July 16]]th, 2017'''. --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] ([[User talk:Monzo|talk]]) 20:34, 10 July 2017 (EDT)

==Poll entries==


*Jetfire, Lio Convoy, ''Beast Wars: Uprising'' Preditron [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 20:50, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Bulkhead, Sky-Byte --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 21:02, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Hot Shot, Ravage --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 21:10, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Scrounge, BW Silverbolt --[[User:Jrgolden42|Jrgolden42]] ([[User talk:Jrgolden42|talk]]) 21:20, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Bulkhead, Scorponok, Sideways -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 21:35, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Brainstorm, Perceptor, Rung -[[user: cyberdoctor42|cyberdoctor42]] ([[user talk:cyberdoctor42|talk]]) 21:41, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Bludgeon, Thundercracker [[User:Kyojikasshu|Kyojikasshu]] ([[User talk:Kyojikasshu|talk]]) 21:41, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Devastator, Tarantulas, Ravage -[[User:LV|LV]] ([[User talk:LV|talk]]) 21:46, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Brainstorm, Cyclonus, Ravage - [[User:Tiel|Tiel]] ([[User talk:Tiel|talk]]) 21:51, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Spacewarp, Trans-Mutate, Vector Prime [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 22:02, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Hooligan, Slog - [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] ([[User talk:Semysane|talk]]) 22:05, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Bludgeon, Perceptor, Wreck-Gar - [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 22:21, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cyclonus, Galvatron, Sky-Byte - [[User:SeanTF1967|SeanTF1967]] (([[User talk:SeanTF1967|talk]]) 22:30, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cyclonus, Springer, Whirl --[[User:Ladystrikeback|Lady Strikeback]] ([[User talk:Ladystrikeback|talk]]) 22:48, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Devastator, Swindle, Windblade --[[User:BattleBlade|BattleBlade]] ([[User talk:BattleBlade|talk]]) 23:06, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Chase, Rhinox -- [[User:Chip|Chip]] ([[User talk:Chip|talk]]) 23:11, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Chromedome, Cyclonus, Rewind [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] ([[User talk:Alientraveller|talk]]) 23:16, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Swindle, Thundercracker, Wreck-Gar --[[User:Maroyasha|Maroyasha]] ([[User talk:Maroyasha|talk]]) 23:57, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Cyclonus, Sky-Byte [[User:LordTacos|LordTacos]] ([[User talk:LordTacos|talk]]) 00:14, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarchania, Rattrap, Swindle -- [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 00:53, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Galvatron, Laserbeak, Sky-Byte --[[User:Flicky1991|flicky]][[User talk:Flicky1991|1991]] 01:19, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Ginrai, Lockdown, Nautica--[[User:Fredbob|Fredbob]] ([[User talk:Fredbob|talk]]) 01:42, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia (BW), Cheetor (BW), Ginrai --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 02:12, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Overlord, Rung --[[User:Nanox|Nanox]] ([[User talk:Nanox|talk]]) 02:16, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Galvatron, Tarantulas -- [[User:DalekSupreme13|DalekSupreme13]] ([[User talk:DalekSupreme13|talk]]) 08:11, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Devastator, Jetfire --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 08:17, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Bludgeon, Sky-Byte --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 09:14, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cyclonus, Scorponok (G1), Scourge (RiD) --[[User:Anguirus|Anguirus]] ([[User talk:Anguirus|talk]]) 09:19, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Doublecross, Sky-Byte, Thundercracker --[[User:MaximalBroadjaw|MaximalBroadjaw]] ([[User talk:MaximalBroadjaw|talk]]) 10:38, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Cheetor, Devastator--[[User:Munkky|Munkky]] ([[User talk:Munkky|talk]]) 12:04, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Lio Convoy, Vector Prime--[[User:IKY|IKY]] ([[User talk:IKY|talk]]) 12:41, 11 July 2017‎ (EDT)





[[Category: TFWiki.net]]

MediaWiki:TFWiki.net 2017 Transformers Hall of Fame Auditions/Movie

2017-07-11T16:51:26Z

IKY: /* Poll entries */

[[File:Transformers2007teaserposter.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
This is the page for the '''TFWiki.net Transformers Hall of Fame Favorite Movie Character Auditions''' entries. The rules are as follows:

#You must pick your top '''three''' favorite LIVE-ACTION FILM SERIES ''Transformers'' characters.
#Per the the informational email, they must characters that '''appeared on film'''. They must also actually '''be''' Transformers; sorry, but no humans, non-Transformer aliens, or anything else of the sort are being considered for the Hall of Fame. Any votes for such entities will '''not''' be tabulated. It is the sole discretion of the contest organizers to decide what does and does not count.
##"Favorite Transformers Character" (fictional robot character) votes '''[[Transformers Wiki:TFWiki.net 2017 Transformers Hall of Fame Auditions/Character|go here!]]'''
##Do not vote for the same characters in both categories.
#Take your top three list and '''put it in alphabetical order'''. Order of preference does not matter.
##You '''can''' vote for any film character who was previously inducted! This includes '''Arcee, Bumblebee, Grimlock, Hot Rod, Ironhide, Jazz, Megatron, Optimus Prime, Ratchet, Shockwave, Soundwave, Starscream, and Wheeljack.'''
#Only one entry per user.

Please put your characters of choice and user name below in the following manner:

*Cogman, Frenzy, Hound --<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Poll entry period ends at 3pm on '''[[July 16]]th, 2017'''. --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] ([[User talk:Monzo|talk]]) 20:34, 10 July 2017 (EDT)

==Poll entries==


*Dragonstorm, Drift, Grimlock [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 20:51, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Nitro Zeus, Sqweeks -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 21:03, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Hound, Laserbeak, Nitro Zeus --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 21:06, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Laserbeak, Ratchet, Ravage --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 21:11, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Hound, Nitro Zeus --[[User:Jrgolden42|Jrgolden42]] ([[User talk:Jrgolden42|talk]]) 21:22, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Devastator, Sentinel Prime -[[User:LV|LV]] ([[User talk:LV|talk]]) 21:48, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Frenzy, Nitro Zeus - [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 22:04, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Dickbot the blender guy, Dispensor, Ejector - [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] ([[User talk:Semysane|talk]]) 22:16, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Ironhide, Optimus Prime - [[User:SeanTF1967|SeanTF1967]] ([[User talk:SeanTF1967|talk]]) 22:35, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Dispensor, Nitro Zeus [[User:Grum|Grum]] - ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 22:40, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Hot Rod, Ratchet - --[[User:Ladystrikeback|Lady Strikeback]] ([[User talk:Ladystrikeback|talk]]) 22:44, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Hound, Jetfire, Lockdown --[[User:BattleBlade|BattleBlade]] ([[User talk:BattleBlade|talk]]) 23:02, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Laserbeak, Nitro Zeus, Watch That Killed Hitler -- [[User:Chip|Chip]] ([[User talk:Chip|talk]]) 23:22, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Hound, Lockdown [[User:LordTacos|LordTacos]] ([[User talk:LordTacos|talk]]) 00:19, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Crosshairs, Jetfire - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 00:56, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Bumblebee, Frenzy --[[User:Flicky1991|flicky]][[User talk:Flicky1991|1991]] 01:22, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Hound, Nitro Zeus --[[User:Fredbob|Fredbob]] ([[User talk:Fredbob|talk]]) 01:40, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Jazz, Laserbeak --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 02:15, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Lockdown, Optimus Prime --[[User:Nanox|Nanox]] ([[User talk:Nanox|talk]]) 02:17, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Crosshairs, Drift, Jetfire -- [[User:DalekSupreme13|DalekSupreme13]] ([[User talk:DalekSupreme13|talk]]) 08:18, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Dispensor, Nitro Zeus --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 09:17, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Dispensor, Hound --[[User:MaximalBroadjaw|MaximalBroadjaw]] ([[User talk:MaximalBroadjaw|talk]]) 10:39, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Blackout, Cogman--[[User:Munkky|Munkky]] ([[User talk:Munkky|talk]]) 12:05, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Dispensor, Nitro Zeus--[[User:IKY|IKY]] ([[User talk:IKY|talk]]) 16:46, July 11, 2017





[[Category: TFWiki.net]]

MediaWiki:TFWiki.net 2017 Transformers Hall of Fame Auditions/Movie

2017-07-11T16:46:47Z

IKY: /* Poll entries */

[[File:Transformers2007teaserposter.jpg|thumb|250px|]]
This is the page for the '''TFWiki.net Transformers Hall of Fame Favorite Movie Character Auditions''' entries. The rules are as follows:

#You must pick your top '''three''' favorite LIVE-ACTION FILM SERIES ''Transformers'' characters.
#Per the the informational email, they must characters that '''appeared on film'''. They must also actually '''be''' Transformers; sorry, but no humans, non-Transformer aliens, or anything else of the sort are being considered for the Hall of Fame. Any votes for such entities will '''not''' be tabulated. It is the sole discretion of the contest organizers to decide what does and does not count.
##"Favorite Transformers Character" (fictional robot character) votes '''[[Transformers Wiki:TFWiki.net 2017 Transformers Hall of Fame Auditions/Character|go here!]]'''
##Do not vote for the same characters in both categories.
#Take your top three list and '''put it in alphabetical order'''. Order of preference does not matter.
##You '''can''' vote for any film character who was previously inducted! This includes '''Arcee, Bumblebee, Grimlock, Hot Rod, Ironhide, Jazz, Megatron, Optimus Prime, Ratchet, Shockwave, Soundwave, Starscream, and Wheeljack.'''
#Only one entry per user.

Please put your characters of choice and user name below in the following manner:

*Cogman, Frenzy, Hound --<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Poll entry period ends at 3pm on '''[[July 16]]th, 2017'''. --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] ([[User talk:Monzo|talk]]) 20:34, 10 July 2017 (EDT)

==Poll entries==


*Dragonstorm, Drift, Grimlock [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 20:51, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Nitro Zeus, Sqweeks -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 21:03, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Hound, Laserbeak, Nitro Zeus --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 21:06, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Laserbeak, Ratchet, Ravage --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 21:11, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Hound, Nitro Zeus --[[User:Jrgolden42|Jrgolden42]] ([[User talk:Jrgolden42|talk]]) 21:22, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Devastator, Sentinel Prime -[[User:LV|LV]] ([[User talk:LV|talk]]) 21:48, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Frenzy, Nitro Zeus - [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 22:04, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Dickbot the blender guy, Dispensor, Ejector - [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] ([[User talk:Semysane|talk]]) 22:16, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Ironhide, Optimus Prime - [[User:SeanTF1967|SeanTF1967]] ([[User talk:SeanTF1967|talk]]) 22:35, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Dispensor, Nitro Zeus [[User:Grum|Grum]] - ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 22:40, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Hot Rod, Ratchet - --[[User:Ladystrikeback|Lady Strikeback]] ([[User talk:Ladystrikeback|talk]]) 22:44, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Hound, Jetfire, Lockdown --[[User:BattleBlade|BattleBlade]] ([[User talk:BattleBlade|talk]]) 23:02, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Laserbeak, Nitro Zeus, Watch That Killed Hitler -- [[User:Chip|Chip]] ([[User talk:Chip|talk]]) 23:22, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Hound, Lockdown [[User:LordTacos|LordTacos]] ([[User talk:LordTacos|talk]]) 00:19, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Crosshairs, Jetfire - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 00:56, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Bumblebee, Frenzy --[[User:Flicky1991|flicky]][[User talk:Flicky1991|1991]] 01:22, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Hound, Nitro Zeus --[[User:Fredbob|Fredbob]] ([[User talk:Fredbob|talk]]) 01:40, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Jazz, Laserbeak --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 02:15, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Lockdown, Optimus Prime --[[User:Nanox|Nanox]] ([[User talk:Nanox|talk]]) 02:17, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Crosshairs, Drift, Jetfire -- [[User:DalekSupreme13|DalekSupreme13]] ([[User talk:DalekSupreme13|talk]]) 08:18, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Dispensor, Nitro Zeus --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 09:17, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Dispensor, Hound --[[User:MaximalBroadjaw|MaximalBroadjaw]] ([[User talk:MaximalBroadjaw|talk]]) 10:39, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Barricade, Blackout, Cogman--[[User:Munkky|Munkky]] ([[User talk:Munkky|talk]]) 12:05, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cogman, Dispensor, Nitro Zeus--[[User:IKY|IKY]]





[[Category: TFWiki.net]]

MediaWiki:TFWiki.net 2017 Transformers Hall of Fame Auditions/Character

2017-07-11T16:41:53Z

IKY: /* Poll entries */

This is the page for the '''TFWiki.net Transformers Hall of Fame Favorite Character Auditions''' entries. The rules are as follows:

#You must pick your top '''three''' ''Transformers'' characters, from any era. They must actually '''be''' Transformers; sorry, but no humans, non-Transformer aliens, non-Transformer robots, or anything else of the sort are being considered for the Hall of Fame. Any votes for such entities will '''not''' be tabulated. It is the sole discretion of the contest organizers to decide what does and does not count.
##"Live-Action Film Transformers Character" (fictional robot character) votes '''[[Transformers Wiki:TFWiki.net 2017 Transformers Hall of Fame Auditions/Movie|go here!]]'''
##Do not vote for the same characters in both categories.
#Take your top three list and '''put it in alphabetical order'''. Order of preference does not matter. Feel free to denote the character's franchise of origin, although these distinctions may or may not figure into the final results.
#You '''cannot''' pick a specific version of '''Arcee, Bumblebee, Cosmos, Dinobot, Grimlock, Ironhide, Jazz, Megatron, ''Beast Wars'' Megatron, Optimus Primal, Optimus Prime, Predaking (combiner), Prowl, Ratchet, Rodimus, Shockwave, Soundwave, Starscream, Ultra Magnus, Waspinator, or Wheeljack.''' They've already been inducted!
#Only one entry per user.

Please put your characters of choice and user name below in the following manner:

*Blackarachnia, Hot Shot, Sentinel Prime (Animated)--<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>

Poll entry period ends at 3pm on '''[[July 16]]th, 2017'''. --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] ([[User talk:Monzo|talk]]) 20:34, 10 July 2017 (EDT)

==Poll entries==


*Jetfire, Lio Convoy, ''Beast Wars: Uprising'' Preditron [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 20:50, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Bulkhead, Sky-Byte --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 21:02, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Hot Shot, Ravage --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 21:10, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Scrounge, BW Silverbolt --[[User:Jrgolden42|Jrgolden42]] ([[User talk:Jrgolden42|talk]]) 21:20, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Bulkhead, Scorponok, Sideways -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 21:35, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Brainstorm, Perceptor, Rung -[[user: cyberdoctor42|cyberdoctor42]] ([[user talk:cyberdoctor42|talk]]) 21:41, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Bludgeon, Thundercracker [[User:Kyojikasshu|Kyojikasshu]] ([[User talk:Kyojikasshu|talk]]) 21:41, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Devastator, Tarantulas, Ravage -[[User:LV|LV]] ([[User talk:LV|talk]]) 21:46, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Brainstorm, Cyclonus, Ravage - [[User:Tiel|Tiel]] ([[User talk:Tiel|talk]]) 21:51, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Spacewarp, Trans-Mutate, Vector Prime [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 22:02, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Hooligan, Slog - [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] ([[User talk:Semysane|talk]]) 22:05, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Bludgeon, Perceptor, Wreck-Gar - [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 22:21, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cyclonus, Galvatron, Sky-Byte - [[User:SeanTF1967|SeanTF1967]] (([[User talk:SeanTF1967|talk]]) 22:30, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cyclonus, Springer, Whirl --[[User:Ladystrikeback|Lady Strikeback]] ([[User talk:Ladystrikeback|talk]]) 22:48, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Devastator, Swindle, Windblade --[[User:BattleBlade|BattleBlade]] ([[User talk:BattleBlade|talk]]) 23:06, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Chase, Rhinox -- [[User:Chip|Chip]] ([[User talk:Chip|talk]]) 23:11, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Chromedome, Cyclonus, Rewind [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] ([[User talk:Alientraveller|talk]]) 23:16, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Swindle, Thundercracker, Wreck-Gar --[[User:Maroyasha|Maroyasha]] ([[User talk:Maroyasha|talk]]) 23:57, 10 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Cyclonus, Sky-Byte [[User:LordTacos|LordTacos]] ([[User talk:LordTacos|talk]]) 00:14, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarchania, Rattrap, Swindle -- [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 00:53, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Galvatron, Laserbeak, Sky-Byte --[[User:Flicky1991|flicky]][[User talk:Flicky1991|1991]] 01:19, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Ginrai, Lockdown, Nautica--[[User:Fredbob|Fredbob]] ([[User talk:Fredbob|talk]]) 01:42, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia (BW), Cheetor (BW), Ginrai --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 02:12, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Overlord, Rung --[[User:Nanox|Nanox]] ([[User talk:Nanox|talk]]) 02:16, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Galvatron, Tarantulas -- [[User:DalekSupreme13|DalekSupreme13]] ([[User talk:DalekSupreme13|talk]]) 08:11, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Devastator, Jetfire --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 08:17, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Bludgeon, Sky-Byte --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 09:14, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Cyclonus, Scorponok (G1), Scourge (RiD) --[[User:Anguirus|Anguirus]] ([[User talk:Anguirus|talk]]) 09:19, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Doublecross, Sky-Byte, Thundercracker --[[User:MaximalBroadjaw|MaximalBroadjaw]] ([[User talk:MaximalBroadjaw|talk]]) 10:38, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Cheetor, Devastator--[[User:Munkky|Munkky]] ([[User talk:Munkky|talk]]) 12:04, 11 July 2017 (EDT)
*Blackarachnia, Lio Convoy, Vector Prime--[[User:IKY|IKY]]





[[Category: TFWiki.net]]

User:IKY

2016-03-03T16:05:07Z

IKY: Created page with "I'm IKY. I'm a relatively new user here, but I've been reading this site for years. I did a good bit of artwork for Ask Vector Prime and Renegade Rhetoric."

I'm IKY. I'm a relatively new user here, but I've been reading this site for years. I did a good bit of artwork for Ask Vector Prime and Renegade Rhetoric.

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2016-01-07T02:48:38Z

IKY: /* We're all sick of arguing about GoBots */

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

This is the place for discussion of topics that affect the entire wiki. Some topics that would ordinarily be here have merited their own pages:

{{chapters|title=Specific Discussion Subjects|align=left|content=
<div class="list-header">'''Moving From Wikia:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving|Arriving]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving|Leaving]]
* [[Transformers Wiki:Community Portal/Complaints|Complaints]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''New Ad Policy:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki:Ads|Ads]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Bookworm Database-Crash:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Damage Control Central|Damage Control Central]]
* [[Project:Bookworm Crash]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving2|Leaving Take 2]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Server Move:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving2|Arriving Take 2]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Relicensing:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Relicensing|Relicensing]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Dealing With Vandalism:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Vandalism|Vandalism]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''GoBots Sister Wiki:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/GoBots|Discussion on the place of GoBots in this wiki]]
<br/> <div class="list-header">'''Wiki Technical Information:'''</div>
* [[Transformers_Wiki:Tech|A Not So Brief Summary of the Horrible Things That McFly and Co. Have Done To Keep This Wiki From Melting Down]]
}}<br/>

{{:{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}/Archive}}


== GoBots 2015 ==
Hey guess what - people are using AVP to try to settle this internet score too. What a shock, I know, right? Multiple wiki editors said the scores of new one-sentence-one-source GoBot articles should all be made into a single list, read commentary here:
http://www.allspark.com/forums/topic/101932-tfwikinet-thread-30/page-96

Before very many more one-sentence-one-source articles get installed, I think we should at least have some discussion here. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 13:38, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:I say make an exception and do a full coverage on Gobots.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 13:48, 18 October 2015 (EDT)

:Completely sold on combo pages by Tindalos: we already do include Related Characters on pages like [[Susan Hoffman]], [[Collins (Movie)]]. We could easily do a Guardians#Minor Guardians and Renegades#Minor Renegades for people who haven't got enough to them. (Like, Cop-Tur and Zero gets a lot said about them but Fly Trap does not) Groups like Puzzler could be all stuffed under the Puzzler page. (The Axiom Nexus Renegades, I'd cheat and say keep them on their own pages since ''these'' are meant to be Transformers in-universe.) --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 18:49, 18 October 2015 (GMT)

:Most of the Gobots described by RR are getting more than one note name mentions. History, alt-modes, personality, the works. I wouldn't just conglomerate them all together. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 13:59, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:However, I wouldn't be opposed to consolidating articles like Puzzler, since he's practically a drone, and the Dread Launchers and Secret Riders, since all of them share history. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 14:07, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::I think making a list page is better than having numerous pages with short texts.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 14:15, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::If we don't do them all, combining Puzzler, Launchers,and Riders is a good idea anyway.[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 19:18, 18 October 2015 (GMT)

:Proof-of-concept page for if we want to list 'em up: put it under fiction (so that's easier to find), put the main Gobotron and the in-universe TFs up top, and stick the details of the minors under that. tfwiki.net/mediawiki/index.php?title=Renegade&oldid=1016174 [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 19:20, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
::I've been doing most of the Renegade write-ups and most of them seem to be more than just name drops. Generally we get a name, a personality, an alt mode, and often an adventure. That's easily enough for an article. For the exceptions, like Puzzler, a single overarching page isn't a bad idea, but maybe not a necessary idea. The information on the Guardians is much more sparse, and having big lists for most of them could probably work. I haven't been writing them up due to how little there is on most of them.
::I am not sure where the idea comes from that having eighty small articles is a bad thing, though. The Wiki has always erred on the side of inclusiveness, which leads to pages like [[Spike's booty call]] and [[Moe]] and [[DeForest High]], things which are also one or two line articles about people and concepts that only appear in one source. I'm not sure why this is any different. If anything, there's way more interest in the GoBot material, as evidenced by how many people are asking questions about the Renegades and how many likes and shares those pages are getting.
::I'm also seeing, both in this thread and in the thread linked to, lots of interest in wikiing up the entire "Challenge of the Gobots" cartoon. McFeely, Khajidha, Saix, Sorenson, originally, and now Primestar and Gearshift all seem to be in favor. On the other side, Walky, M Sipher, Thylacine. It seems odd to me that, with the momentum apparently leaning 2:1 towards documenting all of "Challenge of the Gobots", we're talking about curtailing the bits and bobs that are definitely for sure Transformers canon. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 15:49, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::Logistical question: Do enough people have the GoBots DVD (or, cough, other sources) to write them up? (We ''are'' still lagging in fleshed out UT character pages, after all, and I think more people own those shows). -- [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 19:20, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
::::Well, episodes are on the internet.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 16:01, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::Episodes aren't licensed by Hasbro, so we cannot write them up and place them here. Ever.
:::::Giggidy: this is different from the silly jokes you refer to because at least those jokes are contained within licensed Transformers material. The GoBots AS PEOPLE REMEMBER THEM - the cartoons, characters, and toys - were never released under a Hasbro license, except for a tiny minority of exceptions in text stories. Even IF we settled for allowing independent articles for everything AVP said, it could never, ever contain any material more than that, because Hasbro didn't publish it and doesn't own it.
:::::All in all I am extremely disappointed by the... I guess, poor sportsmanship, pettiness, and entitlement... of the pro-inclusion side. This has been rehashed and reargued and relitigated year after year after year after year with very clear reasons why they do not belong, and for some reason people think none of that matters because GoBots were just cool! Well, Samhain and the Bogey Man from the DIC Ghostbusters cartoon were just cool and we've got the Ghostbusters in here as an in-joke, but we don't freaking add in Samhain the demon from a DIC cartoon through overeager bootstrapping. We also don't add in the very awesome and well-loved Dark Phoenix by extrapolation just because the Allspark Almanac mentioned an M'kraan Crystal.
:::::The MOST that could EVER be included about any of these GoBots is the stuff AVP writes, because at least that IS put out by Hasbro. I and quite a few others think that even that much material isn't much at all and since it's coming in a rapidfire slew for a lot of characters I think a list format collection is worth discussing. If a lot of people really really really disagree, then I could rationally grasp the argument that through the loophole that has been cheated into existence they have grounds on which to disagree and the articles containing the AVP material could hypothetically each stand on their own. But that's ALL that can go there. Only AVP. No cartoon, nothing else. And even that should not be taken for granted by the pro-inclusion side. They really have to sell their case, because from here it's STILL way too heavily predicated upon "oh-come-ON!"-ism. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 16:18, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::This isn't about winning arguments from years ago-most of us weren't even signed up when the AAII came out and everybody got into a whole mess over that. Many of us honestly think that documenting the series is something that we should do and within the jurisdiction. You can disagree with putting it up on the wiki, but don't just throw about terms like "pettiness" and "entitlement" cause you don't like the opposing sides argument or the fiction causing it in the first place. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 16:46, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::I would suggest Hasbro's ownership or non-ownership is irrelevant. We document many things not owned by Hasbro but merely associated with them, including the entire Japanese franchise (owned by TakaraTomy) and the entire film franchise (owned and copyrighted by Paramount, with only the Transformers elements used under license from Hasbro). --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:50, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Ownership by TakTom is just as legitimate as ownership by Hasbro, and licensing is just as legitimate as ownership. Things that are neither owned nor licensed by a company that actually produces real Transformers, such as a Hanna-Barbera cartoon, are not legitimate for inclusion. Otherwise we'll be throwing in fanfic and third-party toys and Family Guy episodes with TF "appearances." --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 17:04, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::There is a possible justification for their inclusion that would still bar those other things. We could decide that having had the GoBots declared to actually be TFs in a multiversal sense means that any material that was officially produced about them is now open for inclusion (the fact that it was officially produced under the auspices of Tonka would be a mere detail). This would not open the floodgates for fanfic, 3rd party materials or Family Guy. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 17:47, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::That concept has been decided-''against'', here, many times. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:19, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::Saying that we've voted against something in the past is not a strong argument for why we should vote against it now. Things change, the population of editors change, our understanding of the material changes. Gay marriage was illegal, now it's legal. I'm not saying you're stomping on my civil liberties, but you really need a more compelling argument than "we've said no before." Besides, you're the one who jumpstarted this conversation.
:::::::::::My point with Paramount was that there are elements that we document fully that aren't owned by Hasbro. They're owned by another corporation, and are used adjacent to Hasbro material. Hasbro doesn't own, say, Seymour Simmons. Paramount does. But we document him because he's a Transformers character. Likewise, Hasbro doesn't own some elements of Challenge of the Gobots, Hanna-Barbara does. But Kenner did license certain elements to Hanna-Barbara to make the GoBots cartoon, and Kenner is now Hasbro. Effectively it's the same situation legally. We do the same thing with other crossovers, like [[DreamMix TV World Fighters]] or the [[Avengers]] book.
:::::::::::And even if it wasn't, our decisions about what's in scope and what isn't is just that, our decision. It's reached by consensus, after reasoned debate. If the consensus is that Gobots is close enough, passes the squint test, we certainly could choose to include it. You're acting as if your statments are akin to "it's obvious that water is wet", a fact, when in fact they're closer to "marriage has always been defined as being between a man and a woman," a social convention. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 18:35, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::I just saw this in the morass of text, and '''''fuck you''''' for equating "not including GoBots cartoon" with "ban gay marriage". REALLY tempted to drop a ban on you right now for that little act of vileness. Holy fucking shit. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:53, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::I am not purporting to cite stone tablets from a thousand years ago - I am referring back to ''the conversation FOUR MONTHS AGO directly above this one.'' Your reference to DreamMix proves my point perfectly: we include things that had an official Transformers creator stamp at time of publication, like Simon Belmondo, and NOT ancillary same-universe stuff that DID NOT, like Sypha Belnades. Ditto for Avenger characters that never had the stamp like the Brothers Grimm or whatever. We don't get to enjoy our way past the clear concept of who really owned and licensed what and when. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:55, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::So we've got the two positions:
::::::::::::a) GoBots the cartoon is not Hasbro licensed or involved in any way; we should only properly cover GB stuff in Hasbro-approved stuff like Fun Publications, AVP, comic homages etc
::::::::::::b) Approved stuff has now made so many GoBots nods and explicit references to the show (all the way back [[Games of Deception|to 2007]] and almost [[G1_GoBots|2004]]) that this is no longer a big jump but a natural thing to do.
::::::::::::without much budging. We could put it up to an editor vote? --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 18:49, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
::::::::::::It might be a bit off topic, but are you sure about Simmons? Hasbro put out a Human Alliance toy with Agent Simmons. I don't have the box and didn't read all the fine print, but the front of the box has "Agent Simmons™" next to a Hasbro logo. One movieverse character that might be wholly affiliated with paramount and not Hasbro might be [[Bendy-Bus Prime]]. - [[User:Gimmick|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick|talk]]) 19:00, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::We include stuff that includes Transformers even without an official Transformers stamp, like [[Unfoldings!]]. And the conversation four months ago looks like it was 4 in favor, 3 against, so it's not really a great argument for you. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:10, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::How in the world can you imagine an issue of the GIJoe comic starring Transformers to NOT BE official licensed product? --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:24, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::I didn't say that it wasn't licensed. I said it didn't have a Transformers stamp. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:39, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::Also by my count of the last conversation it was 2 in favor, 4 against, 1 seemingly not strongly decided, and 1 recusal due to professional conflict of interest. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:50, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::My count: McFeely, Khajidha, Saix, Sorenson, for, Walky, M Sipher, Thylacine against. Sorenson's position was clear. And M Sipher also worked professional on GoBots, so if we're discounting Sorenson, we should probably discount Sipher as well. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:22, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::Unfoldings is Hasbro-stamped though, and we don't describe much of the Joe plot.
::::::::::::::Either way, if it was that close a call last time, should we just aye or nay it?--[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 00:14, 19 October 2015 (GMT)
:::::::::::::::It's been like four hours. This is a big decision and should have at least 2-3 days debate. Honestly, I haven't even decided how I feel, I just think Thy's arguments are pretty weak. That doesn't mean there aren't some strong ones. Let's not go calling for votes just yet. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:18, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::[[Help:Official info]]: the first sentence under "What constitutes official information?" seems relevant here. There is no way anything included in the movies is anything less than relevant to this wiki. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 19:26, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
'''"Simply put, anything coming either directly or indirectly from Hasbro and/or TakaraTomy, or from other official parties such as (currently) IDW Publishing, Paramount Pictures, Fun Publications or other companies officially involved with the Transformers brand."'''
:::::::::::::Right. And since Kenner is wholly owned by Hasbro, then despite being owned by Hanna-Barbara, GoBots was (retroactively) coming directly from Hasbro as much as the movies are. Then the only question becomes is GoBots a Transformers subline. Hasbro and FunPub seem to feel that it is, and have been using the [[Gobots|name]] [[G1 GoBots|and]][[Ask Vector Prime|concepts]] [[Go-Bot (G2)|for]] [[Withered Hope|decades]].--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:39, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::The key - and wrong - word being "retroactively." Takara's Diaclones became Transformers, and there are occasional Diaclone references we catalog. But we do not catalog 1970s-80s pre-Transformer content as anything beyond curiosities and footnotes; they don't get their box-back name-dropped characters and events covered here; in fact the "Cymond" content we have is new, not vintage. The same goes for Macross and Beetras and Brave as well. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:57, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::Also, I feel that I should point out that some members of the Wiki are at TFCon at the moment and unable to take part in this discussion. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 20:05, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Another excellent reason not to rush into any hasty votes.--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:16, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Well I'm back and guess what? Fuck individual articles. Stuff them all into a single "Renegade" article. The idea of a ton of two-sentence articles from a singular source that is blatantly doing this to ramrod shit we have repeatedly and recently said "no" to remains goddamn stupid and counter-productive. There's better arguments for documenting everything G.I. Joe than GoBots, and we're not fucking doing that. MAKE A SEPARATE GOBOTS WIKI. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 20:29, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::Except since the whole thing's started, it's moved on from name drops to actually expanding the histories of the characters, which is why many are turning back to the idea of individual Gobot articles. There's plenty of G.I. Joes and Cobra members who do nothing of note in the series they appear in with the TFs, but the only consolidated one is the Dreadnoks since they share most of their appearances together, which could work for Puzzler and others like that. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:54, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::::Making the separate Go-Bots articles doesn't take away anything from the rest of the wiki. And if they're short articles, well, they are what they are. We have recorded the entirety of Transformers fiction covering their subject on one page, and that fiction is very sparse, but it is accurate, and faithful to the wiki's mission of documenting information. Beyond that though, I'd say I'd vote against merging in information about non-Hasbro/Takara/whatevs owned properties into the articles, such as the Go-Bots cartoon. A sister wiki seems like it would be the best idea, though I can't volunteer my services to completing it as of right now, as I'm pretty thoroughly engaged on other projects on THIS wiki. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:13, 18 October 2015 (EDT)

===Call for Vote===

It's been a week since this last came up and I know there are people still pissed that GoBots stuff is added at all, so can we pull the pin and decide? We all know the arguments by now. Whether we should reduce most of the existing GoBot pages or leave them (this seems to be all they're getting now Renegade Rhetoric's ended) is an important but I think separate issue to: include GoBots fiction in its entirety on this wiki or do not include anything but what comes out under Hasbro material. <br>
At this point I've swung round to being against adding ''Challenge'' material; it should have its own wiki, which could be created tomorrow if people wanted. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 01:19, 26 October 2015 (GMT)
:I vote for leaving the Go-Bot articles as we have them now. They're hardly "two-sentence articles" for the most part, and whether we personally like something or not hardly has bearing on its inclusion in the wiki. Lots of people hate [[The Beast Within]], but its here. And AVP has more people involved in its production, and more research put through it than that comic did. When there's going to be a Go-Bot's wiki, we'll link it in the articles like we do to other outside wikis. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:36, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
::I'm in favour of keeping the existing AVP, FunPub stuff too. Just draw the line there and all. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 01:40, 26 October 2015 (GMT)
:::By the way, thanks to all the editors who have been working hard to keep all the Guardians and Renegades articles updated! It's a big help, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who appreciates it greatly. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:44, 25 October 2015 (EDT)

I've been thinking on this and, despite the relatively weak arguments against including ''Challenge'' material, something about including it feels off to me. I think intellectually the case for inclusion is very strong, but I think emotionally it'd probably feel better somewhere else. I'd agree with Charles about voting on against full-on-wikifying ''Challenge''. I've also been one of several people writing-up the GoBots articles and I'd strenuously disagree with deleting them. There is plenty of information on even the scantiest of them, including at the minimum names, factions, actions taken. The wiki is replete with articles for less. In the case of virtually every Renegade, we get at least two adventures, personality, and alt modes. Some Guardians get similar treatment. A few characters have visuals. It'd be silly to torch them.

As I said, I've been thinking on this and I think there may be a compromise solution between the two extremes, one of a big list due to a relative paucity of material, the other of wikifying everything from ''Challenge.'' I propose we only wiki up what's actually been said about the characters in a Transformers medium... but, to give the articles a little more oomph, we add in a main picture from ''Challenge'' if (and only if) there is no official Transformers image available. We've in the past shown a willingness to use these images in the notes section, so we'd only be bumping them up to the top. The copyright shouldn't be an issue, Challenge of the Gobots sports a Tonka copyright, and Tonka is wholly owned by Hasbro. This way we're still limiting to the "facts" of Transformers, but the articles will look and feel a little more robust. Only one image per character, and then only if they haven't gotten an official illustration. Thoughts?--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:45, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
:It is unacceptable to catalog "Challenge" here. It is not and never has been owned by a Transformers license-holder, and I can't fathom how this could be seen as a weak argument. Even if AVP made every GoBot article 20 pages long, the cartoon never had the stamp and so any form of systematic involvement should be out. If that means a whole slew of articles with no main images, then that is the price for creating so many individual articles instead of a list. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 21:55, 25 October 2015 (EDT)

http://machinerobo.wikia.com/wiki/Gobots

Have fun. --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] ([[User talk:Monzo|talk]]) 21:57, 25 October 2015 (EDT)

I feel like everyone's forgetting that even before AVP came into play, we had images from COTG on the wiki-Cy-Kill, the E-Hobby pack, Doctor Braxis, all in the notes section. The ones that didn't, I think nobody just felt like adding them. Fracture had Crasher's image in her notes section, and Deadlift had Spoons. So, yes, as long as they're in the notes section, with the images having all the copyright information. they'll probably be fine.

As for the wiki, I feel like a great many of us would rather have a sister site than some ad-filled mess of a page. My computer can't even handle going on it for a full minute without making me restart it. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 22:02, 25 October 2015 (EDT)

::What Thy said. This is not fucking up for debate. All the AVP end-run wank isn't going to change the FACT that large swaths of the GoBots IP are NOT owned by Hasbro, including the cartoon and toys said cartoon was derived from, the latter being owned by a direct competitor to both TF-owning companies. Frankly, I'm not even sure what, if anything, Hasbro DOES own from that IP, given they haven't used an overtly-GoBots Trademark in what, a decade? At best they MIGHT still own the name "GoBots", and I mean "own" in the sense that "nobody's bothered to challenge it so far". --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 22:15, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
:::My two cents is that despite my personal wish for all GoBots information to go on tfwiki, I say that as long as this wiki's rules are based on ''Transformers'' information (Hasbro, Takara, etc.-only), then the non-Hasbro owned CotG cartoon and such doesn't go on this wiki. In addition for convenience of navigation for ''GoBots'' fans, a sister wiki for ''GoBots'' would help for finding strictly ''GoBots'' information. Also, if we were to put CotG on the wiki, then on principle would we have to add in ''Robotix'' and all the Cymond Cluster franchises (''Brave'', ''Zoids'', etc) because they're in the ''Transformers'' multiverse?
:::With regards to ''GoBots'' material in ''Transformers'' works ("Withered Hope", Renegade Rhetoric, the hopefully upcoming "Spatiotemporal Challenges", etc.), I say that it goes on the wiki because it was distributed through a ''Transformers'' medium. And gets individual articles as does ''G.I. Joe'' or anything like that. And given the influence of ''GoBots'' on ''Transformers'', I agree that we make the exception to use limited CotG screencaps as the main pictures for ''GoBots'' characters on the wiki since we've been doing that for years in notes sections. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 01:42, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::::I vote against turning an EXCEPTION from like 4 pages into THE RULE on a hundred. "Challenge" screencaps should not be used as main pics on every single GoBot page. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 11:21, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::Reiterating this point: since the individual articles already exist it's probably just easier to leave them. However, I strongly suggest a ''total block on any further use of any unlicensed GoBots media appearances, of any kind. No more "Challenge," no more coloring books, not even as Notes, let alone as main pics.'' If folks want to leave up the small handful of longstanding examples we've got, eh. But since there a very real distinction between GoBots IP that is allowed / available and that which is not, we should draw a firm line, stick with it, and prevent any further inclusion of material that doesn't pass the usual rules of ownership / licensing. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:03, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::Oh, yes, nothing past the requirements should be included. I do agree with that. And I doubt we'll have any more Gobots related stuff for AVP. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:08, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Nays are having it so far. <br>
Giggidy's suggestion of putting screencaps in Notes for some pages seems like workable, unless there's acopyright issue o people will consider it thin-edging the wedge --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 08:04, 26 October 2015 (GMT)

I might've been in favour of it before, but I too have swung around to thinking the ''Challenge'' cartoon doesn't fall within our remit, as a piece of media that was not ever, and is still not, owned or licensed by a Transformers rights-holder. I'm not averse to using screencaps from the cartoon for pictures, though. I'd also say we can definitely merge the components of Puzzler and [[Monsterous]] into singular articles under the combiner names. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 06:49, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Much of the story information that AVP revealed about the GoBots characters is straightforward recapitulation of episodes of CotG. Do we need/want to put a note to that effect on the character pages? If so, should it just be something general like "events are adapted from the CotG cartoon" or should we note the episode titles for the different events? Should/could we link to Counter-X's episode summaries? --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 11:19, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:Most of the AVP stuff seems to be original. Where it's not I've been mentioning the episodes. Linking to Counter-X is a good idea. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 11:51, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Not sure how much of a vote is actually happening here, but me and my seven years worth of contributions vote '''No''' to ''Challenge'' or further GoBots additions to the Wiki. I would remove or block any individual pages for GoBots characters due to AVP. I already think tongue-in-cheek reference pages like [[Harrison Ford]] and [[Indiana Jones]] are silly, and probably contributed to the all-inclusive mentality people are fighting against here.

Has/Tak only owns a small fragment of GoBots IP. This Wiki, like ''every Wiki and every fan website on the internet'', exists at the sufferance of the property's owners. So while there are in-universe, multiversal collaborations between Marvel and DC continuity, you'll notice they still retain separate Wikis. It doesn't matter how closely related Transformers and GoBots become in the fictional realities -- real world reality has to govern this site.

Personally, I like the way the Marvel Wiki deals with Transformers -- each issue of the Marvel Comic contains an issue summary and cast list of the Marvel story, but the individual links on that page leave the Marvel wiki and go to the Transformers wiki (albeit the wrong TF Wiki, but they ''are'' on wikia). There is no [[Bluestreak (G1)]] page on the Marvel Database, even though he appeared in a Marvel Comic...just a link to a Transformers wiki that can actually cover the character in-depth as he deserves.

My recommendation is to reduce all of Renegades Rhetoric to a single story page, chronicling the many adventures and details provided by Has/Tak owned Axiom Nexus's Cy-Kill in one place, with no individual Guardian or Renegade pages on this wiki. If and when a functional Gobots Wiki is created, link the characters and concepts to THAT wiki where they can be covered in full. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 11:50, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:That tactic gets my vote. The "minor joke article" was a bit of harmless fun back when the franchise was much smaller, and we do '''''not''''' need to kowtow to it when something comes along to abuse the wiki's "system" to do something of dubious legal standing. (Really ought to look at how the GB page addresses Hasbro's "ownership" and elaborate.) For the quadzillionth time, our "rules" need to be flexible and typically ARE, but some people really just can't handle the idea of not treating everything with the same ironclad law at all times, no matter what affect it has on the overall wiki. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 14:41, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::I vote against it. Ultimately passing the buck off to another wiki isn't my idea of being informative. Where others would do that, we work hard to cover as much as what falls within our realm to cover. (Which, as it happens, does NOT include the COTG cartoon) That's what makes us stand out, in terms of both content and quality, above many other wikis out there. And I don't even think the franchise was ever even that small. That was just an illusion created by the fact that a lot of it had gone on undocumented for a long time. People need to stop making this out like its some kind of personal attack against us. What's it gonna harm that there are a few pages out there like the Harrison Ford page article? Are people gonna flip out and swear never to use our wiki again if they stumble across it? Are we going to be sneered at and ridiculed by some internet aristocracy because our "credibility" will be in doubt or something? I doubt its eating up much space in terms of bandwith or whatever. And no one will make any legal advance that has any ground here. Wikis wouldn't exist as a concept if that would regularly happen. Where is the harm? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 14:49, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:::That's a "nay" from me on cutting the small number of deliberately silly pages: we're long past the point that this wiki can say that's not on, unless we can say that it puts people off visiting. Casual fans and browsers seem to like them. -- [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:22, 26 October 2015 (GMT)
::::I wasn't actually advocating removing the Harrison Ford-style joke articles. (Not a fan of taking a whole article to say "Somebody mentioned [[Broadside (SG)]] once!", either.) Just pointing out pages like that contributed to the mind set of including articles for every person, place, or thing mentioned in Transformers fiction. The difference, of course, is that no one is trying to write up full articles about the ''Indiana Jones'' franchise here instead of making an Indy wiki. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 17:30, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::I wasn't either. I'd have thought the intention was clear: that the allowing of "harmless fun" articles of small references from when the franchise was VASTLY smaller was now being intentionally abused as an end-run around something that was decided against long ago for being not-HasTak-owned/licensed, one of the few pretty concrete rules we do have, and a fundamental one at that. Therefore I have no compunctions about making an exception to the general guideline (which we often have to do anyway) and compacting the information to a minimal number of pages... especially given the dubious nature of Hasbro's "ownership" of the GoBots IP (among other IPs mentioned in certain sources). --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:32, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

I actually expected more arguments for adding COTG material - check up the page and there ''have'' been more! Interest seems to have collapsed. -- [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:34, 26 October 2015 (GMT)

Honestly, at this point, most-if not all-articles for the Gobots have been created. I really don't think it would hurt anyone to just leave them up. We can argue about all the IP ownership all we want, but as Ascendron already pointed out, we have other articles that don't exactly line up with Hasbro-owned stuff either-Hasbro certainly didn't shout at IDW for including Transformers in a Crossover that also involved a rival company (Playmates and Ninja Turtles). [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 18:39, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:...Are you actually contending that IDW didn't run the scope and parameters of the giant crossover by Hasbro ''at all'' before doing it? That the crossover wasn't extensively okayed by every rightsholder involved beforehand? Because there's no other way to interpret what you just said, and that's a staggeringly stupid premise. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:49, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::Stay classy, M Sipher. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:06, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:::classy? is this the part of the thread where we equate gay marriage to gobots being on the transformers wiki --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 20:17, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::::I don't believe he was literally equating the two-he was using a recent example of rules changing from previous. Could he have used a better example? Yes, probably, but I understood what he was getting at, and I say this as someone who would be affected by said laws. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:44, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

::No, of course not. However, what I can say from experience: as our audience grew bigger, we did go back and make changes to the older gobots-involved answers. A couple model sheets here and there were deleted, because Warner Bros could have potentially sued Hasbro. I don't think we would've even gone through with Cy-Kill if it hadn't been without someone giving us the okay first-and even then, we made sure to delete an old avatar with Cy-Kill Hanna-Barbara face on it. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 18:55, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

I'd be okay with a separate wiki that we could just link to when GoBots came up. I mean, the GoBots franchise has been basically dead for thirty years outside of a few winks from Transformers (with the exception of the Cy-Kill thing that started this whole debate), so I don't think it'd ever get too out of hand. Obviously time, money, and access to the show are factors in this solution, so it might not be 100% viable. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 19:57, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Sorry if this is a really dumb question, but if the whole not-Hasbro IP thing matters for this wiki, then what stops sites like the Machine Robo wikia from using any ''GoBots'' material at all? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 20:55, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:The rules of this web site have no relevance to any other wikis, and the Machine Robo wikia does indeed include GoBots material. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 22:12, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::I was debating with myself whether or not to make this post, but it's going to bug me if I don't. Here goes. Obviously, a lot of us have become pretty emotionally involved in this topic. People say hurtful and stupid things when emotions run high. But if you're going to debate with someone, its important to challenge their arguments, and not attack the debater themselves... Despite whatever slip-ups may happen. I don't really know any of you. I can't really call any of you friends, because I'm not involved in any forums, and I don't attend conventions... But I respect many people's work ethic here, especially since we're all volunteering our time for the wiki. For the information itself, I get it that people are getting upset that information is being "snuck in" as a deliberate attempt to get it documented on the wiki. But if someone else got the job of getting to create fiction related to the Transformers brand, and used it as they saw fit, well I'm hardly in a position to debate that. They get to do stuff I never will, and as an adult, I have to concede to such defeats. Ultimately, it comes down to this: I believe that, for the most part, keeping the information on separate pages as they are currently is the best and most informative way to share it with whoever chooses to browse our wiki. (Some of the combiner components can be combined, as their importance relates wholly to the fact that they're components to a more important character). If anyone is able to prove me wrong by presenting even a crude mock-up that shows a better way of accomplishing that task, I will gladly change my stance on the issue. But we can do that by being civil and respectful. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 04:40, 27 October 2015 (EDT)

Bottom line, GoBots shouldn't be treated any differently, and certainly not any ''better'', than G.I. Joe on this Wiki. The Joes are a fully owned Hasbro franchise with decades of interactive history with the Transformers brand, BUT...all the images of Snake Eyes or Cobra Commander on the TF Wiki are from TF stuff, not from the Sunbow cartoon that was not connected to ''Transformers''. No one is trying to explain [[Snake-Eyes]]' Vietnam origins in his Notes section, unlike the [[Doctor Braxis]] Notes section stuffed with COTG references. Because people understand that if you want to read about G.I. Joe, you go to a G.I. Joe website...which this isn't. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 13:02, 27 October 2015 (EDT)

====Vote Results====
It's been more than 24 hours with no movement one way or the other, and even then, the stuff from yesterday seems like rehashing old arguments. Is now a fair time to tally? The voting is complicated because there are multiple proposals on the table.

*Proposal: '''Complete cataloging of "''Challenge of the Gobots''"'''
**Supporters: Khajidha

*Proposal: '''Condensing all Ask Vector Prime GoBots pages down to just one or two master pages, probably ''Guardians'' and ''Renegades'' or ''Renegade Rhetoric'''''
**Supporters: Xaaron, M Sipher

*Proposal: '''Expand coverage of Ask Vector Prime GoBots to include "''Challenge of the Gobots''" screen captures'''
**Supporters: Giggidy, Chris McFeely, Escargon, Charles RB, S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47, Khajidha, tentative Riptide

*Proposal: '''Expand coverage of Ask Vector Prime GoBots to include link to Counter-X website'''
**Supporters: Khajidha, Giggidy, Riptide, Saix

*Proposal: '''Treat Renegade Rhetoric like any other source, no condensation but also no expansion such as screen captures'''
**Supporters: Thylacine 2000

*Proposal: '''Pics from outside media goes in the notes section on character pages. Some Go-Bots pics can go there, otherwise wait until Transformers media includes original art of these characters.'''
**Supporters: Ascendron

I ''think'' I got everyone's position represented. Grum, I'm not really sure which camp you fell into. Regardless, it's clear that there's a solid majority in favor of documenting everything from Ask Vector Prime fully, with exceptions when it's sensible to do so such as with Puzzler and Monsterous. The good news is that this is exactly the current state of the wiki. No further action is required. Though it's ironic and a little sad that it took so much acrimony and name calling to get to the point of doing nothing different than we are now.

I'm less confident declaring victory on the screen capture question. M Sipher, Thylacine 2000, and Xaaron have all made their position against clear, as have the five supporters. I'd be curious to hear from <s>Khajidha, Ascendron, and</s> Grum on that issue before we go expanding them. I'm not sure if their silence indicates indifference, lack of awareness, or simply opposition to that proposal. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 15:43, 28 October 2015 (EDT)

:Didn't say anything until now since I didn't really have anything new to add, but I would vote for Counter-X and... maaaaaybe screencaps, but I'm indecisive on that one. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 15:53, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:: I'm divided about the screencaps... My gut instinct says that it would be a good addition to the pages... But I almost would feel, I dunno, hypocritical giving my full support to their inclusion, seeing as I'm usually very steadfast in my stance of only including stuff that's official. I suppose I can justify it to myself, as their inclusion would do more good than harm as far as how informative they would make the articles... Let's just not go overboard with it? One pic for each guy, maybe less if a single picture does a good job of showcasing multiple characters? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:31, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:::Yes, that was my original proposal. One and only one, less where possible. Couldn't agree more. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:42, 28 October 2015 (EDT)

:Actually, I'm in favor of complete GoBots coverage, but have bowed to the overwhelming opposition on that score. TOTALLY opposed to the wholesale reduction approach. Favor screen caps (but expect that not to come about). Favor Counter-X links. I would prefer that the combiner members have their own pages, but the limited information available currently makes the redirection to the combined form page at least as viable a solution.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 16:30, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:If we do include these screencaps, I would also like to request that we make it explicitly clear that they are not owned by Hasbro, and are not official Transformers images on the image's page itself. I was almost tempted to say in their captions on the characters' pages, but even I think that's a bit too extreme. So long as someone can learn quickly that the images do not come from an actual Transformers source if they make the effort of looking up the image's information. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:44, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
For full coverage on GoBots as given in any Transformers media. Counter-X links seem like a no-brainer. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 17:46, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:I said on Oct.26, 19:03, that it would probably at this point be best to leave all the articles up as they are. So if the only issue actually up for decision now is whether to include COTG screenshots, then I firmly vote against that, and see it as sufficiently against our rules of documenting official HasTak material that I'm not entirely sure a vote is even appropriate. We agree on AVP - well AVP itself says COTG screenshots aren't HasTak property and couldn't be used, hence why they themselves took down the first Cy-Kill picture. I think people should be satisfied with what they got. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:49, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
::Sorry, I missed that. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:00, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:::It's true that it's not in line with our policy entirely, but it would be nice for people reading the pages access to an image on the page, just so that they don't have to go hop over to google or whatever other website to see a visual representation of them. That's my main reasoning behind supporting this idea despite not being 100% behind it. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:19, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
::::At first, I think we could include Gobots cartoon here but now I changed my thoughts. They are not owned by Hasbro. But I wonder if Hasbro buys the rights to the cartoon, can we include the cartoon on this wiki then? I'm just curious.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 07:12, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::I'd still say no because it's not ''Transformers''. Like I said with ''G.I.Joe'', we don't use images of Joes or Cobras from their 80's cartoon -- only from Transformers-related crossover media. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 10:34, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::<<<<<Not mentioning the Joe franchise character that actually has a non-TF related main pic....>>>>> --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 13:58, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::Well we've got ''Transformers''-branded visuals for reference for ''G.I. Joe'' characters. Less so for ''GoBots'' characters. Would it not be prudent to have visual points of reference for the GoBots who have appeared in ''Transformers'' fiction? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 14:25, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::It absolutely would. But we don't HAVE visual points of reference for those GoBots from Transformers fiction. We would have to take images from other fiction/mediums. And if we did it for GoBots, why not add some pictures for [[Jem]], the Inhumanoids' [[Earth Corps]], or the [[Darkling Lord]]s? The aforementioned [[Harrison Ford]] and [[Indiana Jones]] pages don't have visual references either, for that matter. The [[Fantastic Four]] could probably use a better visual reference than that cropped cover border, so...
::::::::Do you see how this snowballs out of control? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 16:08, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::My initial suggestion of just putting a picture in the note section is still out there, by the way. I kinda dropped it because no one really seemed on board... But I figured if we have the leeway to put up pics outside of Transformers fiction there, like we did for the [[Beast (G1)|Beast]], and for that matter, [[Cy-Kill (GoBots)|Cy-kill]], we could just do the same for all the Go-Bots characters. I know it's kinda seem like a silly game of working our way through loopholes, but it still is what I would personally prefer... Best of both worlds kind of thing. We still get a visual representation of the character in the article itself, most articles are short enough that the picture would be apparent immediately, but we'd still be sticking to our policy of only using official pictures in the body of the article. The picture is there as an aside, an addition to a note of "by the way, this guy is from this cartoon not owned by Hasbro." Like, look at the [[Night Ranger]] article. That's a great article right there! All the Go-Bots articles should be formatted like that. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:21, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::That Night Ranger article actually turns me off the idea of putting pictures in the notes section. There's a huge unsightly gap of white space there between the external links section and the box with the categories in it. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 17:02, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::But that's only because that picture is a character model, which is taller than it is wide. Screencaps are wider than they are tall, and wouldn't create nearly as much whitespace! And we could do what we did with the [[Zebediah Braxis]] article, where we go in a bit of a brief overview of the character's role in the cartoon/ "Made-up Guy filled the role of the impressionable young kid-appeal character in the Go-Bots cartoon, similar as how Bumblebee did in the original Transformers cartoon." Something like that. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:07, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::...Which goes right back to doing what we were complaining about in the first place, which is detailing COTG on the TFWiki! This is how quickly it gets out of control. "Well, we're not allowed to cover ''Challenge of the GoBots'', but these pages would look nicer with some images. Okay, we're allowed to put one image in the Notes section as a visual reference, but now it looks unsightly so we'll add some details about COTG to justify having the pictures. Okay, well, we're already talking about COTG in the Notes now, so..."
:::::::::::: - Covering the GoBots material produced under the Transformers franchise...Yes.
:::::::::::: - Adding non-TF GoBots material so that the TF GoBots pages look better...No. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 17:24, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::I think it looking "unsightly" is really a minor problem. And I didn't mean covering their every appearance. More along the lines of a blip of information. I'm sure a few characters could have more notes that would be informative and interesting to "pad out" the note section if the white space is that big of an issue, (which I don't think it is... Ugly, maybe, but I'd rather have an article that is "unsightly" than uninformative or goes against the wiki's rules.) Stuff like "he was also voiced by this guy who voiced this transformers character" or "this Transformers character is an homage to him," if stuff like that applies. You know, things that we already do for other character pages anyways. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:33, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Honestly the more the argument for adding in '''hundreds''' of unlicensed, non-TF images comes to hinge desperately on "You did it 5 years ago for Dr. Braxis and 8 years ago for Cobra Commander!", the more it starts to be an argument for deleting those pictures from Dr. Braxis and Cobra Commander. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:12, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::It's not like there's a shortage of CC images from TF fiction. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 04:04, 30 October 2015 (EDT)

Just to note here, with all the comparisons being made to our handling of ''G.I. Joe'', we've ''always'' treated the Joes with more leeway than we have, say, Spider-Man or Godzilla. A ''lot'' of our Joe articles include real names and factoids taken from filecards and such, and yes, even in one isolated instance a piece of art that's not from a TF source, because there was no point to the "wilful ignorance" gag, since it wasn't ''funny'' - everyone knows who Spider-Man and Godzilla are, but nobody knows who [[Sci-Fi|Seymour P. Fine]] is. There's no need for such wilful ignorance on Go-Bots either, given how repeatedly tied-in to Transformers it has become - it's not a [[Simon Belmondo]] or a [[Solid Snake]], it's as much part of the Transformers "family" now as Joe is, even if its situation is a bit thornier. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 17:47, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:If I could make another suggestion. Could we maybe forestall this discussion until after AVP has wrapped up? It is what kicked off this whole discussion. I don't want to "encourage" the feature to "spam" a whole bunch of Gobots screencaps... But it has already brought in a little bit of artwork for Go-Bots articles anyways, and with both VP's return to the storyline, and contact having been made to a Gargent Universe recently, any number of things could happen to influence this discussion one way or another, or even render it moot. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 18:06, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::Unless Hasbro buys Bandai and/or Hanna-Barbera, nothing in AVP could change that we're really not allowed to have systematic coverage of Challenge (and that includes screencaps on ~100 articles) here. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:08, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::We're allowed to cover whatever we decide is in scope. We have no affiliation with Hasbro. The fact that the copyright notice on the episodes themselves gives ownership to Tonka, a Hasbro subsidiary, is a bonus. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:20, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::AVP already HAS posted screencaps that were are using... Not to mention some original art of Cy-kill. It's a longshot, but it's already happened once. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:22, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::I actually don't like using most of those screencaps - they WEREN'T posted by AVP, they were posted by dickish users trying to game the system, and were only ''acknowledged'' by Cy-Kill. Further, a quick look back at the FB page suggests the question threads they were posted in were deleted. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 19:28, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::Just checked, they're still there. However, I wouldn't use them outside the Src page. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:37, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::Hmm... Should we use the pics AVP deleted outside of source pages at all? Thinking about the Cy-Kill profile pic. Not like we don't have another one to replace it with. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:43, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Escargon is correct, we haven't deleted anything recently. Chris is also correct, you haven't seen us post screen captures from Challenge in the pages of Ask Vector Prime. We have acknowledged art and captures that others have posted. Also, regarding this: "Could we maybe forestall this discussion until after AVP has wrapped up?", it might be a long wait. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 19:47, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::I hadn't realized that AVP hadn't posted those pics themselves (not gotten to that point yet while working through it in my sandbox. In light of this, I've changed my stance, and changed up there earlier in this thread. I'm now going to stay out of this conversation, since I want to dedicate my energies to other stuff for the time being. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:54, 29 October 2015 (EDT)

With no activity on this page for 3 days, I think we can comfortably assess the results. It looks like the vote was better than 2:1 in favor of including Challenge of the GoBots screen captures on the pages, but a healthy caution against overuse. One and only one image per page, and only when official images are not available.

I've also done some homework into the copyright status and it would appear that Warner Bros. is still acknowledging Hasbro's copyright claim. Each '''Challenge of the Gobots''' box set and disk is marked with text to the effect of "GOBOTS and all related characters and elements are trademarks of and (C) [[Hasbro]] Inc." The only thing Hanna-Barbera lays claim to is the actual compilation of the DVDs, and even that is in conjunction with Hasbro: "Program Compilation (C) Hanna-Barbera and Hasbro Inc." The DVD packaging, however, is off-limits. "Package Design (C) Hanna-Barbera and and Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc." The episodes themselves give copyright exclusively to [[Tonka]]. Hopefully this reassures some of Xaaron's concerns, which seemed more legal than philosophical. There are links to photos of the copyright notices on my user page. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 01:42, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Or maybe with 3 days of inactivity on this page, we can consider the matter tabled, what with how time after time the more people talk about it and actually listen to counterpoints the more they realize it's a bad idea and (as we see above) come to change their minds to be against it. If the character and animation likenesses are off-limits even to AVP in the last few days, that should give pause. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 07:05, 3 November 2015 (EST)

*WHAT AM I ARGUING AGAINST AND IS ANGER AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE?!?
SRSLY, though? If some user's posted screencaps make those screencaps TF canon - wouldn't the poster themselves also become canon? Wouldn't Facebook become canon?
Draw the damn line, people; we're never going to be a comprehensive GoBots source unless we fully document the toyline and the cartoon. That ain't happening, not on this wiki at least. Accept that, and our mandate is back to recording only what's mentioned in official TF sources, even obnoxiously, willfully fanwankish ones like AVP alas. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 07:41, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Why not redraw the line to include all GoBots materials? No, it doesn't fit the current definition of our mandate but it is a logically consistent one. No, we would not then have to include all GIJoe, etc materials because there is a fundamental difference. GIJoe is in the same universe as Transformers, GoBots have been declared to be Transformers. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 08:34, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::You answer your own question: It isn't within our mandate and it's not logically consistent because we really then should put in all of GIJoe but we won't do GIJoe because reasons. This has always been a push to change the scope and inclusion criteria for this wiki due to arbitrary personal favoritism. It could only be indulged through this sort of arbitrary personal favoritism. That's not what standards are for. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 09:36, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::You missed my point. It's not within the current mandate, but we could redraw the line to make it our new mandate. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 10:08, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::I would further suggest that we've settled this issue, at least until [http://www.slashfilm.com/gobots-movie-hasbro/ something new comes along to change it], so this discussion becomes a distraction from a genuinely unsettled question. I'm not saying your arguments are invalid, Khajidha, I'm saying that everyone's heard them and there was a clear and convincing consensus against you. Sometimes when that happens, the adult and mature thing to do is concede that you're in the minority and move on. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:41, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::::Go. Make. A. GoBots. Wiki. "Problem" solved. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 19:31, 3 November 2015 (EST)

====Vote Results again for reals maybe? Focus only on Screencapture====

*Proposal: '''No Screen Captures'''
**Supporters: Xaaron, M Sipher, Thylacine 2000, Repowers, ItsWalky, Nevermore, Chris McFeely, Ascendron

*Proposal: '''Expand coverage of Ask Vector Prime GoBots to include '''limited''' "''Challenge of the Gobots''" screen captures, either in notes or main page'''
**Supporters: Giggidy, Escargon, S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47, Khajidha, Saix

*Proposal: '''Screen captures on a case by case basis'''
**Supporters: Abates, Charles RB, Riptide

This is where the current vote stands focusing entirely on the issue of screen captures. Repowers, I took the liberty of adding you to the no column. Please feel free to remove if you like. Thylacine 2000, I respect your passion but there is a difference between "my argument convinced one guy to change his proposal from screen captures in every main page section to screen captures in every notes sections" to "my argument is so good I've picked up supporters in droves." You've said lots and lots and lots of words on this subject and you're still losing 2:1.--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:02, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:And you've said some pretty outrageous and dishonest words on this topic, including immediately above this. At the very least, Ascendron, Escargon, and McFeely changed their positions to be against. This is the second time in a week that you have just happened to get the results wrong in a way that just happens to benefit your side. It is really depressing, though no doubt I only feel that way because I'm a violent gaybasher or however you choose to characterize this dispute. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 09:23, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:I think including one image for informative purposes in the notes section is fine—just as a "this is what this character looks like". This isn't what I want, but I feel like it's a fair enough compromise. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 09:17, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::I don't think I have misrepresented their positions, but if I do I apologize. Ascendron said he was moving to notes. McFeely came out in support of the screen capture proposal but didn't like the current way screen captures posted in the AVP comments and acknowledged by Cy-Kill were handled. Not sure what you're talking about with Escargon. But, to do due diligence, I'll follow up with all three. And I am not, and have not, and hopefully will not attack your character in any way. Also, as far as I can tell, going over the edit history, if I got the first vote wrong it was because I conservatively underestimated support for my proposal. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:27, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::I only said my vote on including everything from Gobots probably shouldn't count since I worked on the thing. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 09:31, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::::Well, it would appear that an apology is in order. You, Thylacine, indeed had a better read on the vote than I. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:04, 4 November 2015 (EST)
:I'm in favour of CotG screencaps, but '''only''' in the notes. Main page inclusion is a step too far, I think, and would be more prone to "well we already do [x] why not include the whole thing". --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 11:00, 3 November 2015 (EST)
Point of order: since the inclusion of ''COTG'' screenshots is still a potential legal issue, and one of the votes in the '''No''' column is from [[User:ItsWalky|the guy who owns the Wiki]], is a democratic vote really the proper resolution for this matter? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 10:37, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Again, the DVDs (photos on my user page) recently released and still being distributed by Warner Bros. give copyright of everything Gobots to Hasbro, and gives the "program compilation" a shared copyright between Hasbro and Hanna-Barbera. But, this is ItsWalky's wiki. If he feels that a vote is out of order I will shut up and graciously concede defeat. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 10:42, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::I think the fact that AVP was not able to use screen caps from Challenge of the GoBots trumps any copyright notices on the DVD box sets, however in this case I don't think it's relevant to this Wiki being able to use them in the notes section of articles. We're talking about a bunch of articles about characters with very little fiction and no visual representation, so the question becomes a matter of "will including screencaps really make much of a difference to the information they contain?" I think screencaps make sense where a GoBots character has a visual representation like [[Bug Bite (GoBots)|Bug Bite]] and we want to compare what they looked like in GoBots fiction to what they looked like in Transformers fiction, but not so much where the character has no Transformers representation to begin with. In this case I think it's more effective to just include a link to a GoBots site which would give more information about the GoBots character as well as visual representation. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 15:04, 3 November 2015 (EST)

TL;DR. My comment: Full inclusion of HB GoBots. Yes. <span style="font-size:300%">Over my dead body.</span>--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore|talk]]) 13:59, 3 November 2015 (EST)

The "slippery slope" argument is winning me over. I'm still in favour of ''limited'' screencaps: the ones acknowledged by AVP, the model sheets and such for key people like Bug Bite, the original Cy-Kill profile (even if we scrap the rest I'd argue for this to come in under the same reason Cobra Commander's got that kick-the-dog one, i.e. it looks better). We're likely at the limits of limited already though. Who else could we reasonably add? --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:26, 3 November 2015 (GMT)
:My suggestion would be screencaps, at a maximum of one per page, for 1) those characters with major enough appearance in Transformers fiction (e.g. the e-Hobby GoBots and Cy-Kill, probably a few others), and 2) those with visuals acknowledged by Ask Vector Prime. Otherwise, links are fine. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 16:02, 3 November 2015 (EST)

Another three days with no activity, and I'm big enough to acknowledge that the momentum has shifted. I count 8 against screen captures, 5 in favor, and 3 in favor of limited. Basically a tie, and I think ties need to go to the more conservative, i.e. not my, position. As with article creation, the screen capture issue seems to go to no change from our current policy. A long and and acrimonious road to get to the point of no change. I apologize if my arguments along the way caused offense. Hopefully we can move on. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 08:49, 6 November 2015 (EST)
: Fair's fair -- you help me dispose of Nevermore's <span style="font-size:300%">dead body</span>, and we'll call everything even. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 09:06, 6 November 2015 (EST)

== Who's that <s>Pokemon</s> character? ==
<s>I'm going through posting pics up for [[Cybertron's Most Wanted]], but need you guys' help to identify some of these guys! '''[[:File:UnknownTransTechandRattrapTranstech-CMW.jpg|This is the first character]]''' I can't identify. (He is listed as the question mark in the number 7 slot of the featured characters section.) He's not [[Starscream (TransTech)]] as I initially thought. Starscream appears later in the issue, and is definitely visually distinct.</s> '''[[:File:UnknownoffworlderandWindblade-CMW.jpg|This is the second character]]''' I can't identify. (The green one, not Windblade, listed as the question mark at #23 in the featured characters section). Although there is a slight possibility that he's supposed to be a generic, I highly doubt it since every single other character on the page is a specific guy or gal. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 15:26, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:Maybe the first guy is just Starscream misdrawn? This post and picture from the Rook blog indicates so. [https://www.facebook.com/AxiomNewsRook/photos/pb.890548954322059.-2207520000.1439583294./906676859375935/?type=1&theater ] [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:17, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::Ah, well, if that post says so. That's also a much nicer version of the image I just uploaded... [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:37, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:::By the way, what about that dog-looking thing on the streets on page 1? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:45, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::That's just a [[turbofox]], I believe. Not an actual "character" per se. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:53, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::Actually, Jesse's said on the Allspark that it's meant to be the wolf Mini-Con from Classics. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 18:22, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::Shows what I know. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 18:27, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::: '''[[:File:Anotheruniodentifiedoffworlder-CMW.jpg|Here's another guy]]''' I can't identify. He's mostly obscured by text boxes, which makes it even harder. However, he's in the same panel as the other unidentified green guy, as well as the two [[Windblade (G1)|Windblades]]. He may or may not be a double to the other green offworlder, considering who else is in the panel. In any case, we're looking at the back of an orange head, big green shoulder kibble, with some yellow details on the arm from the looks of it. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:10, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::: '''[[:File:Offworlderprisoners-CMW.jpg|Here's another bunch]]'''. I Think the red guy's Ironhide? But the vents on the side of his head are throwing me off. The two bug guys at the bottom, I have no idea. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 22:39, 15 August 2015 (EDT)
::::: <s>'''[[:File:Unknownprisoninmate-CMW.jpg|And another]]'''. I'm assuming some of these guys are homages to non-Transformers franchises.</s> [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 23:42, 15 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::Hmm. The guy on the bottom left of the one with Hellbat looks like a Kamen Rider that Matt drew in Spotlight: Trailcutter. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:12, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::::Oh, yeah! The colour scheme between this one and "[[V3]]" are pretty different though. Is it patterned after another character of that franchise? That way I can give it a "nickname".[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 20:12, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Don't know much about it, sadly. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 23:05, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::That "unknown inmate" is totally based on Kamen Rider Amazon. -[[User:Ookalf|Ookalf]] ([[User talk:Ookalf|talk]]) 19:34, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
===AllSpark Almanac===
<s>So I noticed '''[[:File:Unknownrobocritter-AAII.jpg|this guy]]''' in the second AllSpark Almanac. I was not gonna bother with it, but then decided of anyone might recognize it as an actual character, and not just some generic critter. Mainly because, this is the AllSpark Almanac, and it has homages and Easter Eggs out the wazoo. If no one can think of anything though, I'll just assume it's a generic that's not noteworthy. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:43, 18 August 2015 (EDT)</s>
:Catillia, according to Forster's deviantart. Also a snake on that page is named something like 1412 or something like that. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 16:54, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
::Thanks, I looked it up, and he says he "stuck in" his real life snake (named 1812). I don't particularly feel that's worth including. If anyone feels otherwise, I can be persuaded to upload the picture and make the page, however. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:21, 18 August 2015 (EDT)

==Apocrypha and Vector Prime==
There have been a few parallel discussions about apocryphal works. [[Alignment]], [[Doomsday Redux!]], [[Bumblebee at Tyger Pax]]. User Grum went ahead and removed the Apocrypha template from Bumblebee at Tyger Pax, prompting a short discussion. I put forth the question on Doomsday Redux!, and by extension on the other unreleased Energon comics that scripts are available for, and got little response. Alignment had quite a robust debate when the AllSpark Almanac came out, but not much since then. All three have been declared to have happened by Vector Prime, and in their primary universes as opposed to in some splinter timeline. Is there value to keeping the Apocrypha template, versus just having a note detailing the unusual circumstance of the publication? It seems like something that should get a greater discussion than it's getting. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 00:05, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
:They're. Still. Fucking. Apocrypha. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 03:36, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
::Since Doomsday Redux was approved by Hasbro and declared to be canon even though it was unreleased, I think that one maybe merits a little more discussion. The others, not so much; even if they're canon from an in-universe perspective, they still aren't Hasbro-approved. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 05:07, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
:::A story that was officially commissioned and scheduled, then yanked because of licensee bankruptcy, should be listed as no different than a canceled toy. An explanatory note afterwards can be enough. But something that was never licensed cannot be licensed after-the-fact just through assertions and "oh, come on!"-ism. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 08:04, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
::::I tend to agree. I'd suggest that Vector Prime's statements be added to the notes section, and perhaps the stories be slotted into the appropriate position in the navigation track. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:23, 18 August 2015 (EDT)

== Galvatron II style linking ==

So I've noticed that there's been some disagreements on how to organize articles such as, say, Spychanger Prime or Balancing Act Prime. Perhaps we could implant a Galvatron II style system; link both in the main article, along with a suite. Also it could be used for the Thirteen and their Uniend selves, for the time being, I suppose. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:37, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:What if we did something like this for [[Screech (Generations)|Screech]] since he is 1 version of G1 Skids? Or [[Razorclaw (Universe)|Razorclaw]] since he's 1 version of Tigerhawk? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 19:51, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
::Quite honestly, I don't think I would have a problem with that. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:54, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:::Seems promising. Maybe sandbox one? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:39, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
::::Unfortunately, I couldn't make a sandbox to save a life. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:49, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::There are a couple of other characters that might also benefit from this - BW Megatron and Noble, Overlord and Gigatron maybe... I think it's probably worth looking into. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 14:17, 1 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::I've added a suite to the (hopefully non-controversial) example of [[Silverbolt (BW)|Silverbolt]] and [[Jetstorm (BM)|Jetstorm]]. What do we think? Does it work? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 04:06, 31 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::I like it. It's simple and elegant. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 08:50, 31 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::I find it pointless and cluttering. We don't slap "Galvatron" into Megatron's suite, despite better character continuity than Silverbolt and Jetstorm. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 09:04, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::::::Oh yeah, I forgot that time Galvatron got turned back into Megatron at the end of the series --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 12:16, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::::::::[[Megatron (G1)/Generation 1 cartoon continuity#The Battlestars manga and story pages|I guess you did?]] [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 13:23, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::::::::::Granted, but you're both stretching the definition of series and opening up a bit of a can of worms regarding where we draw the line at different "versions" of the same "character" anyway. G1 Galvatron and Megatron were treated separately mainly because the sheer volume of material for both meant it made sense for us to do it that way but all the times G1 Bumblebee became Goldbug (and sometimes went back again) are all covered on one page, as are UT Cyclonus/Snow Cat, Tidal Wave/Mirage, G1 Overlord/Gigatron, Hot Rod/Rodimus Prime and all the UT Megatrons and Galvatrons. Yet BW/BM Waspinator/Thrust, Rhinox/Tankor, Silverbolt/Jetstorm and Megatron/Noble are separate pages. That's a whole other debate and I don't particularly want to dredge up any of those cases as they've all been done to death a million times before (except for maybe Overlord/Gigatron, I feel there's a clear split that could be made there and linked this way) but I do think this as a good way of dealing with what we do have. It doesn't take up a lot of room and it would only apply to a handful of cases at best anyway. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 16:09, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::::::::::In the case of the Vehicon generals, that's because they're different characters that happen to use the same sparks as pre-established characters. The others are functionally "same guy, but with a new name". I thought that was clear. (Megatron as Noble is detailed on his page, so I dunno why you brought him up.) [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 01:53, 4 November 2015 (EST)
::::::Looks fine and dandy to me. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:34, 3 November 2015 (GMT)

==Notes and images==
I seem to remember that there was some clever way of adding notes so that they don't break onto a new line when up against a left-aligned image, but for the life of me I can't find it by searching. Can anyone hit me up with the codez? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 05:27, 17 September 2015 (EDT)

== Timelines fiction release order links ==

I have noticed that where it is so, a ''Timelines'' story's primary previous or next story arrow points to the BotCon comic if it has the closest release date. However, the primary previous and next story arrows on BotCon comics' pages always point to other BotCon comics because they actually have a "Volume" order to go with. It seems inappropriate to me a story point to another which is not also linked to it. So what do we do, for instance, with "[[Burning Bridges]]", the first non-Facebook ''Timelines'' story to come out after BotCon 2015's "[[Cybertron's Most Wanted]]" and "[[The Return of Blurr]]"? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 00:39, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
:I think the idea of putting all of the disparate Timlines stories in chronological order for the template is stupid. What exactly is gained there? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 12:43, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
::It was probably workable at some point, but it's long since lost any functionality, I think. We keep winding up with stories that have like three or four "previous" or "next" links. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 15:19, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
:::Right. It's excess that only exists to do stuff like link "[[Collections]]" to "[[Head Games]]" because... why? How does that really help readers? It really should just be limited to the specific media (script readings, etc.) and continuity (Wings Universe, etc.), not a grab-bag of random stories that just happen to be under the Timelines banner. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:29, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
::::Would anyone object if I went and removed all previous and next release order story links, leaving in only previous and next continuity story links? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 14:38, 1 October 2015 (EDT)

== Harmonic resonance ==

So throughout [[Ask Vector Prime]], the theme of "trans-dimensional harmonic resonance"/"quantum harmonic resonance" has come up as an in-universe explanation for most commonly used characters (i.e. the franchise tropes of Optimus Prime, Megatron, Grimlock, etc.), design re-use across continuity families (i.e. pre-Transformer toys which got recycled as Transformers toys), mistaken use of story elements which seemingly don't belong (i.e. ''Armada'' Beast Wars in "[[Fire in the Dark]]"), other things (i.e. RiD Unicron as a seemingly mundane Transformer who (not) coincidentally became a universe-destroying planet), etc. Do we want to make a page(s) about this and how should we handle it? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 21:23, 9 October 2015 (EDT)
:Same way anything else is handled? Create an article and document the things VP said about it? --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 21:25, 9 October 2015 (EDT)

== Online Transformers Games help request ==
So, I've recently been frustrated with the fact that many online games have been taken down, making it really hard to create articles for them. I've been doing well creating articles for them up to now, either finding copies of the games on other websites or cobbling together articles by watching play-throughs on Youtube. However, I've hit upon my first real snag with "[[Transformers Prime: Beast Hunters Game]]." I can't find any footage of it whatsoever anywhere, and the game doesn't seem to load on the Hasbro or Hub website. I never played the game, so I can't create anything from memory either. Anyone has anything to help me out with this? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 22:29, 17 October 2015 (EDT)

== Repurposing vs Multi-family toys ==
Over on the discussion about [[Talk:Clampdown (RID)|Clampdown]], M Sipher raised an excellent point about how silly it is to not have the Clampdown [[Kreon]] on the Clampdown [[Transformers: Robots in Disguise (2015 franchise)|Robots in Disguise]] page. This dovetailed nicely with my own musings on the subject. Right now, technically, the way the wiki is organized if we wanted to have that toy on two pages we'd have to arbitrarily declare one Clampdown to be a [[repurposing]] of the other, which I find to be ridiculous. I had a discussion on one of the talk pages about removing the repurposing label from toys that were simply imported from one continuity family to another, only to be shot down.

As a compromise position, I've worked up a related idea: "multi-family toys". That is to say, a toy that seems to exist more-or-less unchanged across multiple families. This seems like a distinct idea from a straight-up repurpose. To me, at least, there seems to be a fundamental difference from someone like [[Dirge (Armada)|Armada Dirge]], which is a brand-new character based on a toy with a different name and bio, to someone like [[Lockdown (G1)|IDW's Lockdown]]. Furthermore, [[Ask Vector Prime]] has formalized the idea that Hasbro's been running with, namely that a character can comfortably exist across multiple [[continuity family|continuity families]] and that this is no big deal.

This is my go at introducing the idea: [[User:Giggidy/Sandbox/Multi-Family Toys]]. Any feedback would be appreciated. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:34, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
:I agree with Kre-O but ROTF Lockdown figure didn't meant to be G1 Lockdown when it was produced. He meant to be Movie version of Lockdown. so G1 version is indeed a repurpose.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 10:01, 31 October 2015 (EDT)
:I like the idea of separating the concept of "Foo was repurposed as Foo" from that of "Foo was repurposed as Bar". I still think it would be better to have the Kre-O and various Iocus-cluster toys on their own pages while leaving only a heading and a link out from the pages of characters they are visually based upon.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 10:53, 31 October 2015 (EDT)
::I don't feel strongly one way or the other about Kre-O. I'm solidly on-board with the way the merchandise is currently handled and disagree with making Iocus-cluster pages for all the merch. I can see how it's an intellectually coherent position to want to do so... but I don't like it. If we do decide to keep merchandise on its own page as its own character as well as on the local pages, then I'd consider it a [[User:Giggidy/Sandbox/Multi-Family Toys|Multi-Family Toy]]. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:28, 31 October 2015 (EDT)

== Multiversal singularities ==

Now that AVP on Facebook has publicly acknowledged the splintering of singularities (albeit via a now semi-unaware TransTech Vector Prime), should we merge all the Thirteen's mainstream multiverse and Aligned pages together? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 14:59, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:Having waited to see how it all shook out, yes, I still stand by [[Talk:Thirteen#Revisiting_yet_again|the original suggestion I made a couple of months ago]], which is to merge the individual incarnations of the Thirteen's pages into singular ones (except for Alpha Trion and Aligned Optimus Prime), treating them more as concepts that will probably require "conceptual history" sections. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 15:04, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::What about the SG versions of Unicron and Primus? We typically give new pages to SG versions of characters, as per countless previous discussions on separating out the SG versions of other characters from their positive polarity counterparts. Except, since it's Primus and Unicron we're talking about here, them being them and their SG versions being SG versions of them makes this a little fuzzy. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 15:20, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:::I completely disagree with Chris's proposal and would rather treat them like every other character, but my opinion doesn't mean much, so. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:40, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::I'm kind of torn on this. On one hand, splitting by continuity family will lead to pointless micro-articles like "Vector Prime (TransTech)", and don't even know how one would begin to deal with Fun Pub Nexus Prime. On the other, Aligned Megatronus really has very little to do with Dreamwave Fallen and ROTF Fallen and having them all on one page would seem antithetical to the goal of accessibility. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 16:33, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:::::I, too, am torn. I like keeping the Aligned stuff separate. Maybe just go case-by-case? Like, the Movie Fallen could probably be split from the Dreamwave guy, but I'm not sure Vector Prime (TransTech) is a thing that needs to exist. Do any other members of the Thirteen have a substantial amount of fiction to them?--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:48, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::::Maybe use suites? And like, point out that they were all at one point considered to be incarnations of The Same Dude. I wouldn't be opposed to merging most of the Aligned Thirteen, though. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 18:48, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:::::::Using suites does sound like a good idea, particularly for the SG versions of Primus and Unicron. It keeps them together with the main versions allowing them to be separated onto their own pages. I like it. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 19:26, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::::::Me too. Seems like a good compromise for the cases where we do decide to split. I still think we should avoid articles that are too short. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:29, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:::::::::Also if we utilize a suite, then we can keep main version(s) of guys like [[Primus]] or [[Unicron]] at their own namespace. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 19:55, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::::::::Suite's suit. We should do that. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:43, 3 November 2015 (EST)

Summary of the multiversal singularities:
*[[Unicron]] (G1, UT, Movie, Animated, Aligned, Kre-O, SG) — I think UT, Aligned, and SG can support their own pages; the others are minor versions based on G1.
*[[Primus]] (G1, UT, SG, Movie, GoBots, Aligned) — Only UT and SG really stand out.
*Prima ([[Prima (G1)|G1, Movie]], [[Prima (WFC)|Aligned]])
*Vector Prime ([[Vector Prime (Cybertron)|UT, Movie, TransTech]], [[Vector Prime (WFC)|Aligned]])
*Alpha Trion ([[Alpha Trion (G1)|G1]], [[Alpha Trion (RID)|RID]], [[Alpha Trion (Energon)|UT]], [[Alpha Trion (SG)|SG]], [[Alpha Trion (Animated)|Animated]], [[Alpha Trion (ROTF)|Movie]], [[Alpha Trion (WFC)|Aligned]], [[Alpha Trion (Kre-O)|Kre-O]])
*Solus Prime ([[Solus Prime (Prime)|Aligned]], [[Solus Prime (G1)|G1]])
*Alchemist Prime ([[Alchemist Prime (Prime)|Aligned]], [[Alchemist Prime (G1)|G1]])
*Nexus Prime ([[Nexus Prime (Classics)|G1?]], [[Nexus Prime (Prime)|Aligned]])
*Onyx Prime ([[Onyx Prime (Prime)|Aligned]], [[Onyx Prime (G1)|G1]])
*[[Amalgamous Prime]] (Aligned, G1 [sorta])
*Liege Maximo ([[Liege Maximo (G2)|G1, TransTech]], [[Liege Maximo (WFC)|Aligned]])
*Megatronus/The Fallen ([[The Fallen|G1, Movie]], [[Megatronus (WFC)|Aligned]]) — Movie could really, really stand to be split out.
*Optimus Prime ([[Optimus Prime (WFC)|lol]]) — lol
My feelings if we're going the "we don't want small pages" route. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 20:42, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:You know, another thought just crossed my mind. Why didn't we think of using a suite for the many versions of Sideways too, instead of turning his disambig page into his main page? --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 22:00, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::Because then we'd have to put the explanation of his whole deal on all the pages. I think that putting a suite on his pages isn't a bad idea, but I do like the set-up we have now. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 07:12, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Agree on splitting out Movie from the rest of the Fallen's page; SG and Aligned Unicron's are different enough, and with enough fiction in the latter's case, to get a-splitting. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:43, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::Movie Fallen should definitely split.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 14:12, 4 November 2015 (EST)
:I don't really think that UT Primus is that different from G1 Primus, or at least from the G1 Primuses of fiction that was contemporary of the time (Dreamwave, late 3H, early Fun Pub, etc.). Granted, back then was when the singularity concept was in full swing so UT Primus was viewed as the same dude as G1 Primus anyway, but I don't see anything in particular that would distinct UT Primus from 2002-2006 G1 Primus that much to separate him out. After all, the heavily Marvel G1-influenced Primus/Unicron/Thirteen backstory of that era of was attributed to both the G1 and UT versions of Primus via things like 2004's The Ultimate Book (G1 Primus), the Armada Fleer trading cards (UT Primus), and even Takara's "World of the Transformers" website that [[Talk:World of Transformers/Section5 src#SOURSE-2 － THE ONE & 13PROTTYPES －|told the backstory]] with [[:File:Original13.jpg|imagery of Armada Unicron, Cybertron Primus, and Cybertron Vector Prime (and War Within's '''''G1''''' The Fallen) among the Thirteen]]. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 02:46, 6 November 2015 (EST)

== Formatting of Year pages ==

So I noticed the pages for [[2007]] and [[2012]] are formatted VERY differently from any other Years' pages, being built out of subpages. As a result, the parent page ends up taking on any categories its subpages are tagged with even if they're not really applicable to the larger page (Toys, Media, Games, etc.), plus it creates an inconsistency with the rest of the Year articles. (Plus I'm not so sure this subdivision really makes the editing or upkeep process any easier). Should we move all the information to a single page like the other Year articles, or perhaps change the rest to match these two? -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 14:08, 4 November 2015 (EST)
:At one point we had all the year pages with separate subpages at one point, and then they got merged and then some of the pages got separated again. I'm not sure that there's any benefit to having subpages for each section. It just means the smaller pages come up pointlessly when you do a search or sometimes when you hit the random page link. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 14:41, 4 November 2015 (EST)
::Understood. I've gone in and moved all the 2007 and 2012 content (and [[2006]], which I guess I missed the first time) back to their main pages, and tagged the subpages with speedy deletion. If someone could take care of those, it'd be much appreciated. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 16:28, 4 November 2015 (EST)

== Why is Glyph not credited in the Character Roster list for the G1 episode 'Five Faces of Darkness part 4'? ==

She is an official retcon, no different than a bunch of other Botcon retcon characters (eg. Ion Storm), or 'Acid Storm' who was retconned by another official means.

Was her exclusion from the Character Roster done on purpose, or simply forgotten and needs updating?

Update: I've made a change to include Glyph on the 'Five Faces of Darkness part 4' Character Roster...but I do not have the information as to when she appeared, in relation to all the other characters. All the characters have a number beside them to indicate the numerical order they appeared in. So, does anyone know Glyph's number? {{unsigned|Zackmak}}

:1) Please sign your posts.
:2) Please don't make edits to fiction you have not personally watched or read, because of the very problems you suffered above. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 10:46, 23 November 2015 (EST)

Still getting used to how this works. My apologies for the newbie mistakes. Wondering though why even one of the many TFwiki administrators don't make the change? It seems like a no-brainer...but that's why I asked the initial question - to find out why she was left out of the 'Character Roster'--[[User:Zackmak|Zackmak]] ([[User talk:Zackmak|talk]]) 18:17, 28 November 2015 (EST)
:Because editing the wiki is not an automatic thing. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 18:33, 28 November 2015 (EST)

== Page names for planets ==

Some planets in ''Transformers'' with numbers in their names are variably parsed with the number in regular Hindu-Arabic numerals, Roman numerals, or in words. (i.e. [[Hydrus Four]]) When I search on the wiki, I generally think of Roman numerals by default, especially since ''Transformers'' is science fiction. Does anyone else think that we should put planets' pages in Roman numerals as long as such parsing is not overshadowed by different parsing? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 20:03, 20 November 2015 (EST)
: So, if I am reading your proposal correctly, you suggest that if there are two canonical parsing of the name of a planet, and one uses Roman numerals, that one should have primacy? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 22:16, 20 November 2015 (EST)
:: Correct. That is, as long as a different parsing is not more prominent. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 17:51, 22 November 2015 (EST)
:::I guess I don't see what that gets us. Mind you, I don't see any harm either, I'm just not sold. What are we doing now? Most prominent? First official text parsing? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 18:37, 22 November 2015 (EST)
::::I thought it would help navigability. Not sure what we're doing now, but I think it's first official text parsing. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 18:53, 22 November 2015 (EST)
:::::I guess you can put me down as a tentative yes. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:14, 22 November 2015 (EST)
:I think that seems unnecessary so long as there's a redirect in place, which there should be if the planet has been named with Roman numerals in fiction. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 20:24, 22 November 2015 (EST)

== Italics in headers for toy sections ==

I've noticed that most pages' toy sections don't italicize the toyline section name, but some do. Examples: in my memory, [[Optimus Prime (G1)/toys]] and [[Optimus Prime (WFC)/toys]] have never italicized their toyline name headers but the [[Brawn (G1)]] page currently does. Do we have a rule on this? If we do I haven't been able to find it. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 17:51, 22 November 2015 (EST)

== Proposal: Temporary Moratorium on AVP ==
After GoBots, after Ulchtar, I think we have decidedly reached a point where the act of editing the wiki according to the latest "official" information is getting in the way of wiki informativeness and quality standards. To be frank, the privilege of creating canonical material has been perverted for the sole purpose of changing this website. I propose a two-week cessation on adding any material to this site that appears on AVP or any of its upcoming iterations. I would like to see what discussions we have here, and how the pages are modified, when we're not lurching to the organ grinder's tune.

If people think this suggestion is totally out of line, by all means say so. If they agree, please say so as well. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:01, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:That's actually exactly what I was considering suggesting. This is all getting a little silly; I'd be more than happy with that, as it'd curb "to-the-wiki"-ism while not banning AVP content entirely for no real defensible reason. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 18:45, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:YES! So much yes! (with the sole exception being the archiving of AVP-and-its-ilk Facebook posts onto their respective archive pages). --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 18:48, 30 November 2015 (EST)
::<s>I'm not really sure what this is supposed to accomplish. I've never had a hard time ignoring the parts of something that annoy me or that I have no interest in. If a robust discussion on a minor character like Ulchtar bugs you so much, maybe you should take a two-week moratorium from editing the wiki. I vote no.</s> Fine. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:09, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:::Are you familiar with the expression "the straw that broke the camel's back"? Ulchtar isn't The Thing, but The Latest Thing In A Long Line Of Things. I say yes. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] ([[User talk:Andrusi|talk]]) 20:13, 30 November 2015 (EST)
Yes. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 19:51, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:I'm down, and let me add this to it: going forward we put stuff from AVP and its mutations on the same waiting period as all the other FP stuff [[Help:Coming_soon#Fun_Publications_Fan_Club_material|we've had basically forever]]. No, it's not part of the "paid content" blardeeblar. But maybe it'll help stem the blatant wiki-gaming going on, and also cut back on the amount of corrective/speculative editing, especially when they have to apologize/retcon/whatever something posted two days prior. Maybe trim it to two weeks rather than one month, but still. The immediate TO THE WIKI! needs to fucking ''stop''. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 19:58, 30 November 2015 (EST)
::Since Escargon brought this to my attention, I'm going to break my usual policy about commenting on my own work and vote '''yes'''. It won't kill anyone to wait a couple of weeks to edit this stuff, and may in fact improve the caliber of the questions we're getting. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 20:17, 30 November 2015 (EST)
Yes. In addition to the reasons mentioned, this should stop the back-and-forth occasionally seen of<BR>
1) AVP posts something.<BR>
2) Someone rushes to add it to the Wiki<BR>
3) Someone else disagrees with the interpretation of AVP<BR>
4) First someone goes back to AVP and asks for further clarification on the first post<BR>
5) AVP responds<BR>
6) Second someone is too busy arguing on the Wiki to check for updates<BR>
7) First someone does victory lap because official source confirmed their idea<BR>
8) Third someone stops by to say this is why they hate AVP.<BR>
We are all children of the internet. We like winning arguments. But being able to ask official sources ''in real time'' to contribute to internet arguments tends to escalate the arguments and the tensions underlying the arguments. New information comes in? Fine -- let's let it breathe for a while before deciding what to do with it. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 21:10, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:Regarding what I said above about updates made to the Facebook post archives being the sole exception to this, it has been suggested that those should have at least a one-day wait after each post is made on Facebook, which sounds reasonable. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 00:07, 1 December 2015 (EST)

I can get behind this. I've drawn attention to this resurgent "OMG TO THE WIKI" attitude while commenting on this problem before and putting a cap on it sounds good. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 08:06, 1 December 2015 (EST)

Since the idea of immediate-term write-ups is apparently problematic to a large number of editors, is there any reason to limit the 2 week cooling off period to just the FP material? Given concerns about spoilers and similar (if less heated) arguments about interpertation of ongoing IDW offerings, perhaps a 2-week wait should just be the standard wiki policy for all fiction. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 07:38, 1 December 2015 (EST)
:You KNOW all "immediate-term write-ups" is not the issue at play. Don't even. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 08:00, 1 December 2015 (EST)
::I actually don't. You and Chris both talk about "TO THE WIKI" as if it's a well understood problem without explaining why. Chris, meanwhile, posts detailed summaries of the comics before American comic shops even open. Aside from some people not liking Ask Vector Prime, I honestly don't understand the difference. It offends my sense of order, but I will admit that's probably more my problem than yours. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:24, 1 December 2015 (EST)
::: The difference is that comics- and the information they reveal- are set in stone; people can't just obsessively demand answers from James Roberts/John Barber/Mairghread Scott about background trivia just for the sake of changing the wiki. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 19:40, 1 December 2015 (EST)
:::: I guess I see. Maybe. Maybe not. Looking at the Ulchtar thing, which apparently was very annoying for people, there was a question asked on the 18th of November. Then an answer on the 28th of November. There were a few follow-up questions but none of them got an answer. The answer was never edited. Then there was three days of debate about what the implications of the answer meant. I don't see how, if we had the debate from December 13-15 it would have been appreciably different, or less annoying. But then, I didn't find the debate annoying in the first place, so again, this could point to my inability to understand such things. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:59, 1 December 2015 (EST)
:This is a recurring, AVP-specific problem that doesn't affect other prominent fiction. The Carcer thing was an isolated incident. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 08:06, 1 December 2015 (EST)
ThisIsWhyWeCantHaveNiceThings.jpg --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] ([[User talk:DrSpengler|talk]]) 09:22, 1 December 2015 (EST)

So, like, are we starting this today or what? I will of course respect the consensus and wait till the 14th if we are, but Cy-Kill just had a new adventure if we're still debating. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 13:26, 1 December 2015 (EST)
:I'm going to assume that, yes, this is starting today, and that current content will be added no sooner than two weeks hence, December 14. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:24, 1 December 2015 (EST)

===Mystery Science Theater 3000===
Does anyone object to me making a page for Mystery Science Theater 3000 now, rather than waiting the 2 weeks? I only ask because the latest AVP plugs the MST3K [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mst3k/bringbackmst3k kickstarter campaign], which is over in 4 days. Given the time-sensitive nature, it seemed an exception might be warranted. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 14:47, 7 December 2015 (EST)

===Results===
'''"I would like to see what discussions we have here, and how the pages are modified, when we're not lurching to the organ grinder's tune."'''

It looks like the discussions we have when not lurching to the tune is... [[Talk:Grand Galvatron|more of the same]]. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 10:48, 11 December 2015 (EST)
:There are 63 new "official facts" about Grand Galvatron hitting the wiki every single day, most of them by wiki editors feeding them through a revolving door Facebook page in order to validate their own ideas? I must've missed it. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 11:36, 11 December 2015 (EST)
::Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were complaining about an argument about Ulchtar, one which Grand Galvatron has already exceeded in length. One that started when someone saw some half-translated info and immediately declared TO THE WIKI. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 11:44, 11 December 2015 (EST)

== Notes and whitespace issue ==

A while back I put up some notes in several characters' pages, in order to include a link to the ''[[The Transformers: The Movie]]'''s adaptations within those pages' fiction sections. Unfortunately, it didn't work out quite as well as I wanted. Unlike the Live-action film series, where a similar note would always come up at the end of a section's write-up, the note came right in the middle of the section for many Generation 1 characters. On top of that, because of how some images were included in the section write-ups, several characters got large amounts of white-space in their section write-ups to accommodate the note.

At the time, I had heard that there was a piece of code that could fix the white-space issue, but I've been looking for a while and found nothing. (The closest I got to any sort of result with was: '''<nowiki><div class="floatright">Text on the right</div></nowiki>''' but that didn't solve much either.)

I'd still very much like to keep the links to the movie adaptations on those characters' pages, as those are still pieces of fiction wherein those characters appeared. But at this point, I've given up on finding a solution that will make the note look like less of a mess. And I will admit that the amount of white-space the note sometimes generates is rather unseemly. I figured a note pointing out that characters appeared in an adaptation of the G1 cartoon movie could be put at the bottom of the article, in the "Notes" section.

Either that, or I could double up links within the cartoon section like this: {{storylink|The Transformers: The Movie}} {{storylink|Transformers: The Animated Movie}} {{storylink|Transformers the Movie (Ladybird adaptation)|Transformers the Movie}}. I'm also open to any other suggestions. Either way, I wanted other people to weigh in and give their opinions before I started any kind of wide-spread editing. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:07, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:I think the extra storylinks look lot better than a note. It's what we already do for flashbacks. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 18:10, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:Multiple storylinks make me think that there is something more to be written up, rather than them being multiple versions of the same events. Putting a note at the end of the page seems to divorce the adaptations from the source material. My personal preference is for the note templates, regardless of the whitespace issue. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 18:39, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:: I'm not convinced that multiple story links or notes are needed at all, at least on a character page. If there are multiple tellings of the same event, probably a character only needs the primary one. Then, anyone who clicks off to the primary story can see a note that there are other adaptations. I'm not sure it adds anything to Bumblebee, for instance, to know that yes, he did this in the Transformers movie but also in a novel and a comic and a story book. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 18:48, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:::I'd rather keep some indication of which adaptation which character shows up in on their own pages, considering it is inconsistent from character to character how many adaptations they show up in. Some characters show up in all of them, some show up in only some of them, and others show up in none of the adaptations. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:02, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:::: I guess I just don't see what the value is of that. Especially because the adaptation itself will have the character roster. Mind you, I don't feel particularly strongly about it one way or the other. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:07, 3 December 2015 (EST)

==Proposal: A "Former multiversal singularities" category==

As probably know, a recent story has split up multiversal singularities into separate characters, or something like that. Because of this, the "multiversal singularities" category has been dissolved, and is no longer linked to on character pages. But why? The idea of multiversal singularities shaped several years of ''Transformers'' fiction. My proposal: a "Formal Multiversal singularities" category, so that we can acknowledge the characters who were once multiversal singularities while not inadvertantly implying that they still ''are'' multiversal singularities. Thoughts? -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 01:22, 13 December 2015 (EST)
:Isn't that, like, only the Thirteen, Primus, and Unicron? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 02:04, 13 December 2015 (EST)

::Yeah. So it'd be an easy thing to do. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 03:15, 13 December 2015 (EST)

:Or we just re-instate "Multiversal Singularities" as a category because categories have '''''NEVER''''' been predicated on current status. BW Blackarachnia doesn't lose her "Predacon" category because she ultimately ended up a Decepticon after being a Maximal for a while. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 17:01, 13 December 2015 (EST)
::Did we ''ever'' have that category? I mean, we ''should'', but yeah, we wouldn't have removed if we had for exactly the reason Sipher states. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 17:51, 13 December 2015 (EST)
:::I checked a few relevant articles at random. Went back to last version before this October. Couldn't find that category in their category lists. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 20:04, 13 December 2015 (EST)
::::I was probably mistaken. I probably just happened to notice Unicron/Primus/one of the Thirteen didn't have a multiversal singularity category on their page, and assumed that it was deleted because of the because of the retcon. My bad. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 13:49, 14 December 2015 (EST)

==Vandalism==
Um, yeah. So one of the pages on the Wanted pages list is...''Spiral Vagina''. That means that someone tried linking to a page called Spiral Vagina at some point. I'm not really sure how to handle that or who to let know about it, so I'm just posting it here. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 18:27, 15 December 2015 (EST)
:[[Genital System]]. I'm very sorry. Incidentally, if you wanted to find what pages link to that, you could have used this page: http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Spiral_Vagina --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 18:32, 15 December 2015 (EST)
::Oh. Thank you. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 18:54, 15 December 2015 (EST)
"'''''Kiss Players!''''' ''No, It's Really Not Vandalism, This Actually Happened.''" --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 21:33, 15 December 2015 (EST)
:The entire page should just be this discussion. [[User:Chip|Chip]] ([[User talk:Chip|talk]]) 05:44, 21 December 2015 (EST)
I seriously want to make that page, but something so epically horrible might need s comitte just to handle the comedy potential. [[User:Lush City|Lush City]] ([[User talk:Lush City|talk]]) 08:52, 18 December 2015 (EST)

== We're all sick of arguing about GoBots ==

But here we are again. I restate my position as detailed in an AllSpark post: since moving to its own page, with Cy-Kill returning to his own universe and talking exclusively about "unmade" GoBots episodes, "Renegade Rhetoric" has become ''GoBots'' fiction, not ''Transformers'' fiction, and we do not cover GoBots fiction. Events from ''Challenge of the GoBots'' "season 2" do not warrant coverage on the wiki, and I think that any events described from the original, actually-existing cartoon should be reduced to minimum, and all GoBots characters only mentioned in these stories consolidated into simplified "List of Guardian" and "List of Renegade" pages with only brief write-ups, linking readers to our archive of the Facebook posts if they want the full scoop. Characters such as Cy-Kill and those who have actually appeared in Transformers-universe stories should, of course, retain their own articles. We have editors actively working in bad faith, manipulating Renegade Rhetoric by asking leading questions to force the inclusion of ''GoBots'' on this wiki when it has been repeatedly decided that it won't be, and I am all for an exception being made so that this type of behaviour is not rewarded. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 19:48, 6 January 2016 (EST)
: THIS WEBSITE'S EMPEROR-KING AGREES --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 20:03, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::Thirded. GoBots fiction, and cheating, do not belong here. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 20:05, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:100% agreement. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 20:06, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:::EDIT: See Below[[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:07, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:::I'm in! -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 20:11, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::::I don't mind either. If nothing else, this entire debacle has taught us that GoBots and Transformers will never be able to peacefully coexist, on toy shelves or otherwise. 20:50, 6 January 2016 (EST)

Changing my vote. The RR page links to the Club page. AVP references and comments on RR. This is canon just as everything else, gaming the system or no. I may be weary, but I won't buckle. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:23, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:I second Escargon. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 21:21, 6 January 2016 (EST)

I don't think anyone will be surprised that I disagree. There seem to be two arguments. 1, it's not Transformers fiction. 2, editors working in bad faith. Going case by case,
1: I don't see how Renegade Rhetoric is GoBots fiction and not Transformers fiction. It's being broadcast on Axiom Nexus News, on Cybertron. It stars Cy-Kill, the hybrid Hanna-Barbara/TransTech version. It features a number of characters who are proper Transformers, from the Aligned continuity and the Unictron Trilogy, and more who are powered by sparks stolen from Mirror Alpha Trion's lab. That seems to be the main intellectual foundation for the argument, and I'll grant that it's novel, but I think it's flawed.
2: Were some editors (including me, I'll admit) asking leading questions? Yes, we were. It seems to have largely stopped, mostly because the column stopped rewarding it. But that applies to ALL of Ask Vector Prime, and that's undoubtedly canon. Are we going to start trying to look at the motivation of every creator now and altering coverage accordingly? Milne draws Hot Shot as dead to poke at Walky, should we undocument that?

And now, additional factors. I hate making slippery slope arguments, but really, the real reason we're having this conversation and everyone knows it is that there's a sizable block of people who don't like the content. That's what all of this boils down to. And if the wiki starts picking and choosing what to document, or at what detail to document, based on that, then it will have well and truly lost its way. Because if we decide that we can come up with a pseudo-logical justification to exclude this content, then we'll use it as precedent and do it again. All of Ask Vector Prime. Kiss Players. The Beast Within. That weird retcon about Cyclonus and Bombshell from a video. Big swaths of the Dreamwave run. I don't see it ending. Yes, people are sick of arguing, but this policy will lead to more, not less, arguments.

Another, lesser factor, is that these pages are already made. So we're proposing going through some 200 articles that are already created in compliance with this wiki's policies and changing them due to an exception, making more work for ourselves to make the wiki less informative.

And a third factor, is that these posts are popular. Ask Vector Prime's readership is in the thousands. Every post gets liked, shared, commented upon. People are enjoying it, and some of them will come here to see what we have to say about it. The cost of having a possibly extraneous article is negligible, but the cost of not having an article is real.

I also think that we should do what we always do on weighty matters, and have the debate first and THEN call for a vote. I would suggest that all the "seconded" to the proposal are premature. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:38, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:''the real reason we're having this conversation and everyone knows it is that there's a sizable block of people who don't like the content. That's what all of this boils down to.''
:NO. No. No no no. I don't give a rip about the content itself either way. (I mean, okay, I think the endless supply of numbering universes and other such non-story wankery is dumb and pointless and has made a Big Giant Thing of something that was meant to be just a sidelong atmospheric technical footnote in a couple of years-ago stories, but that's not the point.)
:No. The point is that this content is being created explicitly and for no other purpose than to circumvent the wiki's rules, to alter its content and organization, by fans who otherwise were unable to get their way on the very content in question. It's not being done as part of a story in any meaningful sense. It's not a unintended side effect by some uninformed pro writer. It's not part of a carefully considered larger universe. It's not something dictated from on high within Hasbro. It's purposefully, transparently, and most of all ''pointlessly'' manipulative, seemingly all because a handful of OCD minds can't handle the thought of a 30 year old cartoon not being related to another 30 year old cartoon.
:THAT is what I and, I presume, other editors don't like. Because it's bullshit. Canon generated by bullshit -- maybe we should consider treating it accordingly. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 20:53, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::I call bullshit on your bullshit. Because if you have been reading Renegade Rhetoric, it's hilarious. It's practically daily new episodes of an 80s cartoon that get the tone spot-on perfect. It's passionate, it has good stories, it even manages to have good characters despite most episodes being about 2 pages long. And none of it is about circumventing wiki rules. If it was, they'd have stopped doing it once they got everyone in, but they haven't. They're telling new stories, and they're quality, and I defy anyone who is actually reading them to disagree with that. Because, really, I'd love a show of hands, how many of the people who are voting no have actually read a single Renegade Rhetoric Season 2 episode? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:57, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:::You yourself said you and others "were asking leading questions until you stopped getting rewarded for it." This is not the place for such a "reward." That kind of "reward" does not belong here and the entire mechanism for gaining it is what really subverts our rules for inclusion. Any alleged humor in Renegade Rhetoric now is just, as the saying goes, the fruit of the poisoned tree. Also, the debates have been had, since 2007 at least. Also also, "people will want to come here to see more RR/GoBots articles" leaves me quite unmoved. They can see RR on RR, they can read about GoBots on Counter-X, and in the year 2016 they can make their own GoBot wiki. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 21:20, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::::Your "fruit of the poisonous tree" argument leaves me unmoved. Because, according to this proposal, ALL OF THAT STUFF WILL STAY. Because that's all from the Axiom Nexus bit not covered by Chris McFeely's proposal. So you'll leave the poisonous tree, and get rid of all the fruit. Because that makes sense. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:23, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::This was created because the fans voted for it, after a whole month of guests colummist. Some of these fans have been taking advantage of it, yes, but that's not why it was created.[[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:00, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:: The thing is that the RR stories ''are'' funny and clever and well-written, but fundamentally they don't have anything to do with TFs. They're using characters and settings that were never created by Hasbro/Takara. If, say, Renegade Rhetoric wrote a story where Cy-Kill was on an adventure and bumped into Optimus Prime, then yeah, that particular escapade could be added to the wiki, but fundamentally Renegade Rhetoric is Gobots fanfiction; well written fanfic, but basically completely outside this wiki's coverage sphere. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 21:20, 6 January 2016 (EST)
I vote no to this proposal as a whole. Whilst I'm not a fan of wiki gaming, the GoBots stuff happening these days is nothing like that. They're fun stories for the sake of fun, and I'd be sad to see them banished. (I could probably deal with "List of Guardians" and "List of Renegades" articles, though.) [[User:Sky Shadow|Sky Shadow]] ([[User talk:Sky Shadow|talk]]) 21:10, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:Yeah, or at least group articles for a good number of them. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:11, 6 January 2016 (EST)
If I say yes, will people actually go back to making significant contributions instead of complaining about everything AVP does? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 21:15, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::No. If you say yes to this proposal, it will lead to more arguments, more complaining about AVP, and then Thy will say, "hey, it worked well for GoBots, let's undo all 1000 AVP articles." Remember, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." I urge you to vote with your conscience and not give in to a crowd to try to forestall an argument, for this change WILL open the floodgates. Plus, it will lead to people spending time UNDOING informative articles they don't like rather than making informative articles they do. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:19, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:::I didn't even think about this, but it makes a lot of sense. Any breaking of the rule of putting What Is Canon before anything else (when that's been the wiki's entire modus operandi up until this started) is a dangerous path to follow. [[User:Sky Shadow|Sky Shadow]] ([[User talk:Sky Shadow|talk]]) 21:25, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:I got Armada and Energon DVDs for Christmas. Sure. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:17, 6 January 2016 (EST)
Like Escargon and Giggidy, I am against this proposal. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 21:34, 6 January 2016 (EST)

So I'm only a recent editor of this Wiki, but I've been reading it religiously for years. And as a deeply devoted and long time TF fan, despite what some may feel, AVP, RR, and the collective of Club FB Pages have been some of the most entertaining pieces of TF canon. Yes, Go-Bots has a different lineage than the rest of Transformers proper, but at least since the Almanacs, and especially through these FB Pages, Go-Bots has become recognized as legitimate canon within the TF Multiverse. While I admit to being a completionist, and ideally, I'd love to see the entirety of Go-Bots, Brave, Zoids, etc. covered on this wiki due to their relation with Transformers; but worry not, for I understand that realistically, that truly would become far too distractedly cluttered - which is why I can even agree with not having extensive coverage for anything Go-Bots related that is outside of anything under the umbrella of Transformers. But as it was mentioned earlier, Renegade Rhetoric is treated with the same regard as Ask Vector Prime, Spacewarp's Logs and all the Axiom Nexus News Pages. It may not be "directly" Transformers, but it's far more intertwined than the 80's cartoon. No, people shouldn't be abusing to ability to have canon produced just for the sake of the Wiki, but that REALLY doesn't seem to be the case with what RR is producing currently. They're great stories in good fun, and I believe they should be treated as being just as much canon as any other TF media. I vote to include it. Hail Cy-KIll! [[User:IKY|IKY]]

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2016-01-07T02:45:00Z

IKY: /* We're all sick of arguing about GoBots */

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

This is the place for discussion of topics that affect the entire wiki. Some topics that would ordinarily be here have merited their own pages:

{{chapters|title=Specific Discussion Subjects|align=left|content=
<div class="list-header">'''Moving From Wikia:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving|Arriving]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving|Leaving]]
* [[Transformers Wiki:Community Portal/Complaints|Complaints]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''New Ad Policy:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki:Ads|Ads]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Bookworm Database-Crash:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Damage Control Central|Damage Control Central]]
* [[Project:Bookworm Crash]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving2|Leaving Take 2]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Server Move:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving2|Arriving Take 2]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Relicensing:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Relicensing|Relicensing]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Dealing With Vandalism:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Vandalism|Vandalism]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''GoBots Sister Wiki:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/GoBots|Discussion on the place of GoBots in this wiki]]
<br/> <div class="list-header">'''Wiki Technical Information:'''</div>
* [[Transformers_Wiki:Tech|A Not So Brief Summary of the Horrible Things That McFly and Co. Have Done To Keep This Wiki From Melting Down]]
}}<br/>

{{:{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}/Archive}}


== GoBots 2015 ==
Hey guess what - people are using AVP to try to settle this internet score too. What a shock, I know, right? Multiple wiki editors said the scores of new one-sentence-one-source GoBot articles should all be made into a single list, read commentary here:
http://www.allspark.com/forums/topic/101932-tfwikinet-thread-30/page-96

Before very many more one-sentence-one-source articles get installed, I think we should at least have some discussion here. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 13:38, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:I say make an exception and do a full coverage on Gobots.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 13:48, 18 October 2015 (EDT)

:Completely sold on combo pages by Tindalos: we already do include Related Characters on pages like [[Susan Hoffman]], [[Collins (Movie)]]. We could easily do a Guardians#Minor Guardians and Renegades#Minor Renegades for people who haven't got enough to them. (Like, Cop-Tur and Zero gets a lot said about them but Fly Trap does not) Groups like Puzzler could be all stuffed under the Puzzler page. (The Axiom Nexus Renegades, I'd cheat and say keep them on their own pages since ''these'' are meant to be Transformers in-universe.) --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 18:49, 18 October 2015 (GMT)

:Most of the Gobots described by RR are getting more than one note name mentions. History, alt-modes, personality, the works. I wouldn't just conglomerate them all together. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 13:59, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:However, I wouldn't be opposed to consolidating articles like Puzzler, since he's practically a drone, and the Dread Launchers and Secret Riders, since all of them share history. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 14:07, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::I think making a list page is better than having numerous pages with short texts.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 14:15, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::If we don't do them all, combining Puzzler, Launchers,and Riders is a good idea anyway.[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 19:18, 18 October 2015 (GMT)

:Proof-of-concept page for if we want to list 'em up: put it under fiction (so that's easier to find), put the main Gobotron and the in-universe TFs up top, and stick the details of the minors under that. tfwiki.net/mediawiki/index.php?title=Renegade&oldid=1016174 [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 19:20, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
::I've been doing most of the Renegade write-ups and most of them seem to be more than just name drops. Generally we get a name, a personality, an alt mode, and often an adventure. That's easily enough for an article. For the exceptions, like Puzzler, a single overarching page isn't a bad idea, but maybe not a necessary idea. The information on the Guardians is much more sparse, and having big lists for most of them could probably work. I haven't been writing them up due to how little there is on most of them.
::I am not sure where the idea comes from that having eighty small articles is a bad thing, though. The Wiki has always erred on the side of inclusiveness, which leads to pages like [[Spike's booty call]] and [[Moe]] and [[DeForest High]], things which are also one or two line articles about people and concepts that only appear in one source. I'm not sure why this is any different. If anything, there's way more interest in the GoBot material, as evidenced by how many people are asking questions about the Renegades and how many likes and shares those pages are getting.
::I'm also seeing, both in this thread and in the thread linked to, lots of interest in wikiing up the entire "Challenge of the Gobots" cartoon. McFeely, Khajidha, Saix, Sorenson, originally, and now Primestar and Gearshift all seem to be in favor. On the other side, Walky, M Sipher, Thylacine. It seems odd to me that, with the momentum apparently leaning 2:1 towards documenting all of "Challenge of the Gobots", we're talking about curtailing the bits and bobs that are definitely for sure Transformers canon. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 15:49, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::Logistical question: Do enough people have the GoBots DVD (or, cough, other sources) to write them up? (We ''are'' still lagging in fleshed out UT character pages, after all, and I think more people own those shows). -- [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 19:20, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
::::Well, episodes are on the internet.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 16:01, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::Episodes aren't licensed by Hasbro, so we cannot write them up and place them here. Ever.
:::::Giggidy: this is different from the silly jokes you refer to because at least those jokes are contained within licensed Transformers material. The GoBots AS PEOPLE REMEMBER THEM - the cartoons, characters, and toys - were never released under a Hasbro license, except for a tiny minority of exceptions in text stories. Even IF we settled for allowing independent articles for everything AVP said, it could never, ever contain any material more than that, because Hasbro didn't publish it and doesn't own it.
:::::All in all I am extremely disappointed by the... I guess, poor sportsmanship, pettiness, and entitlement... of the pro-inclusion side. This has been rehashed and reargued and relitigated year after year after year after year with very clear reasons why they do not belong, and for some reason people think none of that matters because GoBots were just cool! Well, Samhain and the Bogey Man from the DIC Ghostbusters cartoon were just cool and we've got the Ghostbusters in here as an in-joke, but we don't freaking add in Samhain the demon from a DIC cartoon through overeager bootstrapping. We also don't add in the very awesome and well-loved Dark Phoenix by extrapolation just because the Allspark Almanac mentioned an M'kraan Crystal.
:::::The MOST that could EVER be included about any of these GoBots is the stuff AVP writes, because at least that IS put out by Hasbro. I and quite a few others think that even that much material isn't much at all and since it's coming in a rapidfire slew for a lot of characters I think a list format collection is worth discussing. If a lot of people really really really disagree, then I could rationally grasp the argument that through the loophole that has been cheated into existence they have grounds on which to disagree and the articles containing the AVP material could hypothetically each stand on their own. But that's ALL that can go there. Only AVP. No cartoon, nothing else. And even that should not be taken for granted by the pro-inclusion side. They really have to sell their case, because from here it's STILL way too heavily predicated upon "oh-come-ON!"-ism. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 16:18, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::This isn't about winning arguments from years ago-most of us weren't even signed up when the AAII came out and everybody got into a whole mess over that. Many of us honestly think that documenting the series is something that we should do and within the jurisdiction. You can disagree with putting it up on the wiki, but don't just throw about terms like "pettiness" and "entitlement" cause you don't like the opposing sides argument or the fiction causing it in the first place. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 16:46, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::I would suggest Hasbro's ownership or non-ownership is irrelevant. We document many things not owned by Hasbro but merely associated with them, including the entire Japanese franchise (owned by TakaraTomy) and the entire film franchise (owned and copyrighted by Paramount, with only the Transformers elements used under license from Hasbro). --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:50, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Ownership by TakTom is just as legitimate as ownership by Hasbro, and licensing is just as legitimate as ownership. Things that are neither owned nor licensed by a company that actually produces real Transformers, such as a Hanna-Barbera cartoon, are not legitimate for inclusion. Otherwise we'll be throwing in fanfic and third-party toys and Family Guy episodes with TF "appearances." --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 17:04, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::There is a possible justification for their inclusion that would still bar those other things. We could decide that having had the GoBots declared to actually be TFs in a multiversal sense means that any material that was officially produced about them is now open for inclusion (the fact that it was officially produced under the auspices of Tonka would be a mere detail). This would not open the floodgates for fanfic, 3rd party materials or Family Guy. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 17:47, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::That concept has been decided-''against'', here, many times. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:19, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::Saying that we've voted against something in the past is not a strong argument for why we should vote against it now. Things change, the population of editors change, our understanding of the material changes. Gay marriage was illegal, now it's legal. I'm not saying you're stomping on my civil liberties, but you really need a more compelling argument than "we've said no before." Besides, you're the one who jumpstarted this conversation.
:::::::::::My point with Paramount was that there are elements that we document fully that aren't owned by Hasbro. They're owned by another corporation, and are used adjacent to Hasbro material. Hasbro doesn't own, say, Seymour Simmons. Paramount does. But we document him because he's a Transformers character. Likewise, Hasbro doesn't own some elements of Challenge of the Gobots, Hanna-Barbara does. But Kenner did license certain elements to Hanna-Barbara to make the GoBots cartoon, and Kenner is now Hasbro. Effectively it's the same situation legally. We do the same thing with other crossovers, like [[DreamMix TV World Fighters]] or the [[Avengers]] book.
:::::::::::And even if it wasn't, our decisions about what's in scope and what isn't is just that, our decision. It's reached by consensus, after reasoned debate. If the consensus is that Gobots is close enough, passes the squint test, we certainly could choose to include it. You're acting as if your statments are akin to "it's obvious that water is wet", a fact, when in fact they're closer to "marriage has always been defined as being between a man and a woman," a social convention. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 18:35, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::I just saw this in the morass of text, and '''''fuck you''''' for equating "not including GoBots cartoon" with "ban gay marriage". REALLY tempted to drop a ban on you right now for that little act of vileness. Holy fucking shit. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:53, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::I am not purporting to cite stone tablets from a thousand years ago - I am referring back to ''the conversation FOUR MONTHS AGO directly above this one.'' Your reference to DreamMix proves my point perfectly: we include things that had an official Transformers creator stamp at time of publication, like Simon Belmondo, and NOT ancillary same-universe stuff that DID NOT, like Sypha Belnades. Ditto for Avenger characters that never had the stamp like the Brothers Grimm or whatever. We don't get to enjoy our way past the clear concept of who really owned and licensed what and when. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:55, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::So we've got the two positions:
::::::::::::a) GoBots the cartoon is not Hasbro licensed or involved in any way; we should only properly cover GB stuff in Hasbro-approved stuff like Fun Publications, AVP, comic homages etc
::::::::::::b) Approved stuff has now made so many GoBots nods and explicit references to the show (all the way back [[Games of Deception|to 2007]] and almost [[G1_GoBots|2004]]) that this is no longer a big jump but a natural thing to do.
::::::::::::without much budging. We could put it up to an editor vote? --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 18:49, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
::::::::::::It might be a bit off topic, but are you sure about Simmons? Hasbro put out a Human Alliance toy with Agent Simmons. I don't have the box and didn't read all the fine print, but the front of the box has "Agent Simmons™" next to a Hasbro logo. One movieverse character that might be wholly affiliated with paramount and not Hasbro might be [[Bendy-Bus Prime]]. - [[User:Gimmick|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick|talk]]) 19:00, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::We include stuff that includes Transformers even without an official Transformers stamp, like [[Unfoldings!]]. And the conversation four months ago looks like it was 4 in favor, 3 against, so it's not really a great argument for you. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:10, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::How in the world can you imagine an issue of the GIJoe comic starring Transformers to NOT BE official licensed product? --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:24, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::I didn't say that it wasn't licensed. I said it didn't have a Transformers stamp. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:39, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::Also by my count of the last conversation it was 2 in favor, 4 against, 1 seemingly not strongly decided, and 1 recusal due to professional conflict of interest. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:50, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::My count: McFeely, Khajidha, Saix, Sorenson, for, Walky, M Sipher, Thylacine against. Sorenson's position was clear. And M Sipher also worked professional on GoBots, so if we're discounting Sorenson, we should probably discount Sipher as well. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:22, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::Unfoldings is Hasbro-stamped though, and we don't describe much of the Joe plot.
::::::::::::::Either way, if it was that close a call last time, should we just aye or nay it?--[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 00:14, 19 October 2015 (GMT)
:::::::::::::::It's been like four hours. This is a big decision and should have at least 2-3 days debate. Honestly, I haven't even decided how I feel, I just think Thy's arguments are pretty weak. That doesn't mean there aren't some strong ones. Let's not go calling for votes just yet. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:18, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::[[Help:Official info]]: the first sentence under "What constitutes official information?" seems relevant here. There is no way anything included in the movies is anything less than relevant to this wiki. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 19:26, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
'''"Simply put, anything coming either directly or indirectly from Hasbro and/or TakaraTomy, or from other official parties such as (currently) IDW Publishing, Paramount Pictures, Fun Publications or other companies officially involved with the Transformers brand."'''
:::::::::::::Right. And since Kenner is wholly owned by Hasbro, then despite being owned by Hanna-Barbara, GoBots was (retroactively) coming directly from Hasbro as much as the movies are. Then the only question becomes is GoBots a Transformers subline. Hasbro and FunPub seem to feel that it is, and have been using the [[Gobots|name]] [[G1 GoBots|and]][[Ask Vector Prime|concepts]] [[Go-Bot (G2)|for]] [[Withered Hope|decades]].--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:39, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::The key - and wrong - word being "retroactively." Takara's Diaclones became Transformers, and there are occasional Diaclone references we catalog. But we do not catalog 1970s-80s pre-Transformer content as anything beyond curiosities and footnotes; they don't get their box-back name-dropped characters and events covered here; in fact the "Cymond" content we have is new, not vintage. The same goes for Macross and Beetras and Brave as well. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:57, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::Also, I feel that I should point out that some members of the Wiki are at TFCon at the moment and unable to take part in this discussion. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 20:05, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Another excellent reason not to rush into any hasty votes.--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:16, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Well I'm back and guess what? Fuck individual articles. Stuff them all into a single "Renegade" article. The idea of a ton of two-sentence articles from a singular source that is blatantly doing this to ramrod shit we have repeatedly and recently said "no" to remains goddamn stupid and counter-productive. There's better arguments for documenting everything G.I. Joe than GoBots, and we're not fucking doing that. MAKE A SEPARATE GOBOTS WIKI. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 20:29, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::Except since the whole thing's started, it's moved on from name drops to actually expanding the histories of the characters, which is why many are turning back to the idea of individual Gobot articles. There's plenty of G.I. Joes and Cobra members who do nothing of note in the series they appear in with the TFs, but the only consolidated one is the Dreadnoks since they share most of their appearances together, which could work for Puzzler and others like that. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:54, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::::Making the separate Go-Bots articles doesn't take away anything from the rest of the wiki. And if they're short articles, well, they are what they are. We have recorded the entirety of Transformers fiction covering their subject on one page, and that fiction is very sparse, but it is accurate, and faithful to the wiki's mission of documenting information. Beyond that though, I'd say I'd vote against merging in information about non-Hasbro/Takara/whatevs owned properties into the articles, such as the Go-Bots cartoon. A sister wiki seems like it would be the best idea, though I can't volunteer my services to completing it as of right now, as I'm pretty thoroughly engaged on other projects on THIS wiki. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:13, 18 October 2015 (EDT)

===Call for Vote===

It's been a week since this last came up and I know there are people still pissed that GoBots stuff is added at all, so can we pull the pin and decide? We all know the arguments by now. Whether we should reduce most of the existing GoBot pages or leave them (this seems to be all they're getting now Renegade Rhetoric's ended) is an important but I think separate issue to: include GoBots fiction in its entirety on this wiki or do not include anything but what comes out under Hasbro material. <br>
At this point I've swung round to being against adding ''Challenge'' material; it should have its own wiki, which could be created tomorrow if people wanted. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 01:19, 26 October 2015 (GMT)
:I vote for leaving the Go-Bot articles as we have them now. They're hardly "two-sentence articles" for the most part, and whether we personally like something or not hardly has bearing on its inclusion in the wiki. Lots of people hate [[The Beast Within]], but its here. And AVP has more people involved in its production, and more research put through it than that comic did. When there's going to be a Go-Bot's wiki, we'll link it in the articles like we do to other outside wikis. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:36, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
::I'm in favour of keeping the existing AVP, FunPub stuff too. Just draw the line there and all. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 01:40, 26 October 2015 (GMT)
:::By the way, thanks to all the editors who have been working hard to keep all the Guardians and Renegades articles updated! It's a big help, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who appreciates it greatly. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:44, 25 October 2015 (EDT)

I've been thinking on this and, despite the relatively weak arguments against including ''Challenge'' material, something about including it feels off to me. I think intellectually the case for inclusion is very strong, but I think emotionally it'd probably feel better somewhere else. I'd agree with Charles about voting on against full-on-wikifying ''Challenge''. I've also been one of several people writing-up the GoBots articles and I'd strenuously disagree with deleting them. There is plenty of information on even the scantiest of them, including at the minimum names, factions, actions taken. The wiki is replete with articles for less. In the case of virtually every Renegade, we get at least two adventures, personality, and alt modes. Some Guardians get similar treatment. A few characters have visuals. It'd be silly to torch them.

As I said, I've been thinking on this and I think there may be a compromise solution between the two extremes, one of a big list due to a relative paucity of material, the other of wikifying everything from ''Challenge.'' I propose we only wiki up what's actually been said about the characters in a Transformers medium... but, to give the articles a little more oomph, we add in a main picture from ''Challenge'' if (and only if) there is no official Transformers image available. We've in the past shown a willingness to use these images in the notes section, so we'd only be bumping them up to the top. The copyright shouldn't be an issue, Challenge of the Gobots sports a Tonka copyright, and Tonka is wholly owned by Hasbro. This way we're still limiting to the "facts" of Transformers, but the articles will look and feel a little more robust. Only one image per character, and then only if they haven't gotten an official illustration. Thoughts?--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:45, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
:It is unacceptable to catalog "Challenge" here. It is not and never has been owned by a Transformers license-holder, and I can't fathom how this could be seen as a weak argument. Even if AVP made every GoBot article 20 pages long, the cartoon never had the stamp and so any form of systematic involvement should be out. If that means a whole slew of articles with no main images, then that is the price for creating so many individual articles instead of a list. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 21:55, 25 October 2015 (EDT)

http://machinerobo.wikia.com/wiki/Gobots

Have fun. --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] ([[User talk:Monzo|talk]]) 21:57, 25 October 2015 (EDT)

I feel like everyone's forgetting that even before AVP came into play, we had images from COTG on the wiki-Cy-Kill, the E-Hobby pack, Doctor Braxis, all in the notes section. The ones that didn't, I think nobody just felt like adding them. Fracture had Crasher's image in her notes section, and Deadlift had Spoons. So, yes, as long as they're in the notes section, with the images having all the copyright information. they'll probably be fine.

As for the wiki, I feel like a great many of us would rather have a sister site than some ad-filled mess of a page. My computer can't even handle going on it for a full minute without making me restart it. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 22:02, 25 October 2015 (EDT)

::What Thy said. This is not fucking up for debate. All the AVP end-run wank isn't going to change the FACT that large swaths of the GoBots IP are NOT owned by Hasbro, including the cartoon and toys said cartoon was derived from, the latter being owned by a direct competitor to both TF-owning companies. Frankly, I'm not even sure what, if anything, Hasbro DOES own from that IP, given they haven't used an overtly-GoBots Trademark in what, a decade? At best they MIGHT still own the name "GoBots", and I mean "own" in the sense that "nobody's bothered to challenge it so far". --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 22:15, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
:::My two cents is that despite my personal wish for all GoBots information to go on tfwiki, I say that as long as this wiki's rules are based on ''Transformers'' information (Hasbro, Takara, etc.-only), then the non-Hasbro owned CotG cartoon and such doesn't go on this wiki. In addition for convenience of navigation for ''GoBots'' fans, a sister wiki for ''GoBots'' would help for finding strictly ''GoBots'' information. Also, if we were to put CotG on the wiki, then on principle would we have to add in ''Robotix'' and all the Cymond Cluster franchises (''Brave'', ''Zoids'', etc) because they're in the ''Transformers'' multiverse?
:::With regards to ''GoBots'' material in ''Transformers'' works ("Withered Hope", Renegade Rhetoric, the hopefully upcoming "Spatiotemporal Challenges", etc.), I say that it goes on the wiki because it was distributed through a ''Transformers'' medium. And gets individual articles as does ''G.I. Joe'' or anything like that. And given the influence of ''GoBots'' on ''Transformers'', I agree that we make the exception to use limited CotG screencaps as the main pictures for ''GoBots'' characters on the wiki since we've been doing that for years in notes sections. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 01:42, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::::I vote against turning an EXCEPTION from like 4 pages into THE RULE on a hundred. "Challenge" screencaps should not be used as main pics on every single GoBot page. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 11:21, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::Reiterating this point: since the individual articles already exist it's probably just easier to leave them. However, I strongly suggest a ''total block on any further use of any unlicensed GoBots media appearances, of any kind. No more "Challenge," no more coloring books, not even as Notes, let alone as main pics.'' If folks want to leave up the small handful of longstanding examples we've got, eh. But since there a very real distinction between GoBots IP that is allowed / available and that which is not, we should draw a firm line, stick with it, and prevent any further inclusion of material that doesn't pass the usual rules of ownership / licensing. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:03, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::Oh, yes, nothing past the requirements should be included. I do agree with that. And I doubt we'll have any more Gobots related stuff for AVP. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:08, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Nays are having it so far. <br>
Giggidy's suggestion of putting screencaps in Notes for some pages seems like workable, unless there's acopyright issue o people will consider it thin-edging the wedge --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 08:04, 26 October 2015 (GMT)

I might've been in favour of it before, but I too have swung around to thinking the ''Challenge'' cartoon doesn't fall within our remit, as a piece of media that was not ever, and is still not, owned or licensed by a Transformers rights-holder. I'm not averse to using screencaps from the cartoon for pictures, though. I'd also say we can definitely merge the components of Puzzler and [[Monsterous]] into singular articles under the combiner names. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 06:49, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Much of the story information that AVP revealed about the GoBots characters is straightforward recapitulation of episodes of CotG. Do we need/want to put a note to that effect on the character pages? If so, should it just be something general like "events are adapted from the CotG cartoon" or should we note the episode titles for the different events? Should/could we link to Counter-X's episode summaries? --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 11:19, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:Most of the AVP stuff seems to be original. Where it's not I've been mentioning the episodes. Linking to Counter-X is a good idea. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 11:51, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Not sure how much of a vote is actually happening here, but me and my seven years worth of contributions vote '''No''' to ''Challenge'' or further GoBots additions to the Wiki. I would remove or block any individual pages for GoBots characters due to AVP. I already think tongue-in-cheek reference pages like [[Harrison Ford]] and [[Indiana Jones]] are silly, and probably contributed to the all-inclusive mentality people are fighting against here.

Has/Tak only owns a small fragment of GoBots IP. This Wiki, like ''every Wiki and every fan website on the internet'', exists at the sufferance of the property's owners. So while there are in-universe, multiversal collaborations between Marvel and DC continuity, you'll notice they still retain separate Wikis. It doesn't matter how closely related Transformers and GoBots become in the fictional realities -- real world reality has to govern this site.

Personally, I like the way the Marvel Wiki deals with Transformers -- each issue of the Marvel Comic contains an issue summary and cast list of the Marvel story, but the individual links on that page leave the Marvel wiki and go to the Transformers wiki (albeit the wrong TF Wiki, but they ''are'' on wikia). There is no [[Bluestreak (G1)]] page on the Marvel Database, even though he appeared in a Marvel Comic...just a link to a Transformers wiki that can actually cover the character in-depth as he deserves.

My recommendation is to reduce all of Renegades Rhetoric to a single story page, chronicling the many adventures and details provided by Has/Tak owned Axiom Nexus's Cy-Kill in one place, with no individual Guardian or Renegade pages on this wiki. If and when a functional Gobots Wiki is created, link the characters and concepts to THAT wiki where they can be covered in full. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 11:50, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:That tactic gets my vote. The "minor joke article" was a bit of harmless fun back when the franchise was much smaller, and we do '''''not''''' need to kowtow to it when something comes along to abuse the wiki's "system" to do something of dubious legal standing. (Really ought to look at how the GB page addresses Hasbro's "ownership" and elaborate.) For the quadzillionth time, our "rules" need to be flexible and typically ARE, but some people really just can't handle the idea of not treating everything with the same ironclad law at all times, no matter what affect it has on the overall wiki. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 14:41, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::I vote against it. Ultimately passing the buck off to another wiki isn't my idea of being informative. Where others would do that, we work hard to cover as much as what falls within our realm to cover. (Which, as it happens, does NOT include the COTG cartoon) That's what makes us stand out, in terms of both content and quality, above many other wikis out there. And I don't even think the franchise was ever even that small. That was just an illusion created by the fact that a lot of it had gone on undocumented for a long time. People need to stop making this out like its some kind of personal attack against us. What's it gonna harm that there are a few pages out there like the Harrison Ford page article? Are people gonna flip out and swear never to use our wiki again if they stumble across it? Are we going to be sneered at and ridiculed by some internet aristocracy because our "credibility" will be in doubt or something? I doubt its eating up much space in terms of bandwith or whatever. And no one will make any legal advance that has any ground here. Wikis wouldn't exist as a concept if that would regularly happen. Where is the harm? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 14:49, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:::That's a "nay" from me on cutting the small number of deliberately silly pages: we're long past the point that this wiki can say that's not on, unless we can say that it puts people off visiting. Casual fans and browsers seem to like them. -- [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:22, 26 October 2015 (GMT)
::::I wasn't actually advocating removing the Harrison Ford-style joke articles. (Not a fan of taking a whole article to say "Somebody mentioned [[Broadside (SG)]] once!", either.) Just pointing out pages like that contributed to the mind set of including articles for every person, place, or thing mentioned in Transformers fiction. The difference, of course, is that no one is trying to write up full articles about the ''Indiana Jones'' franchise here instead of making an Indy wiki. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 17:30, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::I wasn't either. I'd have thought the intention was clear: that the allowing of "harmless fun" articles of small references from when the franchise was VASTLY smaller was now being intentionally abused as an end-run around something that was decided against long ago for being not-HasTak-owned/licensed, one of the few pretty concrete rules we do have, and a fundamental one at that. Therefore I have no compunctions about making an exception to the general guideline (which we often have to do anyway) and compacting the information to a minimal number of pages... especially given the dubious nature of Hasbro's "ownership" of the GoBots IP (among other IPs mentioned in certain sources). --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:32, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

I actually expected more arguments for adding COTG material - check up the page and there ''have'' been more! Interest seems to have collapsed. -- [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:34, 26 October 2015 (GMT)

Honestly, at this point, most-if not all-articles for the Gobots have been created. I really don't think it would hurt anyone to just leave them up. We can argue about all the IP ownership all we want, but as Ascendron already pointed out, we have other articles that don't exactly line up with Hasbro-owned stuff either-Hasbro certainly didn't shout at IDW for including Transformers in a Crossover that also involved a rival company (Playmates and Ninja Turtles). [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 18:39, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:...Are you actually contending that IDW didn't run the scope and parameters of the giant crossover by Hasbro ''at all'' before doing it? That the crossover wasn't extensively okayed by every rightsholder involved beforehand? Because there's no other way to interpret what you just said, and that's a staggeringly stupid premise. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:49, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::Stay classy, M Sipher. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:06, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:::classy? is this the part of the thread where we equate gay marriage to gobots being on the transformers wiki --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 20:17, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::::I don't believe he was literally equating the two-he was using a recent example of rules changing from previous. Could he have used a better example? Yes, probably, but I understood what he was getting at, and I say this as someone who would be affected by said laws. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:44, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

::No, of course not. However, what I can say from experience: as our audience grew bigger, we did go back and make changes to the older gobots-involved answers. A couple model sheets here and there were deleted, because Warner Bros could have potentially sued Hasbro. I don't think we would've even gone through with Cy-Kill if it hadn't been without someone giving us the okay first-and even then, we made sure to delete an old avatar with Cy-Kill Hanna-Barbara face on it. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 18:55, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

I'd be okay with a separate wiki that we could just link to when GoBots came up. I mean, the GoBots franchise has been basically dead for thirty years outside of a few winks from Transformers (with the exception of the Cy-Kill thing that started this whole debate), so I don't think it'd ever get too out of hand. Obviously time, money, and access to the show are factors in this solution, so it might not be 100% viable. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 19:57, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Sorry if this is a really dumb question, but if the whole not-Hasbro IP thing matters for this wiki, then what stops sites like the Machine Robo wikia from using any ''GoBots'' material at all? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 20:55, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:The rules of this web site have no relevance to any other wikis, and the Machine Robo wikia does indeed include GoBots material. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 22:12, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::I was debating with myself whether or not to make this post, but it's going to bug me if I don't. Here goes. Obviously, a lot of us have become pretty emotionally involved in this topic. People say hurtful and stupid things when emotions run high. But if you're going to debate with someone, its important to challenge their arguments, and not attack the debater themselves... Despite whatever slip-ups may happen. I don't really know any of you. I can't really call any of you friends, because I'm not involved in any forums, and I don't attend conventions... But I respect many people's work ethic here, especially since we're all volunteering our time for the wiki. For the information itself, I get it that people are getting upset that information is being "snuck in" as a deliberate attempt to get it documented on the wiki. But if someone else got the job of getting to create fiction related to the Transformers brand, and used it as they saw fit, well I'm hardly in a position to debate that. They get to do stuff I never will, and as an adult, I have to concede to such defeats. Ultimately, it comes down to this: I believe that, for the most part, keeping the information on separate pages as they are currently is the best and most informative way to share it with whoever chooses to browse our wiki. (Some of the combiner components can be combined, as their importance relates wholly to the fact that they're components to a more important character). If anyone is able to prove me wrong by presenting even a crude mock-up that shows a better way of accomplishing that task, I will gladly change my stance on the issue. But we can do that by being civil and respectful. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 04:40, 27 October 2015 (EDT)

Bottom line, GoBots shouldn't be treated any differently, and certainly not any ''better'', than G.I. Joe on this Wiki. The Joes are a fully owned Hasbro franchise with decades of interactive history with the Transformers brand, BUT...all the images of Snake Eyes or Cobra Commander on the TF Wiki are from TF stuff, not from the Sunbow cartoon that was not connected to ''Transformers''. No one is trying to explain [[Snake-Eyes]]' Vietnam origins in his Notes section, unlike the [[Doctor Braxis]] Notes section stuffed with COTG references. Because people understand that if you want to read about G.I. Joe, you go to a G.I. Joe website...which this isn't. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 13:02, 27 October 2015 (EDT)

====Vote Results====
It's been more than 24 hours with no movement one way or the other, and even then, the stuff from yesterday seems like rehashing old arguments. Is now a fair time to tally? The voting is complicated because there are multiple proposals on the table.

*Proposal: '''Complete cataloging of "''Challenge of the Gobots''"'''
**Supporters: Khajidha

*Proposal: '''Condensing all Ask Vector Prime GoBots pages down to just one or two master pages, probably ''Guardians'' and ''Renegades'' or ''Renegade Rhetoric'''''
**Supporters: Xaaron, M Sipher

*Proposal: '''Expand coverage of Ask Vector Prime GoBots to include "''Challenge of the Gobots''" screen captures'''
**Supporters: Giggidy, Chris McFeely, Escargon, Charles RB, S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47, Khajidha, tentative Riptide

*Proposal: '''Expand coverage of Ask Vector Prime GoBots to include link to Counter-X website'''
**Supporters: Khajidha, Giggidy, Riptide, Saix

*Proposal: '''Treat Renegade Rhetoric like any other source, no condensation but also no expansion such as screen captures'''
**Supporters: Thylacine 2000

*Proposal: '''Pics from outside media goes in the notes section on character pages. Some Go-Bots pics can go there, otherwise wait until Transformers media includes original art of these characters.'''
**Supporters: Ascendron

I ''think'' I got everyone's position represented. Grum, I'm not really sure which camp you fell into. Regardless, it's clear that there's a solid majority in favor of documenting everything from Ask Vector Prime fully, with exceptions when it's sensible to do so such as with Puzzler and Monsterous. The good news is that this is exactly the current state of the wiki. No further action is required. Though it's ironic and a little sad that it took so much acrimony and name calling to get to the point of doing nothing different than we are now.

I'm less confident declaring victory on the screen capture question. M Sipher, Thylacine 2000, and Xaaron have all made their position against clear, as have the five supporters. I'd be curious to hear from <s>Khajidha, Ascendron, and</s> Grum on that issue before we go expanding them. I'm not sure if their silence indicates indifference, lack of awareness, or simply opposition to that proposal. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 15:43, 28 October 2015 (EDT)

:Didn't say anything until now since I didn't really have anything new to add, but I would vote for Counter-X and... maaaaaybe screencaps, but I'm indecisive on that one. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 15:53, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:: I'm divided about the screencaps... My gut instinct says that it would be a good addition to the pages... But I almost would feel, I dunno, hypocritical giving my full support to their inclusion, seeing as I'm usually very steadfast in my stance of only including stuff that's official. I suppose I can justify it to myself, as their inclusion would do more good than harm as far as how informative they would make the articles... Let's just not go overboard with it? One pic for each guy, maybe less if a single picture does a good job of showcasing multiple characters? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:31, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:::Yes, that was my original proposal. One and only one, less where possible. Couldn't agree more. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:42, 28 October 2015 (EDT)

:Actually, I'm in favor of complete GoBots coverage, but have bowed to the overwhelming opposition on that score. TOTALLY opposed to the wholesale reduction approach. Favor screen caps (but expect that not to come about). Favor Counter-X links. I would prefer that the combiner members have their own pages, but the limited information available currently makes the redirection to the combined form page at least as viable a solution.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 16:30, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:If we do include these screencaps, I would also like to request that we make it explicitly clear that they are not owned by Hasbro, and are not official Transformers images on the image's page itself. I was almost tempted to say in their captions on the characters' pages, but even I think that's a bit too extreme. So long as someone can learn quickly that the images do not come from an actual Transformers source if they make the effort of looking up the image's information. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:44, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
For full coverage on GoBots as given in any Transformers media. Counter-X links seem like a no-brainer. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 17:46, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:I said on Oct.26, 19:03, that it would probably at this point be best to leave all the articles up as they are. So if the only issue actually up for decision now is whether to include COTG screenshots, then I firmly vote against that, and see it as sufficiently against our rules of documenting official HasTak material that I'm not entirely sure a vote is even appropriate. We agree on AVP - well AVP itself says COTG screenshots aren't HasTak property and couldn't be used, hence why they themselves took down the first Cy-Kill picture. I think people should be satisfied with what they got. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:49, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
::Sorry, I missed that. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:00, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:::It's true that it's not in line with our policy entirely, but it would be nice for people reading the pages access to an image on the page, just so that they don't have to go hop over to google or whatever other website to see a visual representation of them. That's my main reasoning behind supporting this idea despite not being 100% behind it. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:19, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
::::At first, I think we could include Gobots cartoon here but now I changed my thoughts. They are not owned by Hasbro. But I wonder if Hasbro buys the rights to the cartoon, can we include the cartoon on this wiki then? I'm just curious.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 07:12, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::I'd still say no because it's not ''Transformers''. Like I said with ''G.I.Joe'', we don't use images of Joes or Cobras from their 80's cartoon -- only from Transformers-related crossover media. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 10:34, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::<<<<<Not mentioning the Joe franchise character that actually has a non-TF related main pic....>>>>> --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 13:58, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::Well we've got ''Transformers''-branded visuals for reference for ''G.I. Joe'' characters. Less so for ''GoBots'' characters. Would it not be prudent to have visual points of reference for the GoBots who have appeared in ''Transformers'' fiction? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 14:25, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::It absolutely would. But we don't HAVE visual points of reference for those GoBots from Transformers fiction. We would have to take images from other fiction/mediums. And if we did it for GoBots, why not add some pictures for [[Jem]], the Inhumanoids' [[Earth Corps]], or the [[Darkling Lord]]s? The aforementioned [[Harrison Ford]] and [[Indiana Jones]] pages don't have visual references either, for that matter. The [[Fantastic Four]] could probably use a better visual reference than that cropped cover border, so...
::::::::Do you see how this snowballs out of control? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 16:08, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::My initial suggestion of just putting a picture in the note section is still out there, by the way. I kinda dropped it because no one really seemed on board... But I figured if we have the leeway to put up pics outside of Transformers fiction there, like we did for the [[Beast (G1)|Beast]], and for that matter, [[Cy-Kill (GoBots)|Cy-kill]], we could just do the same for all the Go-Bots characters. I know it's kinda seem like a silly game of working our way through loopholes, but it still is what I would personally prefer... Best of both worlds kind of thing. We still get a visual representation of the character in the article itself, most articles are short enough that the picture would be apparent immediately, but we'd still be sticking to our policy of only using official pictures in the body of the article. The picture is there as an aside, an addition to a note of "by the way, this guy is from this cartoon not owned by Hasbro." Like, look at the [[Night Ranger]] article. That's a great article right there! All the Go-Bots articles should be formatted like that. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:21, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::That Night Ranger article actually turns me off the idea of putting pictures in the notes section. There's a huge unsightly gap of white space there between the external links section and the box with the categories in it. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 17:02, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::But that's only because that picture is a character model, which is taller than it is wide. Screencaps are wider than they are tall, and wouldn't create nearly as much whitespace! And we could do what we did with the [[Zebediah Braxis]] article, where we go in a bit of a brief overview of the character's role in the cartoon/ "Made-up Guy filled the role of the impressionable young kid-appeal character in the Go-Bots cartoon, similar as how Bumblebee did in the original Transformers cartoon." Something like that. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:07, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::...Which goes right back to doing what we were complaining about in the first place, which is detailing COTG on the TFWiki! This is how quickly it gets out of control. "Well, we're not allowed to cover ''Challenge of the GoBots'', but these pages would look nicer with some images. Okay, we're allowed to put one image in the Notes section as a visual reference, but now it looks unsightly so we'll add some details about COTG to justify having the pictures. Okay, well, we're already talking about COTG in the Notes now, so..."
:::::::::::: - Covering the GoBots material produced under the Transformers franchise...Yes.
:::::::::::: - Adding non-TF GoBots material so that the TF GoBots pages look better...No. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 17:24, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::I think it looking "unsightly" is really a minor problem. And I didn't mean covering their every appearance. More along the lines of a blip of information. I'm sure a few characters could have more notes that would be informative and interesting to "pad out" the note section if the white space is that big of an issue, (which I don't think it is... Ugly, maybe, but I'd rather have an article that is "unsightly" than uninformative or goes against the wiki's rules.) Stuff like "he was also voiced by this guy who voiced this transformers character" or "this Transformers character is an homage to him," if stuff like that applies. You know, things that we already do for other character pages anyways. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:33, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Honestly the more the argument for adding in '''hundreds''' of unlicensed, non-TF images comes to hinge desperately on "You did it 5 years ago for Dr. Braxis and 8 years ago for Cobra Commander!", the more it starts to be an argument for deleting those pictures from Dr. Braxis and Cobra Commander. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:12, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::It's not like there's a shortage of CC images from TF fiction. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 04:04, 30 October 2015 (EDT)

Just to note here, with all the comparisons being made to our handling of ''G.I. Joe'', we've ''always'' treated the Joes with more leeway than we have, say, Spider-Man or Godzilla. A ''lot'' of our Joe articles include real names and factoids taken from filecards and such, and yes, even in one isolated instance a piece of art that's not from a TF source, because there was no point to the "wilful ignorance" gag, since it wasn't ''funny'' - everyone knows who Spider-Man and Godzilla are, but nobody knows who [[Sci-Fi|Seymour P. Fine]] is. There's no need for such wilful ignorance on Go-Bots either, given how repeatedly tied-in to Transformers it has become - it's not a [[Simon Belmondo]] or a [[Solid Snake]], it's as much part of the Transformers "family" now as Joe is, even if its situation is a bit thornier. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 17:47, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:If I could make another suggestion. Could we maybe forestall this discussion until after AVP has wrapped up? It is what kicked off this whole discussion. I don't want to "encourage" the feature to "spam" a whole bunch of Gobots screencaps... But it has already brought in a little bit of artwork for Go-Bots articles anyways, and with both VP's return to the storyline, and contact having been made to a Gargent Universe recently, any number of things could happen to influence this discussion one way or another, or even render it moot. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 18:06, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::Unless Hasbro buys Bandai and/or Hanna-Barbera, nothing in AVP could change that we're really not allowed to have systematic coverage of Challenge (and that includes screencaps on ~100 articles) here. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:08, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::We're allowed to cover whatever we decide is in scope. We have no affiliation with Hasbro. The fact that the copyright notice on the episodes themselves gives ownership to Tonka, a Hasbro subsidiary, is a bonus. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:20, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::AVP already HAS posted screencaps that were are using... Not to mention some original art of Cy-kill. It's a longshot, but it's already happened once. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:22, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::I actually don't like using most of those screencaps - they WEREN'T posted by AVP, they were posted by dickish users trying to game the system, and were only ''acknowledged'' by Cy-Kill. Further, a quick look back at the FB page suggests the question threads they were posted in were deleted. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 19:28, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::Just checked, they're still there. However, I wouldn't use them outside the Src page. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:37, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::Hmm... Should we use the pics AVP deleted outside of source pages at all? Thinking about the Cy-Kill profile pic. Not like we don't have another one to replace it with. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:43, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Escargon is correct, we haven't deleted anything recently. Chris is also correct, you haven't seen us post screen captures from Challenge in the pages of Ask Vector Prime. We have acknowledged art and captures that others have posted. Also, regarding this: "Could we maybe forestall this discussion until after AVP has wrapped up?", it might be a long wait. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 19:47, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::I hadn't realized that AVP hadn't posted those pics themselves (not gotten to that point yet while working through it in my sandbox. In light of this, I've changed my stance, and changed up there earlier in this thread. I'm now going to stay out of this conversation, since I want to dedicate my energies to other stuff for the time being. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:54, 29 October 2015 (EDT)

With no activity on this page for 3 days, I think we can comfortably assess the results. It looks like the vote was better than 2:1 in favor of including Challenge of the GoBots screen captures on the pages, but a healthy caution against overuse. One and only one image per page, and only when official images are not available.

I've also done some homework into the copyright status and it would appear that Warner Bros. is still acknowledging Hasbro's copyright claim. Each '''Challenge of the Gobots''' box set and disk is marked with text to the effect of "GOBOTS and all related characters and elements are trademarks of and (C) [[Hasbro]] Inc." The only thing Hanna-Barbera lays claim to is the actual compilation of the DVDs, and even that is in conjunction with Hasbro: "Program Compilation (C) Hanna-Barbera and Hasbro Inc." The DVD packaging, however, is off-limits. "Package Design (C) Hanna-Barbera and and Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc." The episodes themselves give copyright exclusively to [[Tonka]]. Hopefully this reassures some of Xaaron's concerns, which seemed more legal than philosophical. There are links to photos of the copyright notices on my user page. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 01:42, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Or maybe with 3 days of inactivity on this page, we can consider the matter tabled, what with how time after time the more people talk about it and actually listen to counterpoints the more they realize it's a bad idea and (as we see above) come to change their minds to be against it. If the character and animation likenesses are off-limits even to AVP in the last few days, that should give pause. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 07:05, 3 November 2015 (EST)

*WHAT AM I ARGUING AGAINST AND IS ANGER AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE?!?
SRSLY, though? If some user's posted screencaps make those screencaps TF canon - wouldn't the poster themselves also become canon? Wouldn't Facebook become canon?
Draw the damn line, people; we're never going to be a comprehensive GoBots source unless we fully document the toyline and the cartoon. That ain't happening, not on this wiki at least. Accept that, and our mandate is back to recording only what's mentioned in official TF sources, even obnoxiously, willfully fanwankish ones like AVP alas. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 07:41, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Why not redraw the line to include all GoBots materials? No, it doesn't fit the current definition of our mandate but it is a logically consistent one. No, we would not then have to include all GIJoe, etc materials because there is a fundamental difference. GIJoe is in the same universe as Transformers, GoBots have been declared to be Transformers. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 08:34, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::You answer your own question: It isn't within our mandate and it's not logically consistent because we really then should put in all of GIJoe but we won't do GIJoe because reasons. This has always been a push to change the scope and inclusion criteria for this wiki due to arbitrary personal favoritism. It could only be indulged through this sort of arbitrary personal favoritism. That's not what standards are for. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 09:36, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::You missed my point. It's not within the current mandate, but we could redraw the line to make it our new mandate. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 10:08, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::I would further suggest that we've settled this issue, at least until [http://www.slashfilm.com/gobots-movie-hasbro/ something new comes along to change it], so this discussion becomes a distraction from a genuinely unsettled question. I'm not saying your arguments are invalid, Khajidha, I'm saying that everyone's heard them and there was a clear and convincing consensus against you. Sometimes when that happens, the adult and mature thing to do is concede that you're in the minority and move on. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:41, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::::Go. Make. A. GoBots. Wiki. "Problem" solved. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 19:31, 3 November 2015 (EST)

====Vote Results again for reals maybe? Focus only on Screencapture====

*Proposal: '''No Screen Captures'''
**Supporters: Xaaron, M Sipher, Thylacine 2000, Repowers, ItsWalky, Nevermore, Chris McFeely, Ascendron

*Proposal: '''Expand coverage of Ask Vector Prime GoBots to include '''limited''' "''Challenge of the Gobots''" screen captures, either in notes or main page'''
**Supporters: Giggidy, Escargon, S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47, Khajidha, Saix

*Proposal: '''Screen captures on a case by case basis'''
**Supporters: Abates, Charles RB, Riptide

This is where the current vote stands focusing entirely on the issue of screen captures. Repowers, I took the liberty of adding you to the no column. Please feel free to remove if you like. Thylacine 2000, I respect your passion but there is a difference between "my argument convinced one guy to change his proposal from screen captures in every main page section to screen captures in every notes sections" to "my argument is so good I've picked up supporters in droves." You've said lots and lots and lots of words on this subject and you're still losing 2:1.--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:02, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:And you've said some pretty outrageous and dishonest words on this topic, including immediately above this. At the very least, Ascendron, Escargon, and McFeely changed their positions to be against. This is the second time in a week that you have just happened to get the results wrong in a way that just happens to benefit your side. It is really depressing, though no doubt I only feel that way because I'm a violent gaybasher or however you choose to characterize this dispute. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 09:23, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:I think including one image for informative purposes in the notes section is fine—just as a "this is what this character looks like". This isn't what I want, but I feel like it's a fair enough compromise. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 09:17, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::I don't think I have misrepresented their positions, but if I do I apologize. Ascendron said he was moving to notes. McFeely came out in support of the screen capture proposal but didn't like the current way screen captures posted in the AVP comments and acknowledged by Cy-Kill were handled. Not sure what you're talking about with Escargon. But, to do due diligence, I'll follow up with all three. And I am not, and have not, and hopefully will not attack your character in any way. Also, as far as I can tell, going over the edit history, if I got the first vote wrong it was because I conservatively underestimated support for my proposal. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:27, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::I only said my vote on including everything from Gobots probably shouldn't count since I worked on the thing. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 09:31, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::::Well, it would appear that an apology is in order. You, Thylacine, indeed had a better read on the vote than I. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:04, 4 November 2015 (EST)
:I'm in favour of CotG screencaps, but '''only''' in the notes. Main page inclusion is a step too far, I think, and would be more prone to "well we already do [x] why not include the whole thing". --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 11:00, 3 November 2015 (EST)
Point of order: since the inclusion of ''COTG'' screenshots is still a potential legal issue, and one of the votes in the '''No''' column is from [[User:ItsWalky|the guy who owns the Wiki]], is a democratic vote really the proper resolution for this matter? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 10:37, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Again, the DVDs (photos on my user page) recently released and still being distributed by Warner Bros. give copyright of everything Gobots to Hasbro, and gives the "program compilation" a shared copyright between Hasbro and Hanna-Barbera. But, this is ItsWalky's wiki. If he feels that a vote is out of order I will shut up and graciously concede defeat. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 10:42, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::I think the fact that AVP was not able to use screen caps from Challenge of the GoBots trumps any copyright notices on the DVD box sets, however in this case I don't think it's relevant to this Wiki being able to use them in the notes section of articles. We're talking about a bunch of articles about characters with very little fiction and no visual representation, so the question becomes a matter of "will including screencaps really make much of a difference to the information they contain?" I think screencaps make sense where a GoBots character has a visual representation like [[Bug Bite (GoBots)|Bug Bite]] and we want to compare what they looked like in GoBots fiction to what they looked like in Transformers fiction, but not so much where the character has no Transformers representation to begin with. In this case I think it's more effective to just include a link to a GoBots site which would give more information about the GoBots character as well as visual representation. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 15:04, 3 November 2015 (EST)

TL;DR. My comment: Full inclusion of HB GoBots. Yes. <span style="font-size:300%">Over my dead body.</span>--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore|talk]]) 13:59, 3 November 2015 (EST)

The "slippery slope" argument is winning me over. I'm still in favour of ''limited'' screencaps: the ones acknowledged by AVP, the model sheets and such for key people like Bug Bite, the original Cy-Kill profile (even if we scrap the rest I'd argue for this to come in under the same reason Cobra Commander's got that kick-the-dog one, i.e. it looks better). We're likely at the limits of limited already though. Who else could we reasonably add? --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:26, 3 November 2015 (GMT)
:My suggestion would be screencaps, at a maximum of one per page, for 1) those characters with major enough appearance in Transformers fiction (e.g. the e-Hobby GoBots and Cy-Kill, probably a few others), and 2) those with visuals acknowledged by Ask Vector Prime. Otherwise, links are fine. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 16:02, 3 November 2015 (EST)

Another three days with no activity, and I'm big enough to acknowledge that the momentum has shifted. I count 8 against screen captures, 5 in favor, and 3 in favor of limited. Basically a tie, and I think ties need to go to the more conservative, i.e. not my, position. As with article creation, the screen capture issue seems to go to no change from our current policy. A long and and acrimonious road to get to the point of no change. I apologize if my arguments along the way caused offense. Hopefully we can move on. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 08:49, 6 November 2015 (EST)
: Fair's fair -- you help me dispose of Nevermore's <span style="font-size:300%">dead body</span>, and we'll call everything even. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 09:06, 6 November 2015 (EST)

== Who's that <s>Pokemon</s> character? ==
<s>I'm going through posting pics up for [[Cybertron's Most Wanted]], but need you guys' help to identify some of these guys! '''[[:File:UnknownTransTechandRattrapTranstech-CMW.jpg|This is the first character]]''' I can't identify. (He is listed as the question mark in the number 7 slot of the featured characters section.) He's not [[Starscream (TransTech)]] as I initially thought. Starscream appears later in the issue, and is definitely visually distinct.</s> '''[[:File:UnknownoffworlderandWindblade-CMW.jpg|This is the second character]]''' I can't identify. (The green one, not Windblade, listed as the question mark at #23 in the featured characters section). Although there is a slight possibility that he's supposed to be a generic, I highly doubt it since every single other character on the page is a specific guy or gal. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 15:26, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:Maybe the first guy is just Starscream misdrawn? This post and picture from the Rook blog indicates so. [https://www.facebook.com/AxiomNewsRook/photos/pb.890548954322059.-2207520000.1439583294./906676859375935/?type=1&theater ] [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:17, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::Ah, well, if that post says so. That's also a much nicer version of the image I just uploaded... [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:37, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:::By the way, what about that dog-looking thing on the streets on page 1? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:45, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::That's just a [[turbofox]], I believe. Not an actual "character" per se. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:53, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::Actually, Jesse's said on the Allspark that it's meant to be the wolf Mini-Con from Classics. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 18:22, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::Shows what I know. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 18:27, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::: '''[[:File:Anotheruniodentifiedoffworlder-CMW.jpg|Here's another guy]]''' I can't identify. He's mostly obscured by text boxes, which makes it even harder. However, he's in the same panel as the other unidentified green guy, as well as the two [[Windblade (G1)|Windblades]]. He may or may not be a double to the other green offworlder, considering who else is in the panel. In any case, we're looking at the back of an orange head, big green shoulder kibble, with some yellow details on the arm from the looks of it. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:10, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::: '''[[:File:Offworlderprisoners-CMW.jpg|Here's another bunch]]'''. I Think the red guy's Ironhide? But the vents on the side of his head are throwing me off. The two bug guys at the bottom, I have no idea. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 22:39, 15 August 2015 (EDT)
::::: <s>'''[[:File:Unknownprisoninmate-CMW.jpg|And another]]'''. I'm assuming some of these guys are homages to non-Transformers franchises.</s> [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 23:42, 15 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::Hmm. The guy on the bottom left of the one with Hellbat looks like a Kamen Rider that Matt drew in Spotlight: Trailcutter. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:12, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::::Oh, yeah! The colour scheme between this one and "[[V3]]" are pretty different though. Is it patterned after another character of that franchise? That way I can give it a "nickname".[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 20:12, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Don't know much about it, sadly. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 23:05, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::That "unknown inmate" is totally based on Kamen Rider Amazon. -[[User:Ookalf|Ookalf]] ([[User talk:Ookalf|talk]]) 19:34, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
===AllSpark Almanac===
<s>So I noticed '''[[:File:Unknownrobocritter-AAII.jpg|this guy]]''' in the second AllSpark Almanac. I was not gonna bother with it, but then decided of anyone might recognize it as an actual character, and not just some generic critter. Mainly because, this is the AllSpark Almanac, and it has homages and Easter Eggs out the wazoo. If no one can think of anything though, I'll just assume it's a generic that's not noteworthy. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:43, 18 August 2015 (EDT)</s>
:Catillia, according to Forster's deviantart. Also a snake on that page is named something like 1412 or something like that. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 16:54, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
::Thanks, I looked it up, and he says he "stuck in" his real life snake (named 1812). I don't particularly feel that's worth including. If anyone feels otherwise, I can be persuaded to upload the picture and make the page, however. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:21, 18 August 2015 (EDT)

==Apocrypha and Vector Prime==
There have been a few parallel discussions about apocryphal works. [[Alignment]], [[Doomsday Redux!]], [[Bumblebee at Tyger Pax]]. User Grum went ahead and removed the Apocrypha template from Bumblebee at Tyger Pax, prompting a short discussion. I put forth the question on Doomsday Redux!, and by extension on the other unreleased Energon comics that scripts are available for, and got little response. Alignment had quite a robust debate when the AllSpark Almanac came out, but not much since then. All three have been declared to have happened by Vector Prime, and in their primary universes as opposed to in some splinter timeline. Is there value to keeping the Apocrypha template, versus just having a note detailing the unusual circumstance of the publication? It seems like something that should get a greater discussion than it's getting. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 00:05, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
:They're. Still. Fucking. Apocrypha. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 03:36, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
::Since Doomsday Redux was approved by Hasbro and declared to be canon even though it was unreleased, I think that one maybe merits a little more discussion. The others, not so much; even if they're canon from an in-universe perspective, they still aren't Hasbro-approved. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 05:07, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
:::A story that was officially commissioned and scheduled, then yanked because of licensee bankruptcy, should be listed as no different than a canceled toy. An explanatory note afterwards can be enough. But something that was never licensed cannot be licensed after-the-fact just through assertions and "oh, come on!"-ism. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 08:04, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
::::I tend to agree. I'd suggest that Vector Prime's statements be added to the notes section, and perhaps the stories be slotted into the appropriate position in the navigation track. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:23, 18 August 2015 (EDT)

== Galvatron II style linking ==

So I've noticed that there's been some disagreements on how to organize articles such as, say, Spychanger Prime or Balancing Act Prime. Perhaps we could implant a Galvatron II style system; link both in the main article, along with a suite. Also it could be used for the Thirteen and their Uniend selves, for the time being, I suppose. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:37, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:What if we did something like this for [[Screech (Generations)|Screech]] since he is 1 version of G1 Skids? Or [[Razorclaw (Universe)|Razorclaw]] since he's 1 version of Tigerhawk? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 19:51, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
::Quite honestly, I don't think I would have a problem with that. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:54, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:::Seems promising. Maybe sandbox one? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:39, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
::::Unfortunately, I couldn't make a sandbox to save a life. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:49, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::There are a couple of other characters that might also benefit from this - BW Megatron and Noble, Overlord and Gigatron maybe... I think it's probably worth looking into. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 14:17, 1 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::I've added a suite to the (hopefully non-controversial) example of [[Silverbolt (BW)|Silverbolt]] and [[Jetstorm (BM)|Jetstorm]]. What do we think? Does it work? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 04:06, 31 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::I like it. It's simple and elegant. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 08:50, 31 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::I find it pointless and cluttering. We don't slap "Galvatron" into Megatron's suite, despite better character continuity than Silverbolt and Jetstorm. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 09:04, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::::::Oh yeah, I forgot that time Galvatron got turned back into Megatron at the end of the series --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 12:16, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::::::::[[Megatron (G1)/Generation 1 cartoon continuity#The Battlestars manga and story pages|I guess you did?]] [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 13:23, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::::::::::Granted, but you're both stretching the definition of series and opening up a bit of a can of worms regarding where we draw the line at different "versions" of the same "character" anyway. G1 Galvatron and Megatron were treated separately mainly because the sheer volume of material for both meant it made sense for us to do it that way but all the times G1 Bumblebee became Goldbug (and sometimes went back again) are all covered on one page, as are UT Cyclonus/Snow Cat, Tidal Wave/Mirage, G1 Overlord/Gigatron, Hot Rod/Rodimus Prime and all the UT Megatrons and Galvatrons. Yet BW/BM Waspinator/Thrust, Rhinox/Tankor, Silverbolt/Jetstorm and Megatron/Noble are separate pages. That's a whole other debate and I don't particularly want to dredge up any of those cases as they've all been done to death a million times before (except for maybe Overlord/Gigatron, I feel there's a clear split that could be made there and linked this way) but I do think this as a good way of dealing with what we do have. It doesn't take up a lot of room and it would only apply to a handful of cases at best anyway. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 16:09, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::::::::::In the case of the Vehicon generals, that's because they're different characters that happen to use the same sparks as pre-established characters. The others are functionally "same guy, but with a new name". I thought that was clear. (Megatron as Noble is detailed on his page, so I dunno why you brought him up.) [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 01:53, 4 November 2015 (EST)
::::::Looks fine and dandy to me. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:34, 3 November 2015 (GMT)

==Notes and images==
I seem to remember that there was some clever way of adding notes so that they don't break onto a new line when up against a left-aligned image, but for the life of me I can't find it by searching. Can anyone hit me up with the codez? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 05:27, 17 September 2015 (EDT)

== Timelines fiction release order links ==

I have noticed that where it is so, a ''Timelines'' story's primary previous or next story arrow points to the BotCon comic if it has the closest release date. However, the primary previous and next story arrows on BotCon comics' pages always point to other BotCon comics because they actually have a "Volume" order to go with. It seems inappropriate to me a story point to another which is not also linked to it. So what do we do, for instance, with "[[Burning Bridges]]", the first non-Facebook ''Timelines'' story to come out after BotCon 2015's "[[Cybertron's Most Wanted]]" and "[[The Return of Blurr]]"? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 00:39, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
:I think the idea of putting all of the disparate Timlines stories in chronological order for the template is stupid. What exactly is gained there? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 12:43, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
::It was probably workable at some point, but it's long since lost any functionality, I think. We keep winding up with stories that have like three or four "previous" or "next" links. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 15:19, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
:::Right. It's excess that only exists to do stuff like link "[[Collections]]" to "[[Head Games]]" because... why? How does that really help readers? It really should just be limited to the specific media (script readings, etc.) and continuity (Wings Universe, etc.), not a grab-bag of random stories that just happen to be under the Timelines banner. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:29, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
::::Would anyone object if I went and removed all previous and next release order story links, leaving in only previous and next continuity story links? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 14:38, 1 October 2015 (EDT)

== Harmonic resonance ==

So throughout [[Ask Vector Prime]], the theme of "trans-dimensional harmonic resonance"/"quantum harmonic resonance" has come up as an in-universe explanation for most commonly used characters (i.e. the franchise tropes of Optimus Prime, Megatron, Grimlock, etc.), design re-use across continuity families (i.e. pre-Transformer toys which got recycled as Transformers toys), mistaken use of story elements which seemingly don't belong (i.e. ''Armada'' Beast Wars in "[[Fire in the Dark]]"), other things (i.e. RiD Unicron as a seemingly mundane Transformer who (not) coincidentally became a universe-destroying planet), etc. Do we want to make a page(s) about this and how should we handle it? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 21:23, 9 October 2015 (EDT)
:Same way anything else is handled? Create an article and document the things VP said about it? --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 21:25, 9 October 2015 (EDT)

== Online Transformers Games help request ==
So, I've recently been frustrated with the fact that many online games have been taken down, making it really hard to create articles for them. I've been doing well creating articles for them up to now, either finding copies of the games on other websites or cobbling together articles by watching play-throughs on Youtube. However, I've hit upon my first real snag with "[[Transformers Prime: Beast Hunters Game]]." I can't find any footage of it whatsoever anywhere, and the game doesn't seem to load on the Hasbro or Hub website. I never played the game, so I can't create anything from memory either. Anyone has anything to help me out with this? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 22:29, 17 October 2015 (EDT)

== Repurposing vs Multi-family toys ==
Over on the discussion about [[Talk:Clampdown (RID)|Clampdown]], M Sipher raised an excellent point about how silly it is to not have the Clampdown [[Kreon]] on the Clampdown [[Transformers: Robots in Disguise (2015 franchise)|Robots in Disguise]] page. This dovetailed nicely with my own musings on the subject. Right now, technically, the way the wiki is organized if we wanted to have that toy on two pages we'd have to arbitrarily declare one Clampdown to be a [[repurposing]] of the other, which I find to be ridiculous. I had a discussion on one of the talk pages about removing the repurposing label from toys that were simply imported from one continuity family to another, only to be shot down.

As a compromise position, I've worked up a related idea: "multi-family toys". That is to say, a toy that seems to exist more-or-less unchanged across multiple families. This seems like a distinct idea from a straight-up repurpose. To me, at least, there seems to be a fundamental difference from someone like [[Dirge (Armada)|Armada Dirge]], which is a brand-new character based on a toy with a different name and bio, to someone like [[Lockdown (G1)|IDW's Lockdown]]. Furthermore, [[Ask Vector Prime]] has formalized the idea that Hasbro's been running with, namely that a character can comfortably exist across multiple [[continuity family|continuity families]] and that this is no big deal.

This is my go at introducing the idea: [[User:Giggidy/Sandbox/Multi-Family Toys]]. Any feedback would be appreciated. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:34, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
:I agree with Kre-O but ROTF Lockdown figure didn't meant to be G1 Lockdown when it was produced. He meant to be Movie version of Lockdown. so G1 version is indeed a repurpose.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 10:01, 31 October 2015 (EDT)
:I like the idea of separating the concept of "Foo was repurposed as Foo" from that of "Foo was repurposed as Bar". I still think it would be better to have the Kre-O and various Iocus-cluster toys on their own pages while leaving only a heading and a link out from the pages of characters they are visually based upon.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 10:53, 31 October 2015 (EDT)
::I don't feel strongly one way or the other about Kre-O. I'm solidly on-board with the way the merchandise is currently handled and disagree with making Iocus-cluster pages for all the merch. I can see how it's an intellectually coherent position to want to do so... but I don't like it. If we do decide to keep merchandise on its own page as its own character as well as on the local pages, then I'd consider it a [[User:Giggidy/Sandbox/Multi-Family Toys|Multi-Family Toy]]. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:28, 31 October 2015 (EDT)

== Multiversal singularities ==

Now that AVP on Facebook has publicly acknowledged the splintering of singularities (albeit via a now semi-unaware TransTech Vector Prime), should we merge all the Thirteen's mainstream multiverse and Aligned pages together? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 14:59, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:Having waited to see how it all shook out, yes, I still stand by [[Talk:Thirteen#Revisiting_yet_again|the original suggestion I made a couple of months ago]], which is to merge the individual incarnations of the Thirteen's pages into singular ones (except for Alpha Trion and Aligned Optimus Prime), treating them more as concepts that will probably require "conceptual history" sections. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 15:04, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::What about the SG versions of Unicron and Primus? We typically give new pages to SG versions of characters, as per countless previous discussions on separating out the SG versions of other characters from their positive polarity counterparts. Except, since it's Primus and Unicron we're talking about here, them being them and their SG versions being SG versions of them makes this a little fuzzy. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 15:20, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:::I completely disagree with Chris's proposal and would rather treat them like every other character, but my opinion doesn't mean much, so. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:40, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::I'm kind of torn on this. On one hand, splitting by continuity family will lead to pointless micro-articles like "Vector Prime (TransTech)", and don't even know how one would begin to deal with Fun Pub Nexus Prime. On the other, Aligned Megatronus really has very little to do with Dreamwave Fallen and ROTF Fallen and having them all on one page would seem antithetical to the goal of accessibility. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 16:33, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:::::I, too, am torn. I like keeping the Aligned stuff separate. Maybe just go case-by-case? Like, the Movie Fallen could probably be split from the Dreamwave guy, but I'm not sure Vector Prime (TransTech) is a thing that needs to exist. Do any other members of the Thirteen have a substantial amount of fiction to them?--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:48, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::::Maybe use suites? And like, point out that they were all at one point considered to be incarnations of The Same Dude. I wouldn't be opposed to merging most of the Aligned Thirteen, though. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 18:48, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:::::::Using suites does sound like a good idea, particularly for the SG versions of Primus and Unicron. It keeps them together with the main versions allowing them to be separated onto their own pages. I like it. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 19:26, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::::::Me too. Seems like a good compromise for the cases where we do decide to split. I still think we should avoid articles that are too short. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:29, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:::::::::Also if we utilize a suite, then we can keep main version(s) of guys like [[Primus]] or [[Unicron]] at their own namespace. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 19:55, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::::::::Suite's suit. We should do that. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:43, 3 November 2015 (EST)

Summary of the multiversal singularities:
*[[Unicron]] (G1, UT, Movie, Animated, Aligned, Kre-O, SG) — I think UT, Aligned, and SG can support their own pages; the others are minor versions based on G1.
*[[Primus]] (G1, UT, SG, Movie, GoBots, Aligned) — Only UT and SG really stand out.
*Prima ([[Prima (G1)|G1, Movie]], [[Prima (WFC)|Aligned]])
*Vector Prime ([[Vector Prime (Cybertron)|UT, Movie, TransTech]], [[Vector Prime (WFC)|Aligned]])
*Alpha Trion ([[Alpha Trion (G1)|G1]], [[Alpha Trion (RID)|RID]], [[Alpha Trion (Energon)|UT]], [[Alpha Trion (SG)|SG]], [[Alpha Trion (Animated)|Animated]], [[Alpha Trion (ROTF)|Movie]], [[Alpha Trion (WFC)|Aligned]], [[Alpha Trion (Kre-O)|Kre-O]])
*Solus Prime ([[Solus Prime (Prime)|Aligned]], [[Solus Prime (G1)|G1]])
*Alchemist Prime ([[Alchemist Prime (Prime)|Aligned]], [[Alchemist Prime (G1)|G1]])
*Nexus Prime ([[Nexus Prime (Classics)|G1?]], [[Nexus Prime (Prime)|Aligned]])
*Onyx Prime ([[Onyx Prime (Prime)|Aligned]], [[Onyx Prime (G1)|G1]])
*[[Amalgamous Prime]] (Aligned, G1 [sorta])
*Liege Maximo ([[Liege Maximo (G2)|G1, TransTech]], [[Liege Maximo (WFC)|Aligned]])
*Megatronus/The Fallen ([[The Fallen|G1, Movie]], [[Megatronus (WFC)|Aligned]]) — Movie could really, really stand to be split out.
*Optimus Prime ([[Optimus Prime (WFC)|lol]]) — lol
My feelings if we're going the "we don't want small pages" route. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 20:42, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:You know, another thought just crossed my mind. Why didn't we think of using a suite for the many versions of Sideways too, instead of turning his disambig page into his main page? --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 22:00, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::Because then we'd have to put the explanation of his whole deal on all the pages. I think that putting a suite on his pages isn't a bad idea, but I do like the set-up we have now. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 07:12, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Agree on splitting out Movie from the rest of the Fallen's page; SG and Aligned Unicron's are different enough, and with enough fiction in the latter's case, to get a-splitting. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:43, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::Movie Fallen should definitely split.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 14:12, 4 November 2015 (EST)
:I don't really think that UT Primus is that different from G1 Primus, or at least from the G1 Primuses of fiction that was contemporary of the time (Dreamwave, late 3H, early Fun Pub, etc.). Granted, back then was when the singularity concept was in full swing so UT Primus was viewed as the same dude as G1 Primus anyway, but I don't see anything in particular that would distinct UT Primus from 2002-2006 G1 Primus that much to separate him out. After all, the heavily Marvel G1-influenced Primus/Unicron/Thirteen backstory of that era of was attributed to both the G1 and UT versions of Primus via things like 2004's The Ultimate Book (G1 Primus), the Armada Fleer trading cards (UT Primus), and even Takara's "World of the Transformers" website that [[Talk:World of Transformers/Section5 src#SOURSE-2 － THE ONE & 13PROTTYPES －|told the backstory]] with [[:File:Original13.jpg|imagery of Armada Unicron, Cybertron Primus, and Cybertron Vector Prime (and War Within's '''''G1''''' The Fallen) among the Thirteen]]. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 02:46, 6 November 2015 (EST)

== Formatting of Year pages ==

So I noticed the pages for [[2007]] and [[2012]] are formatted VERY differently from any other Years' pages, being built out of subpages. As a result, the parent page ends up taking on any categories its subpages are tagged with even if they're not really applicable to the larger page (Toys, Media, Games, etc.), plus it creates an inconsistency with the rest of the Year articles. (Plus I'm not so sure this subdivision really makes the editing or upkeep process any easier). Should we move all the information to a single page like the other Year articles, or perhaps change the rest to match these two? -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 14:08, 4 November 2015 (EST)
:At one point we had all the year pages with separate subpages at one point, and then they got merged and then some of the pages got separated again. I'm not sure that there's any benefit to having subpages for each section. It just means the smaller pages come up pointlessly when you do a search or sometimes when you hit the random page link. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 14:41, 4 November 2015 (EST)
::Understood. I've gone in and moved all the 2007 and 2012 content (and [[2006]], which I guess I missed the first time) back to their main pages, and tagged the subpages with speedy deletion. If someone could take care of those, it'd be much appreciated. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 16:28, 4 November 2015 (EST)

== Why is Glyph not credited in the Character Roster list for the G1 episode 'Five Faces of Darkness part 4'? ==

She is an official retcon, no different than a bunch of other Botcon retcon characters (eg. Ion Storm), or 'Acid Storm' who was retconned by another official means.

Was her exclusion from the Character Roster done on purpose, or simply forgotten and needs updating?

Update: I've made a change to include Glyph on the 'Five Faces of Darkness part 4' Character Roster...but I do not have the information as to when she appeared, in relation to all the other characters. All the characters have a number beside them to indicate the numerical order they appeared in. So, does anyone know Glyph's number? {{unsigned|Zackmak}}

:1) Please sign your posts.
:2) Please don't make edits to fiction you have not personally watched or read, because of the very problems you suffered above. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 10:46, 23 November 2015 (EST)

Still getting used to how this works. My apologies for the newbie mistakes. Wondering though why even one of the many TFwiki administrators don't make the change? It seems like a no-brainer...but that's why I asked the initial question - to find out why she was left out of the 'Character Roster'--[[User:Zackmak|Zackmak]] ([[User talk:Zackmak|talk]]) 18:17, 28 November 2015 (EST)
:Because editing the wiki is not an automatic thing. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 18:33, 28 November 2015 (EST)

== Page names for planets ==

Some planets in ''Transformers'' with numbers in their names are variably parsed with the number in regular Hindu-Arabic numerals, Roman numerals, or in words. (i.e. [[Hydrus Four]]) When I search on the wiki, I generally think of Roman numerals by default, especially since ''Transformers'' is science fiction. Does anyone else think that we should put planets' pages in Roman numerals as long as such parsing is not overshadowed by different parsing? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 20:03, 20 November 2015 (EST)
: So, if I am reading your proposal correctly, you suggest that if there are two canonical parsing of the name of a planet, and one uses Roman numerals, that one should have primacy? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 22:16, 20 November 2015 (EST)
:: Correct. That is, as long as a different parsing is not more prominent. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 17:51, 22 November 2015 (EST)
:::I guess I don't see what that gets us. Mind you, I don't see any harm either, I'm just not sold. What are we doing now? Most prominent? First official text parsing? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 18:37, 22 November 2015 (EST)
::::I thought it would help navigability. Not sure what we're doing now, but I think it's first official text parsing. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 18:53, 22 November 2015 (EST)
:::::I guess you can put me down as a tentative yes. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:14, 22 November 2015 (EST)
:I think that seems unnecessary so long as there's a redirect in place, which there should be if the planet has been named with Roman numerals in fiction. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 20:24, 22 November 2015 (EST)

== Italics in headers for toy sections ==

I've noticed that most pages' toy sections don't italicize the toyline section name, but some do. Examples: in my memory, [[Optimus Prime (G1)/toys]] and [[Optimus Prime (WFC)/toys]] have never italicized their toyline name headers but the [[Brawn (G1)]] page currently does. Do we have a rule on this? If we do I haven't been able to find it. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 17:51, 22 November 2015 (EST)

== Proposal: Temporary Moratorium on AVP ==
After GoBots, after Ulchtar, I think we have decidedly reached a point where the act of editing the wiki according to the latest "official" information is getting in the way of wiki informativeness and quality standards. To be frank, the privilege of creating canonical material has been perverted for the sole purpose of changing this website. I propose a two-week cessation on adding any material to this site that appears on AVP or any of its upcoming iterations. I would like to see what discussions we have here, and how the pages are modified, when we're not lurching to the organ grinder's tune.

If people think this suggestion is totally out of line, by all means say so. If they agree, please say so as well. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:01, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:That's actually exactly what I was considering suggesting. This is all getting a little silly; I'd be more than happy with that, as it'd curb "to-the-wiki"-ism while not banning AVP content entirely for no real defensible reason. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 18:45, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:YES! So much yes! (with the sole exception being the archiving of AVP-and-its-ilk Facebook posts onto their respective archive pages). --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 18:48, 30 November 2015 (EST)
::<s>I'm not really sure what this is supposed to accomplish. I've never had a hard time ignoring the parts of something that annoy me or that I have no interest in. If a robust discussion on a minor character like Ulchtar bugs you so much, maybe you should take a two-week moratorium from editing the wiki. I vote no.</s> Fine. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:09, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:::Are you familiar with the expression "the straw that broke the camel's back"? Ulchtar isn't The Thing, but The Latest Thing In A Long Line Of Things. I say yes. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] ([[User talk:Andrusi|talk]]) 20:13, 30 November 2015 (EST)
Yes. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 19:51, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:I'm down, and let me add this to it: going forward we put stuff from AVP and its mutations on the same waiting period as all the other FP stuff [[Help:Coming_soon#Fun_Publications_Fan_Club_material|we've had basically forever]]. No, it's not part of the "paid content" blardeeblar. But maybe it'll help stem the blatant wiki-gaming going on, and also cut back on the amount of corrective/speculative editing, especially when they have to apologize/retcon/whatever something posted two days prior. Maybe trim it to two weeks rather than one month, but still. The immediate TO THE WIKI! needs to fucking ''stop''. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 19:58, 30 November 2015 (EST)
::Since Escargon brought this to my attention, I'm going to break my usual policy about commenting on my own work and vote '''yes'''. It won't kill anyone to wait a couple of weeks to edit this stuff, and may in fact improve the caliber of the questions we're getting. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 20:17, 30 November 2015 (EST)
Yes. In addition to the reasons mentioned, this should stop the back-and-forth occasionally seen of<BR>
1) AVP posts something.<BR>
2) Someone rushes to add it to the Wiki<BR>
3) Someone else disagrees with the interpretation of AVP<BR>
4) First someone goes back to AVP and asks for further clarification on the first post<BR>
5) AVP responds<BR>
6) Second someone is too busy arguing on the Wiki to check for updates<BR>
7) First someone does victory lap because official source confirmed their idea<BR>
8) Third someone stops by to say this is why they hate AVP.<BR>
We are all children of the internet. We like winning arguments. But being able to ask official sources ''in real time'' to contribute to internet arguments tends to escalate the arguments and the tensions underlying the arguments. New information comes in? Fine -- let's let it breathe for a while before deciding what to do with it. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 21:10, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:Regarding what I said above about updates made to the Facebook post archives being the sole exception to this, it has been suggested that those should have at least a one-day wait after each post is made on Facebook, which sounds reasonable. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 00:07, 1 December 2015 (EST)

I can get behind this. I've drawn attention to this resurgent "OMG TO THE WIKI" attitude while commenting on this problem before and putting a cap on it sounds good. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 08:06, 1 December 2015 (EST)

Since the idea of immediate-term write-ups is apparently problematic to a large number of editors, is there any reason to limit the 2 week cooling off period to just the FP material? Given concerns about spoilers and similar (if less heated) arguments about interpertation of ongoing IDW offerings, perhaps a 2-week wait should just be the standard wiki policy for all fiction. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 07:38, 1 December 2015 (EST)
:You KNOW all "immediate-term write-ups" is not the issue at play. Don't even. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 08:00, 1 December 2015 (EST)
::I actually don't. You and Chris both talk about "TO THE WIKI" as if it's a well understood problem without explaining why. Chris, meanwhile, posts detailed summaries of the comics before American comic shops even open. Aside from some people not liking Ask Vector Prime, I honestly don't understand the difference. It offends my sense of order, but I will admit that's probably more my problem than yours. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:24, 1 December 2015 (EST)
::: The difference is that comics- and the information they reveal- are set in stone; people can't just obsessively demand answers from James Roberts/John Barber/Mairghread Scott about background trivia just for the sake of changing the wiki. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 19:40, 1 December 2015 (EST)
:::: I guess I see. Maybe. Maybe not. Looking at the Ulchtar thing, which apparently was very annoying for people, there was a question asked on the 18th of November. Then an answer on the 28th of November. There were a few follow-up questions but none of them got an answer. The answer was never edited. Then there was three days of debate about what the implications of the answer meant. I don't see how, if we had the debate from December 13-15 it would have been appreciably different, or less annoying. But then, I didn't find the debate annoying in the first place, so again, this could point to my inability to understand such things. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:59, 1 December 2015 (EST)
:This is a recurring, AVP-specific problem that doesn't affect other prominent fiction. The Carcer thing was an isolated incident. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 08:06, 1 December 2015 (EST)
ThisIsWhyWeCantHaveNiceThings.jpg --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] ([[User talk:DrSpengler|talk]]) 09:22, 1 December 2015 (EST)

So, like, are we starting this today or what? I will of course respect the consensus and wait till the 14th if we are, but Cy-Kill just had a new adventure if we're still debating. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 13:26, 1 December 2015 (EST)
:I'm going to assume that, yes, this is starting today, and that current content will be added no sooner than two weeks hence, December 14. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:24, 1 December 2015 (EST)

===Mystery Science Theater 3000===
Does anyone object to me making a page for Mystery Science Theater 3000 now, rather than waiting the 2 weeks? I only ask because the latest AVP plugs the MST3K [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mst3k/bringbackmst3k kickstarter campaign], which is over in 4 days. Given the time-sensitive nature, it seemed an exception might be warranted. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 14:47, 7 December 2015 (EST)

===Results===
'''"I would like to see what discussions we have here, and how the pages are modified, when we're not lurching to the organ grinder's tune."'''

It looks like the discussions we have when not lurching to the tune is... [[Talk:Grand Galvatron|more of the same]]. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 10:48, 11 December 2015 (EST)
:There are 63 new "official facts" about Grand Galvatron hitting the wiki every single day, most of them by wiki editors feeding them through a revolving door Facebook page in order to validate their own ideas? I must've missed it. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 11:36, 11 December 2015 (EST)
::Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were complaining about an argument about Ulchtar, one which Grand Galvatron has already exceeded in length. One that started when someone saw some half-translated info and immediately declared TO THE WIKI. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 11:44, 11 December 2015 (EST)

== Notes and whitespace issue ==

A while back I put up some notes in several characters' pages, in order to include a link to the ''[[The Transformers: The Movie]]'''s adaptations within those pages' fiction sections. Unfortunately, it didn't work out quite as well as I wanted. Unlike the Live-action film series, where a similar note would always come up at the end of a section's write-up, the note came right in the middle of the section for many Generation 1 characters. On top of that, because of how some images were included in the section write-ups, several characters got large amounts of white-space in their section write-ups to accommodate the note.

At the time, I had heard that there was a piece of code that could fix the white-space issue, but I've been looking for a while and found nothing. (The closest I got to any sort of result with was: '''<nowiki><div class="floatright">Text on the right</div></nowiki>''' but that didn't solve much either.)

I'd still very much like to keep the links to the movie adaptations on those characters' pages, as those are still pieces of fiction wherein those characters appeared. But at this point, I've given up on finding a solution that will make the note look like less of a mess. And I will admit that the amount of white-space the note sometimes generates is rather unseemly. I figured a note pointing out that characters appeared in an adaptation of the G1 cartoon movie could be put at the bottom of the article, in the "Notes" section.

Either that, or I could double up links within the cartoon section like this: {{storylink|The Transformers: The Movie}} {{storylink|Transformers: The Animated Movie}} {{storylink|Transformers the Movie (Ladybird adaptation)|Transformers the Movie}}. I'm also open to any other suggestions. Either way, I wanted other people to weigh in and give their opinions before I started any kind of wide-spread editing. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:07, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:I think the extra storylinks look lot better than a note. It's what we already do for flashbacks. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 18:10, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:Multiple storylinks make me think that there is something more to be written up, rather than them being multiple versions of the same events. Putting a note at the end of the page seems to divorce the adaptations from the source material. My personal preference is for the note templates, regardless of the whitespace issue. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 18:39, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:: I'm not convinced that multiple story links or notes are needed at all, at least on a character page. If there are multiple tellings of the same event, probably a character only needs the primary one. Then, anyone who clicks off to the primary story can see a note that there are other adaptations. I'm not sure it adds anything to Bumblebee, for instance, to know that yes, he did this in the Transformers movie but also in a novel and a comic and a story book. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 18:48, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:::I'd rather keep some indication of which adaptation which character shows up in on their own pages, considering it is inconsistent from character to character how many adaptations they show up in. Some characters show up in all of them, some show up in only some of them, and others show up in none of the adaptations. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:02, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:::: I guess I just don't see what the value is of that. Especially because the adaptation itself will have the character roster. Mind you, I don't feel particularly strongly about it one way or the other. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:07, 3 December 2015 (EST)

==Proposal: A "Former multiversal singularities" category==

As probably know, a recent story has split up multiversal singularities into separate characters, or something like that. Because of this, the "multiversal singularities" category has been dissolved, and is no longer linked to on character pages. But why? The idea of multiversal singularities shaped several years of ''Transformers'' fiction. My proposal: a "Formal Multiversal singularities" category, so that we can acknowledge the characters who were once multiversal singularities while not inadvertantly implying that they still ''are'' multiversal singularities. Thoughts? -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 01:22, 13 December 2015 (EST)
:Isn't that, like, only the Thirteen, Primus, and Unicron? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 02:04, 13 December 2015 (EST)

::Yeah. So it'd be an easy thing to do. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 03:15, 13 December 2015 (EST)

:Or we just re-instate "Multiversal Singularities" as a category because categories have '''''NEVER''''' been predicated on current status. BW Blackarachnia doesn't lose her "Predacon" category because she ultimately ended up a Decepticon after being a Maximal for a while. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 17:01, 13 December 2015 (EST)
::Did we ''ever'' have that category? I mean, we ''should'', but yeah, we wouldn't have removed if we had for exactly the reason Sipher states. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 17:51, 13 December 2015 (EST)
:::I checked a few relevant articles at random. Went back to last version before this October. Couldn't find that category in their category lists. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 20:04, 13 December 2015 (EST)
::::I was probably mistaken. I probably just happened to notice Unicron/Primus/one of the Thirteen didn't have a multiversal singularity category on their page, and assumed that it was deleted because of the because of the retcon. My bad. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 13:49, 14 December 2015 (EST)

==Vandalism==
Um, yeah. So one of the pages on the Wanted pages list is...''Spiral Vagina''. That means that someone tried linking to a page called Spiral Vagina at some point. I'm not really sure how to handle that or who to let know about it, so I'm just posting it here. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 18:27, 15 December 2015 (EST)
:[[Genital System]]. I'm very sorry. Incidentally, if you wanted to find what pages link to that, you could have used this page: http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Spiral_Vagina --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 18:32, 15 December 2015 (EST)
::Oh. Thank you. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 18:54, 15 December 2015 (EST)
"'''''Kiss Players!''''' ''No, It's Really Not Vandalism, This Actually Happened.''" --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 21:33, 15 December 2015 (EST)
:The entire page should just be this discussion. [[User:Chip|Chip]] ([[User talk:Chip|talk]]) 05:44, 21 December 2015 (EST)
I seriously want to make that page, but something so epically horrible might need s comitte just to handle the comedy potential. [[User:Lush City|Lush City]] ([[User talk:Lush City|talk]]) 08:52, 18 December 2015 (EST)

== We're all sick of arguing about GoBots ==

But here we are again. I restate my position as detailed in an AllSpark post: since moving to its own page, with Cy-Kill returning to his own universe and talking exclusively about "unmade" GoBots episodes, "Renegade Rhetoric" has become ''GoBots'' fiction, not ''Transformers'' fiction, and we do not cover GoBots fiction. Events from ''Challenge of the GoBots'' "season 2" do not warrant coverage on the wiki, and I think that any events described from the original, actually-existing cartoon should be reduced to minimum, and all GoBots characters only mentioned in these stories consolidated into simplified "List of Guardian" and "List of Renegade" pages with only brief write-ups, linking readers to our archive of the Facebook posts if they want the full scoop. Characters such as Cy-Kill and those who have actually appeared in Transformers-universe stories should, of course, retain their own articles. We have editors actively working in bad faith, manipulating Renegade Rhetoric by asking leading questions to force the inclusion of ''GoBots'' on this wiki when it has been repeatedly decided that it won't be, and I am all for an exception being made so that this type of behaviour is not rewarded. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 19:48, 6 January 2016 (EST)
: THIS WEBSITE'S EMPEROR-KING AGREES --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 20:03, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::Thirded. GoBots fiction, and cheating, do not belong here. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 20:05, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:100% agreement. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 20:06, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:::EDIT: See Below[[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:07, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:::I'm in! -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 20:11, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::::I don't mind either. If nothing else, this entire debacle has taught us that GoBots and Transformers will never be able to peacefully coexist, on toy shelves or otherwise. 20:50, 6 January 2016 (EST)

Changing my vote. The RR page links to the Club page. AVP references and comments on RR. This is canon just as everything else, gaming the system or no. I may be weary, but I won't buckle. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:23, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:I second Escargon. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 21:21, 6 January 2016 (EST)

I don't think anyone will be surprised that I disagree. There seem to be two arguments. 1, it's not Transformers fiction. 2, editors working in bad faith. Going case by case,
1: I don't see how Renegade Rhetoric is GoBots fiction and not Transformers fiction. It's being broadcast on Axiom Nexus News, on Cybertron. It stars Cy-Kill, the hybrid Hanna-Barbara/TransTech version. It features a number of characters who are proper Transformers, from the Aligned continuity and the Unictron Trilogy, and more who are powered by sparks stolen from Mirror Alpha Trion's lab. That seems to be the main intellectual foundation for the argument, and I'll grant that it's novel, but I think it's flawed.
2: Were some editors (including me, I'll admit) asking leading questions? Yes, we were. It seems to have largely stopped, mostly because the column stopped rewarding it. But that applies to ALL of Ask Vector Prime, and that's undoubtedly canon. Are we going to start trying to look at the motivation of every creator now and altering coverage accordingly? Milne draws Hot Shot as dead to poke at Walky, should we undocument that?

And now, additional factors. I hate making slippery slope arguments, but really, the real reason we're having this conversation and everyone knows it is that there's a sizable block of people who don't like the content. That's what all of this boils down to. And if the wiki starts picking and choosing what to document, or at what detail to document, based on that, then it will have well and truly lost its way. Because if we decide that we can come up with a pseudo-logical justification to exclude this content, then we'll use it as precedent and do it again. All of Ask Vector Prime. Kiss Players. The Beast Within. That weird retcon about Cyclonus and Bombshell from a video. Big swaths of the Dreamwave run. I don't see it ending. Yes, people are sick of arguing, but this policy will lead to more, not less, arguments.

Another, lesser factor, is that these pages are already made. So we're proposing going through some 200 articles that are already created in compliance with this wiki's policies and changing them due to an exception, making more work for ourselves to make the wiki less informative.

And a third factor, is that these posts are popular. Ask Vector Prime's readership is in the thousands. Every post gets liked, shared, commented upon. People are enjoying it, and some of them will come here to see what we have to say about it. The cost of having a possibly extraneous article is negligible, but the cost of not having an article is real.

I also think that we should do what we always do on weighty matters, and have the debate first and THEN call for a vote. I would suggest that all the "seconded" to the proposal are premature. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:38, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:''the real reason we're having this conversation and everyone knows it is that there's a sizable block of people who don't like the content. That's what all of this boils down to.''
:NO. No. No no no. I don't give a rip about the content itself either way. (I mean, okay, I think the endless supply of numbering universes and other such non-story wankery is dumb and pointless and has made a Big Giant Thing of something that was meant to be just a sidelong atmospheric technical footnote in a couple of years-ago stories, but that's not the point.)
:No. The point is that this content is being created explicitly and for no other purpose than to circumvent the wiki's rules, to alter its content and organization, by fans who otherwise were unable to get their way on the very content in question. It's not being done as part of a story in any meaningful sense. It's not a unintended side effect by some uninformed pro writer. It's not part of a carefully considered larger universe. It's not something dictated from on high within Hasbro. It's purposefully, transparently, and most of all ''pointlessly'' manipulative, seemingly all because a handful of OCD minds can't handle the thought of a 30 year old cartoon not being related to another 30 year old cartoon.
:THAT is what I and, I presume, other editors don't like. Because it's bullshit. Canon generated by bullshit -- maybe we should consider treating it accordingly. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 20:53, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::I call bullshit on your bullshit. Because if you have been reading Renegade Rhetoric, it's hilarious. It's practically daily new episodes of an 80s cartoon that get the tone spot-on perfect. It's passionate, it has good stories, it even manages to have good characters despite most episodes being about 2 pages long. And none of it is about circumventing wiki rules. If it was, they'd have stopped doing it once they got everyone in, but they haven't. They're telling new stories, and they're quality, and I defy anyone who is actually reading them to disagree with that. Because, really, I'd love a show of hands, how many of the people who are voting no have actually read a single Renegade Rhetoric Season 2 episode? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:57, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:::You yourself said you and others "were asking leading questions until you stopped getting rewarded for it." This is not the place for such a "reward." That kind of "reward" does not belong here and the entire mechanism for gaining it is what really subverts our rules for inclusion. Any alleged humor in Renegade Rhetoric now is just, as the saying goes, the fruit of the poisoned tree. Also, the debates have been had, since 2007 at least. Also also, "people will want to come here to see more RR/GoBots articles" leaves me quite unmoved. They can see RR on RR, they can read about GoBots on Counter-X, and in the year 2016 they can make their own GoBot wiki. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 21:20, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::::Your "fruit of the poisonous tree" argument leaves me unmoved. Because, according to this proposal, ALL OF THAT STUFF WILL STAY. Because that's all from the Axiom Nexus bit not covered by Chris McFeely's proposal. So you'll leave the poisonous tree, and get rid of all the fruit. Because that makes sense. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:23, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::This was created because the fans voted for it, after a whole month of guests colummist. Some of these fans have been taking advantage of it, yes, but that's not why it was created.[[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:00, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:: The thing is that the RR stories ''are'' funny and clever and well-written, but fundamentally they don't have anything to do with TFs. They're using characters and settings that were never created by Hasbro/Takara. If, say, Renegade Rhetoric wrote a story where Cy-Kill was on an adventure and bumped into Optimus Prime, then yeah, that particular escapade could be added to the wiki, but fundamentally Renegade Rhetoric is Gobots fanfiction; well written fanfic, but basically completely outside this wiki's coverage sphere. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 21:20, 6 January 2016 (EST)
I vote no to this proposal as a whole. Whilst I'm not a fan of wiki gaming, the GoBots stuff happening these days is nothing like that. They're fun stories for the sake of fun, and I'd be sad to see them banished. (I could probably deal with "List of Guardians" and "List of Renegades" articles, though.) [[User:Sky Shadow|Sky Shadow]] ([[User talk:Sky Shadow|talk]]) 21:10, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:Yeah, or at least group articles for a good number of them. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:11, 6 January 2016 (EST)
If I say yes, will people actually go back to making significant contributions instead of complaining about everything AVP does? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 21:15, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::No. If you say yes to this proposal, it will lead to more arguments, more complaining about AVP, and then Thy will say, "hey, it worked well for GoBots, let's undo all 1000 AVP articles." Remember, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." I urge you to vote with your conscience and not give in to a crowd to try to forestall an argument, for this change WILL open the floodgates. Plus, it will lead to people spending time UNDOING informative articles they don't like rather than making informative articles they do. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:19, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:::I didn't even think about this, but it makes a lot of sense. Any breaking of the rule of putting What Is Canon before anything else (when that's been the wiki's entire modus operandi up until this started) is a dangerous path to follow. [[User:Sky Shadow|Sky Shadow]] ([[User talk:Sky Shadow|talk]]) 21:25, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:I got Armada and Energon DVDs for Christmas. Sure. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:17, 6 January 2016 (EST)
Like Escargon and Giggidy, I am against this proposal. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 21:34, 6 January 2016 (EST)

So I'm only a recent editor of this Wiki, but I've been reading it religiously for years. And as a deeply devoted and long time TF fan, despite what some may feel, AVP, RR, and the collective of Club FB Pages have been some of the most entertaining pieces of TF canon. Yes, Go-Bots has a different lineage than the rest of Transformers proper, but at least since the Almanacs, and especially through these FB Pages, Go-Bots has become recognized as legitimate canon within the TF Multiverse. While I admit to being a completionist, and ideally, I'd love to see the entirety of Go-Bots, Brave, Zoids, etc. covered on this wiki due to their relation with Transformers; but worry not, for I understand that realistically, that truly would become far too distractedly cluttered - which is why I can even agree with not having extensive coverage for anything Go-Bots related that is outside of anything under the umbrella of Transformers. But as it was mentioned earlier, Renegade Rhetoric is treated with the same regard as Ask Vector Prime, Spacewarp's Logs and all the Axiom Nexus News Pages. It may not be "directly" Transformers, but it's far more intertwined than the 80's cartoon. No, people shouldn't be abusing to ability to have canon produced just for the sake of the Wiki, but that REALLY doesn't seem to be the case with what RR is producing currently. They're great stories in good fun, and I believe they should be treated as being just as much canon to any other TF media. I vote to include it. Hail Cy-KIll! [[User:IKY|IKY]]

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2016-01-07T02:44:37Z

IKY: /* We're all sick of arguing about GoBots */

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

This is the place for discussion of topics that affect the entire wiki. Some topics that would ordinarily be here have merited their own pages:

{{chapters|title=Specific Discussion Subjects|align=left|content=
<div class="list-header">'''Moving From Wikia:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving|Arriving]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving|Leaving]]
* [[Transformers Wiki:Community Portal/Complaints|Complaints]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''New Ad Policy:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki:Ads|Ads]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Bookworm Database-Crash:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Damage Control Central|Damage Control Central]]
* [[Project:Bookworm Crash]]
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Leaving2|Leaving Take 2]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Server Move:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving2|Arriving Take 2]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Relicensing:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Relicensing|Relicensing]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''Dealing With Vandalism:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Vandalism|Vandalism]]
<br/><div class="list-header">'''GoBots Sister Wiki:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/GoBots|Discussion on the place of GoBots in this wiki]]
<br/> <div class="list-header">'''Wiki Technical Information:'''</div>
* [[Transformers_Wiki:Tech|A Not So Brief Summary of the Horrible Things That McFly and Co. Have Done To Keep This Wiki From Melting Down]]
}}<br/>

{{:{{FULLPAGENAMEE}}/Archive}}


== GoBots 2015 ==
Hey guess what - people are using AVP to try to settle this internet score too. What a shock, I know, right? Multiple wiki editors said the scores of new one-sentence-one-source GoBot articles should all be made into a single list, read commentary here:
http://www.allspark.com/forums/topic/101932-tfwikinet-thread-30/page-96

Before very many more one-sentence-one-source articles get installed, I think we should at least have some discussion here. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 13:38, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:I say make an exception and do a full coverage on Gobots.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 13:48, 18 October 2015 (EDT)

:Completely sold on combo pages by Tindalos: we already do include Related Characters on pages like [[Susan Hoffman]], [[Collins (Movie)]]. We could easily do a Guardians#Minor Guardians and Renegades#Minor Renegades for people who haven't got enough to them. (Like, Cop-Tur and Zero gets a lot said about them but Fly Trap does not) Groups like Puzzler could be all stuffed under the Puzzler page. (The Axiom Nexus Renegades, I'd cheat and say keep them on their own pages since ''these'' are meant to be Transformers in-universe.) --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 18:49, 18 October 2015 (GMT)

:Most of the Gobots described by RR are getting more than one note name mentions. History, alt-modes, personality, the works. I wouldn't just conglomerate them all together. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 13:59, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:However, I wouldn't be opposed to consolidating articles like Puzzler, since he's practically a drone, and the Dread Launchers and Secret Riders, since all of them share history. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 14:07, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::I think making a list page is better than having numerous pages with short texts.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 14:15, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::If we don't do them all, combining Puzzler, Launchers,and Riders is a good idea anyway.[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 19:18, 18 October 2015 (GMT)

:Proof-of-concept page for if we want to list 'em up: put it under fiction (so that's easier to find), put the main Gobotron and the in-universe TFs up top, and stick the details of the minors under that. tfwiki.net/mediawiki/index.php?title=Renegade&oldid=1016174 [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 19:20, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
::I've been doing most of the Renegade write-ups and most of them seem to be more than just name drops. Generally we get a name, a personality, an alt mode, and often an adventure. That's easily enough for an article. For the exceptions, like Puzzler, a single overarching page isn't a bad idea, but maybe not a necessary idea. The information on the Guardians is much more sparse, and having big lists for most of them could probably work. I haven't been writing them up due to how little there is on most of them.
::I am not sure where the idea comes from that having eighty small articles is a bad thing, though. The Wiki has always erred on the side of inclusiveness, which leads to pages like [[Spike's booty call]] and [[Moe]] and [[DeForest High]], things which are also one or two line articles about people and concepts that only appear in one source. I'm not sure why this is any different. If anything, there's way more interest in the GoBot material, as evidenced by how many people are asking questions about the Renegades and how many likes and shares those pages are getting.
::I'm also seeing, both in this thread and in the thread linked to, lots of interest in wikiing up the entire "Challenge of the Gobots" cartoon. McFeely, Khajidha, Saix, Sorenson, originally, and now Primestar and Gearshift all seem to be in favor. On the other side, Walky, M Sipher, Thylacine. It seems odd to me that, with the momentum apparently leaning 2:1 towards documenting all of "Challenge of the Gobots", we're talking about curtailing the bits and bobs that are definitely for sure Transformers canon. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 15:49, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::Logistical question: Do enough people have the GoBots DVD (or, cough, other sources) to write them up? (We ''are'' still lagging in fleshed out UT character pages, after all, and I think more people own those shows). -- [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 19:20, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
::::Well, episodes are on the internet.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 16:01, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::Episodes aren't licensed by Hasbro, so we cannot write them up and place them here. Ever.
:::::Giggidy: this is different from the silly jokes you refer to because at least those jokes are contained within licensed Transformers material. The GoBots AS PEOPLE REMEMBER THEM - the cartoons, characters, and toys - were never released under a Hasbro license, except for a tiny minority of exceptions in text stories. Even IF we settled for allowing independent articles for everything AVP said, it could never, ever contain any material more than that, because Hasbro didn't publish it and doesn't own it.
:::::All in all I am extremely disappointed by the... I guess, poor sportsmanship, pettiness, and entitlement... of the pro-inclusion side. This has been rehashed and reargued and relitigated year after year after year after year with very clear reasons why they do not belong, and for some reason people think none of that matters because GoBots were just cool! Well, Samhain and the Bogey Man from the DIC Ghostbusters cartoon were just cool and we've got the Ghostbusters in here as an in-joke, but we don't freaking add in Samhain the demon from a DIC cartoon through overeager bootstrapping. We also don't add in the very awesome and well-loved Dark Phoenix by extrapolation just because the Allspark Almanac mentioned an M'kraan Crystal.
:::::The MOST that could EVER be included about any of these GoBots is the stuff AVP writes, because at least that IS put out by Hasbro. I and quite a few others think that even that much material isn't much at all and since it's coming in a rapidfire slew for a lot of characters I think a list format collection is worth discussing. If a lot of people really really really disagree, then I could rationally grasp the argument that through the loophole that has been cheated into existence they have grounds on which to disagree and the articles containing the AVP material could hypothetically each stand on their own. But that's ALL that can go there. Only AVP. No cartoon, nothing else. And even that should not be taken for granted by the pro-inclusion side. They really have to sell their case, because from here it's STILL way too heavily predicated upon "oh-come-ON!"-ism. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 16:18, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::This isn't about winning arguments from years ago-most of us weren't even signed up when the AAII came out and everybody got into a whole mess over that. Many of us honestly think that documenting the series is something that we should do and within the jurisdiction. You can disagree with putting it up on the wiki, but don't just throw about terms like "pettiness" and "entitlement" cause you don't like the opposing sides argument or the fiction causing it in the first place. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 16:46, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::I would suggest Hasbro's ownership or non-ownership is irrelevant. We document many things not owned by Hasbro but merely associated with them, including the entire Japanese franchise (owned by TakaraTomy) and the entire film franchise (owned and copyrighted by Paramount, with only the Transformers elements used under license from Hasbro). --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:50, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Ownership by TakTom is just as legitimate as ownership by Hasbro, and licensing is just as legitimate as ownership. Things that are neither owned nor licensed by a company that actually produces real Transformers, such as a Hanna-Barbera cartoon, are not legitimate for inclusion. Otherwise we'll be throwing in fanfic and third-party toys and Family Guy episodes with TF "appearances." --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 17:04, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::There is a possible justification for their inclusion that would still bar those other things. We could decide that having had the GoBots declared to actually be TFs in a multiversal sense means that any material that was officially produced about them is now open for inclusion (the fact that it was officially produced under the auspices of Tonka would be a mere detail). This would not open the floodgates for fanfic, 3rd party materials or Family Guy. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 17:47, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::That concept has been decided-''against'', here, many times. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:19, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::Saying that we've voted against something in the past is not a strong argument for why we should vote against it now. Things change, the population of editors change, our understanding of the material changes. Gay marriage was illegal, now it's legal. I'm not saying you're stomping on my civil liberties, but you really need a more compelling argument than "we've said no before." Besides, you're the one who jumpstarted this conversation.
:::::::::::My point with Paramount was that there are elements that we document fully that aren't owned by Hasbro. They're owned by another corporation, and are used adjacent to Hasbro material. Hasbro doesn't own, say, Seymour Simmons. Paramount does. But we document him because he's a Transformers character. Likewise, Hasbro doesn't own some elements of Challenge of the Gobots, Hanna-Barbara does. But Kenner did license certain elements to Hanna-Barbara to make the GoBots cartoon, and Kenner is now Hasbro. Effectively it's the same situation legally. We do the same thing with other crossovers, like [[DreamMix TV World Fighters]] or the [[Avengers]] book.
:::::::::::And even if it wasn't, our decisions about what's in scope and what isn't is just that, our decision. It's reached by consensus, after reasoned debate. If the consensus is that Gobots is close enough, passes the squint test, we certainly could choose to include it. You're acting as if your statments are akin to "it's obvious that water is wet", a fact, when in fact they're closer to "marriage has always been defined as being between a man and a woman," a social convention. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 18:35, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::I just saw this in the morass of text, and '''''fuck you''''' for equating "not including GoBots cartoon" with "ban gay marriage". REALLY tempted to drop a ban on you right now for that little act of vileness. Holy fucking shit. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:53, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::I am not purporting to cite stone tablets from a thousand years ago - I am referring back to ''the conversation FOUR MONTHS AGO directly above this one.'' Your reference to DreamMix proves my point perfectly: we include things that had an official Transformers creator stamp at time of publication, like Simon Belmondo, and NOT ancillary same-universe stuff that DID NOT, like Sypha Belnades. Ditto for Avenger characters that never had the stamp like the Brothers Grimm or whatever. We don't get to enjoy our way past the clear concept of who really owned and licensed what and when. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:55, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::So we've got the two positions:
::::::::::::a) GoBots the cartoon is not Hasbro licensed or involved in any way; we should only properly cover GB stuff in Hasbro-approved stuff like Fun Publications, AVP, comic homages etc
::::::::::::b) Approved stuff has now made so many GoBots nods and explicit references to the show (all the way back [[Games of Deception|to 2007]] and almost [[G1_GoBots|2004]]) that this is no longer a big jump but a natural thing to do.
::::::::::::without much budging. We could put it up to an editor vote? --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 18:49, 18 October 2015 (GMT)
::::::::::::It might be a bit off topic, but are you sure about Simmons? Hasbro put out a Human Alliance toy with Agent Simmons. I don't have the box and didn't read all the fine print, but the front of the box has "Agent Simmons™" next to a Hasbro logo. One movieverse character that might be wholly affiliated with paramount and not Hasbro might be [[Bendy-Bus Prime]]. - [[User:Gimmick|Gimmick]] ([[User talk:Gimmick|talk]]) 19:00, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::We include stuff that includes Transformers even without an official Transformers stamp, like [[Unfoldings!]]. And the conversation four months ago looks like it was 4 in favor, 3 against, so it's not really a great argument for you. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:10, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::How in the world can you imagine an issue of the GIJoe comic starring Transformers to NOT BE official licensed product? --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:24, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::I didn't say that it wasn't licensed. I said it didn't have a Transformers stamp. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:39, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::Also by my count of the last conversation it was 2 in favor, 4 against, 1 seemingly not strongly decided, and 1 recusal due to professional conflict of interest. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:50, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::My count: McFeely, Khajidha, Saix, Sorenson, for, Walky, M Sipher, Thylacine against. Sorenson's position was clear. And M Sipher also worked professional on GoBots, so if we're discounting Sorenson, we should probably discount Sipher as well. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:22, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::Unfoldings is Hasbro-stamped though, and we don't describe much of the Joe plot.
::::::::::::::Either way, if it was that close a call last time, should we just aye or nay it?--[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 00:14, 19 October 2015 (GMT)
:::::::::::::::It's been like four hours. This is a big decision and should have at least 2-3 days debate. Honestly, I haven't even decided how I feel, I just think Thy's arguments are pretty weak. That doesn't mean there aren't some strong ones. Let's not go calling for votes just yet. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:18, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::[[Help:Official info]]: the first sentence under "What constitutes official information?" seems relevant here. There is no way anything included in the movies is anything less than relevant to this wiki. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 19:26, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
'''"Simply put, anything coming either directly or indirectly from Hasbro and/or TakaraTomy, or from other official parties such as (currently) IDW Publishing, Paramount Pictures, Fun Publications or other companies officially involved with the Transformers brand."'''
:::::::::::::Right. And since Kenner is wholly owned by Hasbro, then despite being owned by Hanna-Barbara, GoBots was (retroactively) coming directly from Hasbro as much as the movies are. Then the only question becomes is GoBots a Transformers subline. Hasbro and FunPub seem to feel that it is, and have been using the [[Gobots|name]] [[G1 GoBots|and]][[Ask Vector Prime|concepts]] [[Go-Bot (G2)|for]] [[Withered Hope|decades]].--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:39, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::The key - and wrong - word being "retroactively." Takara's Diaclones became Transformers, and there are occasional Diaclone references we catalog. But we do not catalog 1970s-80s pre-Transformer content as anything beyond curiosities and footnotes; they don't get their box-back name-dropped characters and events covered here; in fact the "Cymond" content we have is new, not vintage. The same goes for Macross and Beetras and Brave as well. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:57, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::Also, I feel that I should point out that some members of the Wiki are at TFCon at the moment and unable to take part in this discussion. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 20:05, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Another excellent reason not to rush into any hasty votes.--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:16, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Well I'm back and guess what? Fuck individual articles. Stuff them all into a single "Renegade" article. The idea of a ton of two-sentence articles from a singular source that is blatantly doing this to ramrod shit we have repeatedly and recently said "no" to remains goddamn stupid and counter-productive. There's better arguments for documenting everything G.I. Joe than GoBots, and we're not fucking doing that. MAKE A SEPARATE GOBOTS WIKI. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 20:29, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::Except since the whole thing's started, it's moved on from name drops to actually expanding the histories of the characters, which is why many are turning back to the idea of individual Gobot articles. There's plenty of G.I. Joes and Cobra members who do nothing of note in the series they appear in with the TFs, but the only consolidated one is the Dreadnoks since they share most of their appearances together, which could work for Puzzler and others like that. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:54, 18 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::::Making the separate Go-Bots articles doesn't take away anything from the rest of the wiki. And if they're short articles, well, they are what they are. We have recorded the entirety of Transformers fiction covering their subject on one page, and that fiction is very sparse, but it is accurate, and faithful to the wiki's mission of documenting information. Beyond that though, I'd say I'd vote against merging in information about non-Hasbro/Takara/whatevs owned properties into the articles, such as the Go-Bots cartoon. A sister wiki seems like it would be the best idea, though I can't volunteer my services to completing it as of right now, as I'm pretty thoroughly engaged on other projects on THIS wiki. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:13, 18 October 2015 (EDT)

===Call for Vote===

It's been a week since this last came up and I know there are people still pissed that GoBots stuff is added at all, so can we pull the pin and decide? We all know the arguments by now. Whether we should reduce most of the existing GoBot pages or leave them (this seems to be all they're getting now Renegade Rhetoric's ended) is an important but I think separate issue to: include GoBots fiction in its entirety on this wiki or do not include anything but what comes out under Hasbro material. <br>
At this point I've swung round to being against adding ''Challenge'' material; it should have its own wiki, which could be created tomorrow if people wanted. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 01:19, 26 October 2015 (GMT)
:I vote for leaving the Go-Bot articles as we have them now. They're hardly "two-sentence articles" for the most part, and whether we personally like something or not hardly has bearing on its inclusion in the wiki. Lots of people hate [[The Beast Within]], but its here. And AVP has more people involved in its production, and more research put through it than that comic did. When there's going to be a Go-Bot's wiki, we'll link it in the articles like we do to other outside wikis. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:36, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
::I'm in favour of keeping the existing AVP, FunPub stuff too. Just draw the line there and all. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 01:40, 26 October 2015 (GMT)
:::By the way, thanks to all the editors who have been working hard to keep all the Guardians and Renegades articles updated! It's a big help, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who appreciates it greatly. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 21:44, 25 October 2015 (EDT)

I've been thinking on this and, despite the relatively weak arguments against including ''Challenge'' material, something about including it feels off to me. I think intellectually the case for inclusion is very strong, but I think emotionally it'd probably feel better somewhere else. I'd agree with Charles about voting on against full-on-wikifying ''Challenge''. I've also been one of several people writing-up the GoBots articles and I'd strenuously disagree with deleting them. There is plenty of information on even the scantiest of them, including at the minimum names, factions, actions taken. The wiki is replete with articles for less. In the case of virtually every Renegade, we get at least two adventures, personality, and alt modes. Some Guardians get similar treatment. A few characters have visuals. It'd be silly to torch them.

As I said, I've been thinking on this and I think there may be a compromise solution between the two extremes, one of a big list due to a relative paucity of material, the other of wikifying everything from ''Challenge.'' I propose we only wiki up what's actually been said about the characters in a Transformers medium... but, to give the articles a little more oomph, we add in a main picture from ''Challenge'' if (and only if) there is no official Transformers image available. We've in the past shown a willingness to use these images in the notes section, so we'd only be bumping them up to the top. The copyright shouldn't be an issue, Challenge of the Gobots sports a Tonka copyright, and Tonka is wholly owned by Hasbro. This way we're still limiting to the "facts" of Transformers, but the articles will look and feel a little more robust. Only one image per character, and then only if they haven't gotten an official illustration. Thoughts?--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:45, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
:It is unacceptable to catalog "Challenge" here. It is not and never has been owned by a Transformers license-holder, and I can't fathom how this could be seen as a weak argument. Even if AVP made every GoBot article 20 pages long, the cartoon never had the stamp and so any form of systematic involvement should be out. If that means a whole slew of articles with no main images, then that is the price for creating so many individual articles instead of a list. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 21:55, 25 October 2015 (EDT)

http://machinerobo.wikia.com/wiki/Gobots

Have fun. --[[User:Monzo|Monzo]] ([[User talk:Monzo|talk]]) 21:57, 25 October 2015 (EDT)

I feel like everyone's forgetting that even before AVP came into play, we had images from COTG on the wiki-Cy-Kill, the E-Hobby pack, Doctor Braxis, all in the notes section. The ones that didn't, I think nobody just felt like adding them. Fracture had Crasher's image in her notes section, and Deadlift had Spoons. So, yes, as long as they're in the notes section, with the images having all the copyright information. they'll probably be fine.

As for the wiki, I feel like a great many of us would rather have a sister site than some ad-filled mess of a page. My computer can't even handle going on it for a full minute without making me restart it. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 22:02, 25 October 2015 (EDT)

::What Thy said. This is not fucking up for debate. All the AVP end-run wank isn't going to change the FACT that large swaths of the GoBots IP are NOT owned by Hasbro, including the cartoon and toys said cartoon was derived from, the latter being owned by a direct competitor to both TF-owning companies. Frankly, I'm not even sure what, if anything, Hasbro DOES own from that IP, given they haven't used an overtly-GoBots Trademark in what, a decade? At best they MIGHT still own the name "GoBots", and I mean "own" in the sense that "nobody's bothered to challenge it so far". --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 22:15, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
:::My two cents is that despite my personal wish for all GoBots information to go on tfwiki, I say that as long as this wiki's rules are based on ''Transformers'' information (Hasbro, Takara, etc.-only), then the non-Hasbro owned CotG cartoon and such doesn't go on this wiki. In addition for convenience of navigation for ''GoBots'' fans, a sister wiki for ''GoBots'' would help for finding strictly ''GoBots'' information. Also, if we were to put CotG on the wiki, then on principle would we have to add in ''Robotix'' and all the Cymond Cluster franchises (''Brave'', ''Zoids'', etc) because they're in the ''Transformers'' multiverse?
:::With regards to ''GoBots'' material in ''Transformers'' works ("Withered Hope", Renegade Rhetoric, the hopefully upcoming "Spatiotemporal Challenges", etc.), I say that it goes on the wiki because it was distributed through a ''Transformers'' medium. And gets individual articles as does ''G.I. Joe'' or anything like that. And given the influence of ''GoBots'' on ''Transformers'', I agree that we make the exception to use limited CotG screencaps as the main pictures for ''GoBots'' characters on the wiki since we've been doing that for years in notes sections. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 01:42, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::::I vote against turning an EXCEPTION from like 4 pages into THE RULE on a hundred. "Challenge" screencaps should not be used as main pics on every single GoBot page. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 11:21, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::Reiterating this point: since the individual articles already exist it's probably just easier to leave them. However, I strongly suggest a ''total block on any further use of any unlicensed GoBots media appearances, of any kind. No more "Challenge," no more coloring books, not even as Notes, let alone as main pics.'' If folks want to leave up the small handful of longstanding examples we've got, eh. But since there a very real distinction between GoBots IP that is allowed / available and that which is not, we should draw a firm line, stick with it, and prevent any further inclusion of material that doesn't pass the usual rules of ownership / licensing. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:03, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::Oh, yes, nothing past the requirements should be included. I do agree with that. And I doubt we'll have any more Gobots related stuff for AVP. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:08, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Nays are having it so far. <br>
Giggidy's suggestion of putting screencaps in Notes for some pages seems like workable, unless there's acopyright issue o people will consider it thin-edging the wedge --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 08:04, 26 October 2015 (GMT)

I might've been in favour of it before, but I too have swung around to thinking the ''Challenge'' cartoon doesn't fall within our remit, as a piece of media that was not ever, and is still not, owned or licensed by a Transformers rights-holder. I'm not averse to using screencaps from the cartoon for pictures, though. I'd also say we can definitely merge the components of Puzzler and [[Monsterous]] into singular articles under the combiner names. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 06:49, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Much of the story information that AVP revealed about the GoBots characters is straightforward recapitulation of episodes of CotG. Do we need/want to put a note to that effect on the character pages? If so, should it just be something general like "events are adapted from the CotG cartoon" or should we note the episode titles for the different events? Should/could we link to Counter-X's episode summaries? --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 11:19, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:Most of the AVP stuff seems to be original. Where it's not I've been mentioning the episodes. Linking to Counter-X is a good idea. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 11:51, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Not sure how much of a vote is actually happening here, but me and my seven years worth of contributions vote '''No''' to ''Challenge'' or further GoBots additions to the Wiki. I would remove or block any individual pages for GoBots characters due to AVP. I already think tongue-in-cheek reference pages like [[Harrison Ford]] and [[Indiana Jones]] are silly, and probably contributed to the all-inclusive mentality people are fighting against here.

Has/Tak only owns a small fragment of GoBots IP. This Wiki, like ''every Wiki and every fan website on the internet'', exists at the sufferance of the property's owners. So while there are in-universe, multiversal collaborations between Marvel and DC continuity, you'll notice they still retain separate Wikis. It doesn't matter how closely related Transformers and GoBots become in the fictional realities -- real world reality has to govern this site.

Personally, I like the way the Marvel Wiki deals with Transformers -- each issue of the Marvel Comic contains an issue summary and cast list of the Marvel story, but the individual links on that page leave the Marvel wiki and go to the Transformers wiki (albeit the wrong TF Wiki, but they ''are'' on wikia). There is no [[Bluestreak (G1)]] page on the Marvel Database, even though he appeared in a Marvel Comic...just a link to a Transformers wiki that can actually cover the character in-depth as he deserves.

My recommendation is to reduce all of Renegades Rhetoric to a single story page, chronicling the many adventures and details provided by Has/Tak owned Axiom Nexus's Cy-Kill in one place, with no individual Guardian or Renegade pages on this wiki. If and when a functional Gobots Wiki is created, link the characters and concepts to THAT wiki where they can be covered in full. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 11:50, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:That tactic gets my vote. The "minor joke article" was a bit of harmless fun back when the franchise was much smaller, and we do '''''not''''' need to kowtow to it when something comes along to abuse the wiki's "system" to do something of dubious legal standing. (Really ought to look at how the GB page addresses Hasbro's "ownership" and elaborate.) For the quadzillionth time, our "rules" need to be flexible and typically ARE, but some people really just can't handle the idea of not treating everything with the same ironclad law at all times, no matter what affect it has on the overall wiki. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 14:41, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::I vote against it. Ultimately passing the buck off to another wiki isn't my idea of being informative. Where others would do that, we work hard to cover as much as what falls within our realm to cover. (Which, as it happens, does NOT include the COTG cartoon) That's what makes us stand out, in terms of both content and quality, above many other wikis out there. And I don't even think the franchise was ever even that small. That was just an illusion created by the fact that a lot of it had gone on undocumented for a long time. People need to stop making this out like its some kind of personal attack against us. What's it gonna harm that there are a few pages out there like the Harrison Ford page article? Are people gonna flip out and swear never to use our wiki again if they stumble across it? Are we going to be sneered at and ridiculed by some internet aristocracy because our "credibility" will be in doubt or something? I doubt its eating up much space in terms of bandwith or whatever. And no one will make any legal advance that has any ground here. Wikis wouldn't exist as a concept if that would regularly happen. Where is the harm? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 14:49, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:::That's a "nay" from me on cutting the small number of deliberately silly pages: we're long past the point that this wiki can say that's not on, unless we can say that it puts people off visiting. Casual fans and browsers seem to like them. -- [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:22, 26 October 2015 (GMT)
::::I wasn't actually advocating removing the Harrison Ford-style joke articles. (Not a fan of taking a whole article to say "Somebody mentioned [[Broadside (SG)]] once!", either.) Just pointing out pages like that contributed to the mind set of including articles for every person, place, or thing mentioned in Transformers fiction. The difference, of course, is that no one is trying to write up full articles about the ''Indiana Jones'' franchise here instead of making an Indy wiki. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 17:30, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::I wasn't either. I'd have thought the intention was clear: that the allowing of "harmless fun" articles of small references from when the franchise was VASTLY smaller was now being intentionally abused as an end-run around something that was decided against long ago for being not-HasTak-owned/licensed, one of the few pretty concrete rules we do have, and a fundamental one at that. Therefore I have no compunctions about making an exception to the general guideline (which we often have to do anyway) and compacting the information to a minimal number of pages... especially given the dubious nature of Hasbro's "ownership" of the GoBots IP (among other IPs mentioned in certain sources). --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:32, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

I actually expected more arguments for adding COTG material - check up the page and there ''have'' been more! Interest seems to have collapsed. -- [[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:34, 26 October 2015 (GMT)

Honestly, at this point, most-if not all-articles for the Gobots have been created. I really don't think it would hurt anyone to just leave them up. We can argue about all the IP ownership all we want, but as Ascendron already pointed out, we have other articles that don't exactly line up with Hasbro-owned stuff either-Hasbro certainly didn't shout at IDW for including Transformers in a Crossover that also involved a rival company (Playmates and Ninja Turtles). [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 18:39, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:...Are you actually contending that IDW didn't run the scope and parameters of the giant crossover by Hasbro ''at all'' before doing it? That the crossover wasn't extensively okayed by every rightsholder involved beforehand? Because there's no other way to interpret what you just said, and that's a staggeringly stupid premise. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 18:49, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::Stay classy, M Sipher. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:06, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:::classy? is this the part of the thread where we equate gay marriage to gobots being on the transformers wiki --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 20:17, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::::I don't believe he was literally equating the two-he was using a recent example of rules changing from previous. Could he have used a better example? Yes, probably, but I understood what he was getting at, and I say this as someone who would be affected by said laws. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:44, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

::No, of course not. However, what I can say from experience: as our audience grew bigger, we did go back and make changes to the older gobots-involved answers. A couple model sheets here and there were deleted, because Warner Bros could have potentially sued Hasbro. I don't think we would've even gone through with Cy-Kill if it hadn't been without someone giving us the okay first-and even then, we made sure to delete an old avatar with Cy-Kill Hanna-Barbara face on it. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 18:55, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

I'd be okay with a separate wiki that we could just link to when GoBots came up. I mean, the GoBots franchise has been basically dead for thirty years outside of a few winks from Transformers (with the exception of the Cy-Kill thing that started this whole debate), so I don't think it'd ever get too out of hand. Obviously time, money, and access to the show are factors in this solution, so it might not be 100% viable. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 19:57, 26 October 2015 (EDT)

Sorry if this is a really dumb question, but if the whole not-Hasbro IP thing matters for this wiki, then what stops sites like the Machine Robo wikia from using any ''GoBots'' material at all? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 20:55, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
:The rules of this web site have no relevance to any other wikis, and the Machine Robo wikia does indeed include GoBots material. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 22:12, 26 October 2015 (EDT)
::I was debating with myself whether or not to make this post, but it's going to bug me if I don't. Here goes. Obviously, a lot of us have become pretty emotionally involved in this topic. People say hurtful and stupid things when emotions run high. But if you're going to debate with someone, its important to challenge their arguments, and not attack the debater themselves... Despite whatever slip-ups may happen. I don't really know any of you. I can't really call any of you friends, because I'm not involved in any forums, and I don't attend conventions... But I respect many people's work ethic here, especially since we're all volunteering our time for the wiki. For the information itself, I get it that people are getting upset that information is being "snuck in" as a deliberate attempt to get it documented on the wiki. But if someone else got the job of getting to create fiction related to the Transformers brand, and used it as they saw fit, well I'm hardly in a position to debate that. They get to do stuff I never will, and as an adult, I have to concede to such defeats. Ultimately, it comes down to this: I believe that, for the most part, keeping the information on separate pages as they are currently is the best and most informative way to share it with whoever chooses to browse our wiki. (Some of the combiner components can be combined, as their importance relates wholly to the fact that they're components to a more important character). If anyone is able to prove me wrong by presenting even a crude mock-up that shows a better way of accomplishing that task, I will gladly change my stance on the issue. But we can do that by being civil and respectful. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 04:40, 27 October 2015 (EDT)

Bottom line, GoBots shouldn't be treated any differently, and certainly not any ''better'', than G.I. Joe on this Wiki. The Joes are a fully owned Hasbro franchise with decades of interactive history with the Transformers brand, BUT...all the images of Snake Eyes or Cobra Commander on the TF Wiki are from TF stuff, not from the Sunbow cartoon that was not connected to ''Transformers''. No one is trying to explain [[Snake-Eyes]]' Vietnam origins in his Notes section, unlike the [[Doctor Braxis]] Notes section stuffed with COTG references. Because people understand that if you want to read about G.I. Joe, you go to a G.I. Joe website...which this isn't. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 13:02, 27 October 2015 (EDT)

====Vote Results====
It's been more than 24 hours with no movement one way or the other, and even then, the stuff from yesterday seems like rehashing old arguments. Is now a fair time to tally? The voting is complicated because there are multiple proposals on the table.

*Proposal: '''Complete cataloging of "''Challenge of the Gobots''"'''
**Supporters: Khajidha

*Proposal: '''Condensing all Ask Vector Prime GoBots pages down to just one or two master pages, probably ''Guardians'' and ''Renegades'' or ''Renegade Rhetoric'''''
**Supporters: Xaaron, M Sipher

*Proposal: '''Expand coverage of Ask Vector Prime GoBots to include "''Challenge of the Gobots''" screen captures'''
**Supporters: Giggidy, Chris McFeely, Escargon, Charles RB, S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47, Khajidha, tentative Riptide

*Proposal: '''Expand coverage of Ask Vector Prime GoBots to include link to Counter-X website'''
**Supporters: Khajidha, Giggidy, Riptide, Saix

*Proposal: '''Treat Renegade Rhetoric like any other source, no condensation but also no expansion such as screen captures'''
**Supporters: Thylacine 2000

*Proposal: '''Pics from outside media goes in the notes section on character pages. Some Go-Bots pics can go there, otherwise wait until Transformers media includes original art of these characters.'''
**Supporters: Ascendron

I ''think'' I got everyone's position represented. Grum, I'm not really sure which camp you fell into. Regardless, it's clear that there's a solid majority in favor of documenting everything from Ask Vector Prime fully, with exceptions when it's sensible to do so such as with Puzzler and Monsterous. The good news is that this is exactly the current state of the wiki. No further action is required. Though it's ironic and a little sad that it took so much acrimony and name calling to get to the point of doing nothing different than we are now.

I'm less confident declaring victory on the screen capture question. M Sipher, Thylacine 2000, and Xaaron have all made their position against clear, as have the five supporters. I'd be curious to hear from <s>Khajidha, Ascendron, and</s> Grum on that issue before we go expanding them. I'm not sure if their silence indicates indifference, lack of awareness, or simply opposition to that proposal. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 15:43, 28 October 2015 (EDT)

:Didn't say anything until now since I didn't really have anything new to add, but I would vote for Counter-X and... maaaaaybe screencaps, but I'm indecisive on that one. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 15:53, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:: I'm divided about the screencaps... My gut instinct says that it would be a good addition to the pages... But I almost would feel, I dunno, hypocritical giving my full support to their inclusion, seeing as I'm usually very steadfast in my stance of only including stuff that's official. I suppose I can justify it to myself, as their inclusion would do more good than harm as far as how informative they would make the articles... Let's just not go overboard with it? One pic for each guy, maybe less if a single picture does a good job of showcasing multiple characters? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:31, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:::Yes, that was my original proposal. One and only one, less where possible. Couldn't agree more. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:42, 28 October 2015 (EDT)

:Actually, I'm in favor of complete GoBots coverage, but have bowed to the overwhelming opposition on that score. TOTALLY opposed to the wholesale reduction approach. Favor screen caps (but expect that not to come about). Favor Counter-X links. I would prefer that the combiner members have their own pages, but the limited information available currently makes the redirection to the combined form page at least as viable a solution.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 16:30, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:If we do include these screencaps, I would also like to request that we make it explicitly clear that they are not owned by Hasbro, and are not official Transformers images on the image's page itself. I was almost tempted to say in their captions on the characters' pages, but even I think that's a bit too extreme. So long as someone can learn quickly that the images do not come from an actual Transformers source if they make the effort of looking up the image's information. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:44, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
For full coverage on GoBots as given in any Transformers media. Counter-X links seem like a no-brainer. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 17:46, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:I said on Oct.26, 19:03, that it would probably at this point be best to leave all the articles up as they are. So if the only issue actually up for decision now is whether to include COTG screenshots, then I firmly vote against that, and see it as sufficiently against our rules of documenting official HasTak material that I'm not entirely sure a vote is even appropriate. We agree on AVP - well AVP itself says COTG screenshots aren't HasTak property and couldn't be used, hence why they themselves took down the first Cy-Kill picture. I think people should be satisfied with what they got. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:49, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
::Sorry, I missed that. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:00, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
:::It's true that it's not in line with our policy entirely, but it would be nice for people reading the pages access to an image on the page, just so that they don't have to go hop over to google or whatever other website to see a visual representation of them. That's my main reasoning behind supporting this idea despite not being 100% behind it. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:19, 28 October 2015 (EDT)
::::At first, I think we could include Gobots cartoon here but now I changed my thoughts. They are not owned by Hasbro. But I wonder if Hasbro buys the rights to the cartoon, can we include the cartoon on this wiki then? I'm just curious.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 07:12, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::I'd still say no because it's not ''Transformers''. Like I said with ''G.I.Joe'', we don't use images of Joes or Cobras from their 80's cartoon -- only from Transformers-related crossover media. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 10:34, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::<<<<<Not mentioning the Joe franchise character that actually has a non-TF related main pic....>>>>> --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 13:58, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::Well we've got ''Transformers''-branded visuals for reference for ''G.I. Joe'' characters. Less so for ''GoBots'' characters. Would it not be prudent to have visual points of reference for the GoBots who have appeared in ''Transformers'' fiction? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 14:25, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::It absolutely would. But we don't HAVE visual points of reference for those GoBots from Transformers fiction. We would have to take images from other fiction/mediums. And if we did it for GoBots, why not add some pictures for [[Jem]], the Inhumanoids' [[Earth Corps]], or the [[Darkling Lord]]s? The aforementioned [[Harrison Ford]] and [[Indiana Jones]] pages don't have visual references either, for that matter. The [[Fantastic Four]] could probably use a better visual reference than that cropped cover border, so...
::::::::Do you see how this snowballs out of control? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 16:08, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::My initial suggestion of just putting a picture in the note section is still out there, by the way. I kinda dropped it because no one really seemed on board... But I figured if we have the leeway to put up pics outside of Transformers fiction there, like we did for the [[Beast (G1)|Beast]], and for that matter, [[Cy-Kill (GoBots)|Cy-kill]], we could just do the same for all the Go-Bots characters. I know it's kinda seem like a silly game of working our way through loopholes, but it still is what I would personally prefer... Best of both worlds kind of thing. We still get a visual representation of the character in the article itself, most articles are short enough that the picture would be apparent immediately, but we'd still be sticking to our policy of only using official pictures in the body of the article. The picture is there as an aside, an addition to a note of "by the way, this guy is from this cartoon not owned by Hasbro." Like, look at the [[Night Ranger]] article. That's a great article right there! All the Go-Bots articles should be formatted like that. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:21, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::That Night Ranger article actually turns me off the idea of putting pictures in the notes section. There's a huge unsightly gap of white space there between the external links section and the box with the categories in it. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 17:02, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::But that's only because that picture is a character model, which is taller than it is wide. Screencaps are wider than they are tall, and wouldn't create nearly as much whitespace! And we could do what we did with the [[Zebediah Braxis]] article, where we go in a bit of a brief overview of the character's role in the cartoon/ "Made-up Guy filled the role of the impressionable young kid-appeal character in the Go-Bots cartoon, similar as how Bumblebee did in the original Transformers cartoon." Something like that. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:07, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::...Which goes right back to doing what we were complaining about in the first place, which is detailing COTG on the TFWiki! This is how quickly it gets out of control. "Well, we're not allowed to cover ''Challenge of the GoBots'', but these pages would look nicer with some images. Okay, we're allowed to put one image in the Notes section as a visual reference, but now it looks unsightly so we'll add some details about COTG to justify having the pictures. Okay, well, we're already talking about COTG in the Notes now, so..."
:::::::::::: - Covering the GoBots material produced under the Transformers franchise...Yes.
:::::::::::: - Adding non-TF GoBots material so that the TF GoBots pages look better...No. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 17:24, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::I think it looking "unsightly" is really a minor problem. And I didn't mean covering their every appearance. More along the lines of a blip of information. I'm sure a few characters could have more notes that would be informative and interesting to "pad out" the note section if the white space is that big of an issue, (which I don't think it is... Ugly, maybe, but I'd rather have an article that is "unsightly" than uninformative or goes against the wiki's rules.) Stuff like "he was also voiced by this guy who voiced this transformers character" or "this Transformers character is an homage to him," if stuff like that applies. You know, things that we already do for other character pages anyways. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:33, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::::::::::Honestly the more the argument for adding in '''hundreds''' of unlicensed, non-TF images comes to hinge desperately on "You did it 5 years ago for Dr. Braxis and 8 years ago for Cobra Commander!", the more it starts to be an argument for deleting those pictures from Dr. Braxis and Cobra Commander. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:12, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::::::::::It's not like there's a shortage of CC images from TF fiction. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 04:04, 30 October 2015 (EDT)

Just to note here, with all the comparisons being made to our handling of ''G.I. Joe'', we've ''always'' treated the Joes with more leeway than we have, say, Spider-Man or Godzilla. A ''lot'' of our Joe articles include real names and factoids taken from filecards and such, and yes, even in one isolated instance a piece of art that's not from a TF source, because there was no point to the "wilful ignorance" gag, since it wasn't ''funny'' - everyone knows who Spider-Man and Godzilla are, but nobody knows who [[Sci-Fi|Seymour P. Fine]] is. There's no need for such wilful ignorance on Go-Bots either, given how repeatedly tied-in to Transformers it has become - it's not a [[Simon Belmondo]] or a [[Solid Snake]], it's as much part of the Transformers "family" now as Joe is, even if its situation is a bit thornier. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 17:47, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:If I could make another suggestion. Could we maybe forestall this discussion until after AVP has wrapped up? It is what kicked off this whole discussion. I don't want to "encourage" the feature to "spam" a whole bunch of Gobots screencaps... But it has already brought in a little bit of artwork for Go-Bots articles anyways, and with both VP's return to the storyline, and contact having been made to a Gargent Universe recently, any number of things could happen to influence this discussion one way or another, or even render it moot. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 18:06, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::Unless Hasbro buys Bandai and/or Hanna-Barbera, nothing in AVP could change that we're really not allowed to have systematic coverage of Challenge (and that includes screencaps on ~100 articles) here. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 19:08, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::We're allowed to cover whatever we decide is in scope. We have no affiliation with Hasbro. The fact that the copyright notice on the episodes themselves gives ownership to Tonka, a Hasbro subsidiary, is a bonus. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:20, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::AVP already HAS posted screencaps that were are using... Not to mention some original art of Cy-kill. It's a longshot, but it's already happened once. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:22, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::I actually don't like using most of those screencaps - they WEREN'T posted by AVP, they were posted by dickish users trying to game the system, and were only ''acknowledged'' by Cy-Kill. Further, a quick look back at the FB page suggests the question threads they were posted in were deleted. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 19:28, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::Just checked, they're still there. However, I wouldn't use them outside the Src page. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:37, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::Hmm... Should we use the pics AVP deleted outside of source pages at all? Thinking about the Cy-Kill profile pic. Not like we don't have another one to replace it with. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:43, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Escargon is correct, we haven't deleted anything recently. Chris is also correct, you haven't seen us post screen captures from Challenge in the pages of Ask Vector Prime. We have acknowledged art and captures that others have posted. Also, regarding this: "Could we maybe forestall this discussion until after AVP has wrapped up?", it might be a long wait. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 19:47, 29 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::::I hadn't realized that AVP hadn't posted those pics themselves (not gotten to that point yet while working through it in my sandbox. In light of this, I've changed my stance, and changed up there earlier in this thread. I'm now going to stay out of this conversation, since I want to dedicate my energies to other stuff for the time being. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:54, 29 October 2015 (EDT)

With no activity on this page for 3 days, I think we can comfortably assess the results. It looks like the vote was better than 2:1 in favor of including Challenge of the GoBots screen captures on the pages, but a healthy caution against overuse. One and only one image per page, and only when official images are not available.

I've also done some homework into the copyright status and it would appear that Warner Bros. is still acknowledging Hasbro's copyright claim. Each '''Challenge of the Gobots''' box set and disk is marked with text to the effect of "GOBOTS and all related characters and elements are trademarks of and (C) [[Hasbro]] Inc." The only thing Hanna-Barbera lays claim to is the actual compilation of the DVDs, and even that is in conjunction with Hasbro: "Program Compilation (C) Hanna-Barbera and Hasbro Inc." The DVD packaging, however, is off-limits. "Package Design (C) Hanna-Barbera and and Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc." The episodes themselves give copyright exclusively to [[Tonka]]. Hopefully this reassures some of Xaaron's concerns, which seemed more legal than philosophical. There are links to photos of the copyright notices on my user page. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 01:42, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Or maybe with 3 days of inactivity on this page, we can consider the matter tabled, what with how time after time the more people talk about it and actually listen to counterpoints the more they realize it's a bad idea and (as we see above) come to change their minds to be against it. If the character and animation likenesses are off-limits even to AVP in the last few days, that should give pause. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 07:05, 3 November 2015 (EST)

*WHAT AM I ARGUING AGAINST AND IS ANGER AN APPROPRIATE RESPONSE?!?
SRSLY, though? If some user's posted screencaps make those screencaps TF canon - wouldn't the poster themselves also become canon? Wouldn't Facebook become canon?
Draw the damn line, people; we're never going to be a comprehensive GoBots source unless we fully document the toyline and the cartoon. That ain't happening, not on this wiki at least. Accept that, and our mandate is back to recording only what's mentioned in official TF sources, even obnoxiously, willfully fanwankish ones like AVP alas. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 07:41, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Why not redraw the line to include all GoBots materials? No, it doesn't fit the current definition of our mandate but it is a logically consistent one. No, we would not then have to include all GIJoe, etc materials because there is a fundamental difference. GIJoe is in the same universe as Transformers, GoBots have been declared to be Transformers. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 08:34, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::You answer your own question: It isn't within our mandate and it's not logically consistent because we really then should put in all of GIJoe but we won't do GIJoe because reasons. This has always been a push to change the scope and inclusion criteria for this wiki due to arbitrary personal favoritism. It could only be indulged through this sort of arbitrary personal favoritism. That's not what standards are for. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 09:36, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::You missed my point. It's not within the current mandate, but we could redraw the line to make it our new mandate. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 10:08, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::I would further suggest that we've settled this issue, at least until [http://www.slashfilm.com/gobots-movie-hasbro/ something new comes along to change it], so this discussion becomes a distraction from a genuinely unsettled question. I'm not saying your arguments are invalid, Khajidha, I'm saying that everyone's heard them and there was a clear and convincing consensus against you. Sometimes when that happens, the adult and mature thing to do is concede that you're in the minority and move on. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:41, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::::Go. Make. A. GoBots. Wiki. "Problem" solved. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 19:31, 3 November 2015 (EST)

====Vote Results again for reals maybe? Focus only on Screencapture====

*Proposal: '''No Screen Captures'''
**Supporters: Xaaron, M Sipher, Thylacine 2000, Repowers, ItsWalky, Nevermore, Chris McFeely, Ascendron

*Proposal: '''Expand coverage of Ask Vector Prime GoBots to include '''limited''' "''Challenge of the Gobots''" screen captures, either in notes or main page'''
**Supporters: Giggidy, Escargon, S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47, Khajidha, Saix

*Proposal: '''Screen captures on a case by case basis'''
**Supporters: Abates, Charles RB, Riptide

This is where the current vote stands focusing entirely on the issue of screen captures. Repowers, I took the liberty of adding you to the no column. Please feel free to remove if you like. Thylacine 2000, I respect your passion but there is a difference between "my argument convinced one guy to change his proposal from screen captures in every main page section to screen captures in every notes sections" to "my argument is so good I've picked up supporters in droves." You've said lots and lots and lots of words on this subject and you're still losing 2:1.--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:02, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:And you've said some pretty outrageous and dishonest words on this topic, including immediately above this. At the very least, Ascendron, Escargon, and McFeely changed their positions to be against. This is the second time in a week that you have just happened to get the results wrong in a way that just happens to benefit your side. It is really depressing, though no doubt I only feel that way because I'm a violent gaybasher or however you choose to characterize this dispute. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 09:23, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:I think including one image for informative purposes in the notes section is fine—just as a "this is what this character looks like". This isn't what I want, but I feel like it's a fair enough compromise. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 09:17, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::I don't think I have misrepresented their positions, but if I do I apologize. Ascendron said he was moving to notes. McFeely came out in support of the screen capture proposal but didn't like the current way screen captures posted in the AVP comments and acknowledged by Cy-Kill were handled. Not sure what you're talking about with Escargon. But, to do due diligence, I'll follow up with all three. And I am not, and have not, and hopefully will not attack your character in any way. Also, as far as I can tell, going over the edit history, if I got the first vote wrong it was because I conservatively underestimated support for my proposal. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:27, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::I only said my vote on including everything from Gobots probably shouldn't count since I worked on the thing. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 09:31, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::::Well, it would appear that an apology is in order. You, Thylacine, indeed had a better read on the vote than I. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:04, 4 November 2015 (EST)
:I'm in favour of CotG screencaps, but '''only''' in the notes. Main page inclusion is a step too far, I think, and would be more prone to "well we already do [x] why not include the whole thing". --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 11:00, 3 November 2015 (EST)
Point of order: since the inclusion of ''COTG'' screenshots is still a potential legal issue, and one of the votes in the '''No''' column is from [[User:ItsWalky|the guy who owns the Wiki]], is a democratic vote really the proper resolution for this matter? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 10:37, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Again, the DVDs (photos on my user page) recently released and still being distributed by Warner Bros. give copyright of everything Gobots to Hasbro, and gives the "program compilation" a shared copyright between Hasbro and Hanna-Barbera. But, this is ItsWalky's wiki. If he feels that a vote is out of order I will shut up and graciously concede defeat. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 10:42, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::I think the fact that AVP was not able to use screen caps from Challenge of the GoBots trumps any copyright notices on the DVD box sets, however in this case I don't think it's relevant to this Wiki being able to use them in the notes section of articles. We're talking about a bunch of articles about characters with very little fiction and no visual representation, so the question becomes a matter of "will including screencaps really make much of a difference to the information they contain?" I think screencaps make sense where a GoBots character has a visual representation like [[Bug Bite (GoBots)|Bug Bite]] and we want to compare what they looked like in GoBots fiction to what they looked like in Transformers fiction, but not so much where the character has no Transformers representation to begin with. In this case I think it's more effective to just include a link to a GoBots site which would give more information about the GoBots character as well as visual representation. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 15:04, 3 November 2015 (EST)

TL;DR. My comment: Full inclusion of HB GoBots. Yes. <span style="font-size:300%">Over my dead body.</span>--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] ([[User talk:Nevermore|talk]]) 13:59, 3 November 2015 (EST)

The "slippery slope" argument is winning me over. I'm still in favour of ''limited'' screencaps: the ones acknowledged by AVP, the model sheets and such for key people like Bug Bite, the original Cy-Kill profile (even if we scrap the rest I'd argue for this to come in under the same reason Cobra Commander's got that kick-the-dog one, i.e. it looks better). We're likely at the limits of limited already though. Who else could we reasonably add? --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:26, 3 November 2015 (GMT)
:My suggestion would be screencaps, at a maximum of one per page, for 1) those characters with major enough appearance in Transformers fiction (e.g. the e-Hobby GoBots and Cy-Kill, probably a few others), and 2) those with visuals acknowledged by Ask Vector Prime. Otherwise, links are fine. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 16:02, 3 November 2015 (EST)

Another three days with no activity, and I'm big enough to acknowledge that the momentum has shifted. I count 8 against screen captures, 5 in favor, and 3 in favor of limited. Basically a tie, and I think ties need to go to the more conservative, i.e. not my, position. As with article creation, the screen capture issue seems to go to no change from our current policy. A long and and acrimonious road to get to the point of no change. I apologize if my arguments along the way caused offense. Hopefully we can move on. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 08:49, 6 November 2015 (EST)
: Fair's fair -- you help me dispose of Nevermore's <span style="font-size:300%">dead body</span>, and we'll call everything even. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 09:06, 6 November 2015 (EST)

== Who's that <s>Pokemon</s> character? ==
<s>I'm going through posting pics up for [[Cybertron's Most Wanted]], but need you guys' help to identify some of these guys! '''[[:File:UnknownTransTechandRattrapTranstech-CMW.jpg|This is the first character]]''' I can't identify. (He is listed as the question mark in the number 7 slot of the featured characters section.) He's not [[Starscream (TransTech)]] as I initially thought. Starscream appears later in the issue, and is definitely visually distinct.</s> '''[[:File:UnknownoffworlderandWindblade-CMW.jpg|This is the second character]]''' I can't identify. (The green one, not Windblade, listed as the question mark at #23 in the featured characters section). Although there is a slight possibility that he's supposed to be a generic, I highly doubt it since every single other character on the page is a specific guy or gal. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 15:26, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:Maybe the first guy is just Starscream misdrawn? This post and picture from the Rook blog indicates so. [https://www.facebook.com/AxiomNewsRook/photos/pb.890548954322059.-2207520000.1439583294./906676859375935/?type=1&theater ] [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:17, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::Ah, well, if that post says so. That's also a much nicer version of the image I just uploaded... [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:37, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:::By the way, what about that dog-looking thing on the streets on page 1? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 16:45, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::That's just a [[turbofox]], I believe. Not an actual "character" per se. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:53, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::Actually, Jesse's said on the Allspark that it's meant to be the wolf Mini-Con from Classics. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 18:22, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::Shows what I know. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 18:27, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::: '''[[:File:Anotheruniodentifiedoffworlder-CMW.jpg|Here's another guy]]''' I can't identify. He's mostly obscured by text boxes, which makes it even harder. However, he's in the same panel as the other unidentified green guy, as well as the two [[Windblade (G1)|Windblades]]. He may or may not be a double to the other green offworlder, considering who else is in the panel. In any case, we're looking at the back of an orange head, big green shoulder kibble, with some yellow details on the arm from the looks of it. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:10, 14 August 2015 (EDT)
::::: '''[[:File:Offworlderprisoners-CMW.jpg|Here's another bunch]]'''. I Think the red guy's Ironhide? But the vents on the side of his head are throwing me off. The two bug guys at the bottom, I have no idea. [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 22:39, 15 August 2015 (EDT)
::::: <s>'''[[:File:Unknownprisoninmate-CMW.jpg|And another]]'''. I'm assuming some of these guys are homages to non-Transformers franchises.</s> [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 23:42, 15 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::Hmm. The guy on the bottom left of the one with Hellbat looks like a Kamen Rider that Matt drew in Spotlight: Trailcutter. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:12, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::::Oh, yeah! The colour scheme between this one and "[[V3]]" are pretty different though. Is it patterned after another character of that franchise? That way I can give it a "nickname".[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 20:12, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::::Don't know much about it, sadly. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 23:05, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
::::::That "unknown inmate" is totally based on Kamen Rider Amazon. -[[User:Ookalf|Ookalf]] ([[User talk:Ookalf|talk]]) 19:34, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
===AllSpark Almanac===
<s>So I noticed '''[[:File:Unknownrobocritter-AAII.jpg|this guy]]''' in the second AllSpark Almanac. I was not gonna bother with it, but then decided of anyone might recognize it as an actual character, and not just some generic critter. Mainly because, this is the AllSpark Almanac, and it has homages and Easter Eggs out the wazoo. If no one can think of anything though, I'll just assume it's a generic that's not noteworthy. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:43, 18 August 2015 (EDT)</s>
:Catillia, according to Forster's deviantart. Also a snake on that page is named something like 1412 or something like that. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 16:54, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
::Thanks, I looked it up, and he says he "stuck in" his real life snake (named 1812). I don't particularly feel that's worth including. If anyone feels otherwise, I can be persuaded to upload the picture and make the page, however. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:21, 18 August 2015 (EDT)

==Apocrypha and Vector Prime==
There have been a few parallel discussions about apocryphal works. [[Alignment]], [[Doomsday Redux!]], [[Bumblebee at Tyger Pax]]. User Grum went ahead and removed the Apocrypha template from Bumblebee at Tyger Pax, prompting a short discussion. I put forth the question on Doomsday Redux!, and by extension on the other unreleased Energon comics that scripts are available for, and got little response. Alignment had quite a robust debate when the AllSpark Almanac came out, but not much since then. All three have been declared to have happened by Vector Prime, and in their primary universes as opposed to in some splinter timeline. Is there value to keeping the Apocrypha template, versus just having a note detailing the unusual circumstance of the publication? It seems like something that should get a greater discussion than it's getting. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 00:05, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
:They're. Still. Fucking. Apocrypha. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 03:36, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
::Since Doomsday Redux was approved by Hasbro and declared to be canon even though it was unreleased, I think that one maybe merits a little more discussion. The others, not so much; even if they're canon from an in-universe perspective, they still aren't Hasbro-approved. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 05:07, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
:::A story that was officially commissioned and scheduled, then yanked because of licensee bankruptcy, should be listed as no different than a canceled toy. An explanatory note afterwards can be enough. But something that was never licensed cannot be licensed after-the-fact just through assertions and "oh, come on!"-ism. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 08:04, 18 August 2015 (EDT)
::::I tend to agree. I'd suggest that Vector Prime's statements be added to the notes section, and perhaps the stories be slotted into the appropriate position in the navigation track. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 09:23, 18 August 2015 (EDT)

== Galvatron II style linking ==

So I've noticed that there's been some disagreements on how to organize articles such as, say, Spychanger Prime or Balancing Act Prime. Perhaps we could implant a Galvatron II style system; link both in the main article, along with a suite. Also it could be used for the Thirteen and their Uniend selves, for the time being, I suppose. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:37, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:What if we did something like this for [[Screech (Generations)|Screech]] since he is 1 version of G1 Skids? Or [[Razorclaw (Universe)|Razorclaw]] since he's 1 version of Tigerhawk? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 19:51, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
::Quite honestly, I don't think I would have a problem with that. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:54, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:::Seems promising. Maybe sandbox one? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:39, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
::::Unfortunately, I couldn't make a sandbox to save a life. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:49, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
:::::There are a couple of other characters that might also benefit from this - BW Megatron and Noble, Overlord and Gigatron maybe... I think it's probably worth looking into. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 14:17, 1 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::I've added a suite to the (hopefully non-controversial) example of [[Silverbolt (BW)|Silverbolt]] and [[Jetstorm (BM)|Jetstorm]]. What do we think? Does it work? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 04:06, 31 October 2015 (EDT)
::::::I like it. It's simple and elegant. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 08:50, 31 October 2015 (EDT)
:::::::I find it pointless and cluttering. We don't slap "Galvatron" into Megatron's suite, despite better character continuity than Silverbolt and Jetstorm. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 09:04, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::::::Oh yeah, I forgot that time Galvatron got turned back into Megatron at the end of the series --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 12:16, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::::::::[[Megatron (G1)/Generation 1 cartoon continuity#The Battlestars manga and story pages|I guess you did?]] [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 13:23, 3 November 2015 (EST)
::::::::::Granted, but you're both stretching the definition of series and opening up a bit of a can of worms regarding where we draw the line at different "versions" of the same "character" anyway. G1 Galvatron and Megatron were treated separately mainly because the sheer volume of material for both meant it made sense for us to do it that way but all the times G1 Bumblebee became Goldbug (and sometimes went back again) are all covered on one page, as are UT Cyclonus/Snow Cat, Tidal Wave/Mirage, G1 Overlord/Gigatron, Hot Rod/Rodimus Prime and all the UT Megatrons and Galvatrons. Yet BW/BM Waspinator/Thrust, Rhinox/Tankor, Silverbolt/Jetstorm and Megatron/Noble are separate pages. That's a whole other debate and I don't particularly want to dredge up any of those cases as they've all been done to death a million times before (except for maybe Overlord/Gigatron, I feel there's a clear split that could be made there and linked this way) but I do think this as a good way of dealing with what we do have. It doesn't take up a lot of room and it would only apply to a handful of cases at best anyway. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 16:09, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::::::::::In the case of the Vehicon generals, that's because they're different characters that happen to use the same sparks as pre-established characters. The others are functionally "same guy, but with a new name". I thought that was clear. (Megatron as Noble is detailed on his page, so I dunno why you brought him up.) [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 01:53, 4 November 2015 (EST)
::::::Looks fine and dandy to me. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:34, 3 November 2015 (GMT)

==Notes and images==
I seem to remember that there was some clever way of adding notes so that they don't break onto a new line when up against a left-aligned image, but for the life of me I can't find it by searching. Can anyone hit me up with the codez? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] ([[User talk:Emvee|talk]]) 05:27, 17 September 2015 (EDT)

== Timelines fiction release order links ==

I have noticed that where it is so, a ''Timelines'' story's primary previous or next story arrow points to the BotCon comic if it has the closest release date. However, the primary previous and next story arrows on BotCon comics' pages always point to other BotCon comics because they actually have a "Volume" order to go with. It seems inappropriate to me a story point to another which is not also linked to it. So what do we do, for instance, with "[[Burning Bridges]]", the first non-Facebook ''Timelines'' story to come out after BotCon 2015's "[[Cybertron's Most Wanted]]" and "[[The Return of Blurr]]"? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 00:39, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
:I think the idea of putting all of the disparate Timlines stories in chronological order for the template is stupid. What exactly is gained there? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 12:43, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
::It was probably workable at some point, but it's long since lost any functionality, I think. We keep winding up with stories that have like three or four "previous" or "next" links. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 15:19, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
:::Right. It's excess that only exists to do stuff like link "[[Collections]]" to "[[Head Games]]" because... why? How does that really help readers? It really should just be limited to the specific media (script readings, etc.) and continuity (Wings Universe, etc.), not a grab-bag of random stories that just happen to be under the Timelines banner. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:29, 18 September 2015 (EDT)
::::Would anyone object if I went and removed all previous and next release order story links, leaving in only previous and next continuity story links? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 14:38, 1 October 2015 (EDT)

== Harmonic resonance ==

So throughout [[Ask Vector Prime]], the theme of "trans-dimensional harmonic resonance"/"quantum harmonic resonance" has come up as an in-universe explanation for most commonly used characters (i.e. the franchise tropes of Optimus Prime, Megatron, Grimlock, etc.), design re-use across continuity families (i.e. pre-Transformer toys which got recycled as Transformers toys), mistaken use of story elements which seemingly don't belong (i.e. ''Armada'' Beast Wars in "[[Fire in the Dark]]"), other things (i.e. RiD Unicron as a seemingly mundane Transformer who (not) coincidentally became a universe-destroying planet), etc. Do we want to make a page(s) about this and how should we handle it? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 21:23, 9 October 2015 (EDT)
:Same way anything else is handled? Create an article and document the things VP said about it? --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 21:25, 9 October 2015 (EDT)

== Online Transformers Games help request ==
So, I've recently been frustrated with the fact that many online games have been taken down, making it really hard to create articles for them. I've been doing well creating articles for them up to now, either finding copies of the games on other websites or cobbling together articles by watching play-throughs on Youtube. However, I've hit upon my first real snag with "[[Transformers Prime: Beast Hunters Game]]." I can't find any footage of it whatsoever anywhere, and the game doesn't seem to load on the Hasbro or Hub website. I never played the game, so I can't create anything from memory either. Anyone has anything to help me out with this? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 22:29, 17 October 2015 (EDT)

== Repurposing vs Multi-family toys ==
Over on the discussion about [[Talk:Clampdown (RID)|Clampdown]], M Sipher raised an excellent point about how silly it is to not have the Clampdown [[Kreon]] on the Clampdown [[Transformers: Robots in Disguise (2015 franchise)|Robots in Disguise]] page. This dovetailed nicely with my own musings on the subject. Right now, technically, the way the wiki is organized if we wanted to have that toy on two pages we'd have to arbitrarily declare one Clampdown to be a [[repurposing]] of the other, which I find to be ridiculous. I had a discussion on one of the talk pages about removing the repurposing label from toys that were simply imported from one continuity family to another, only to be shot down.

As a compromise position, I've worked up a related idea: "multi-family toys". That is to say, a toy that seems to exist more-or-less unchanged across multiple families. This seems like a distinct idea from a straight-up repurpose. To me, at least, there seems to be a fundamental difference from someone like [[Dirge (Armada)|Armada Dirge]], which is a brand-new character based on a toy with a different name and bio, to someone like [[Lockdown (G1)|IDW's Lockdown]]. Furthermore, [[Ask Vector Prime]] has formalized the idea that Hasbro's been running with, namely that a character can comfortably exist across multiple [[continuity family|continuity families]] and that this is no big deal.

This is my go at introducing the idea: [[User:Giggidy/Sandbox/Multi-Family Toys]]. Any feedback would be appreciated. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:34, 25 October 2015 (EDT)
:I agree with Kre-O but ROTF Lockdown figure didn't meant to be G1 Lockdown when it was produced. He meant to be Movie version of Lockdown. so G1 version is indeed a repurpose.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 10:01, 31 October 2015 (EDT)
:I like the idea of separating the concept of "Foo was repurposed as Foo" from that of "Foo was repurposed as Bar". I still think it would be better to have the Kre-O and various Iocus-cluster toys on their own pages while leaving only a heading and a link out from the pages of characters they are visually based upon.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 10:53, 31 October 2015 (EDT)
::I don't feel strongly one way or the other about Kre-O. I'm solidly on-board with the way the merchandise is currently handled and disagree with making Iocus-cluster pages for all the merch. I can see how it's an intellectually coherent position to want to do so... but I don't like it. If we do decide to keep merchandise on its own page as its own character as well as on the local pages, then I'd consider it a [[User:Giggidy/Sandbox/Multi-Family Toys|Multi-Family Toy]]. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:28, 31 October 2015 (EDT)

== Multiversal singularities ==

Now that AVP on Facebook has publicly acknowledged the splintering of singularities (albeit via a now semi-unaware TransTech Vector Prime), should we merge all the Thirteen's mainstream multiverse and Aligned pages together? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 14:59, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:Having waited to see how it all shook out, yes, I still stand by [[Talk:Thirteen#Revisiting_yet_again|the original suggestion I made a couple of months ago]], which is to merge the individual incarnations of the Thirteen's pages into singular ones (except for Alpha Trion and Aligned Optimus Prime), treating them more as concepts that will probably require "conceptual history" sections. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 15:04, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::What about the SG versions of Unicron and Primus? We typically give new pages to SG versions of characters, as per countless previous discussions on separating out the SG versions of other characters from their positive polarity counterparts. Except, since it's Primus and Unicron we're talking about here, them being them and their SG versions being SG versions of them makes this a little fuzzy. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 15:20, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:::I completely disagree with Chris's proposal and would rather treat them like every other character, but my opinion doesn't mean much, so. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 15:40, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::I'm kind of torn on this. On one hand, splitting by continuity family will lead to pointless micro-articles like "Vector Prime (TransTech)", and don't even know how one would begin to deal with Fun Pub Nexus Prime. On the other, Aligned Megatronus really has very little to do with Dreamwave Fallen and ROTF Fallen and having them all on one page would seem antithetical to the goal of accessibility. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] ([[User talk:Jalaguy|talk]]) 16:33, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:::::I, too, am torn. I like keeping the Aligned stuff separate. Maybe just go case-by-case? Like, the Movie Fallen could probably be split from the Dreamwave guy, but I'm not sure Vector Prime (TransTech) is a thing that needs to exist. Do any other members of the Thirteen have a substantial amount of fiction to them?--[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 16:48, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::::Maybe use suites? And like, point out that they were all at one point considered to be incarnations of The Same Dude. I wouldn't be opposed to merging most of the Aligned Thirteen, though. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 18:48, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:::::::Using suites does sound like a good idea, particularly for the SG versions of Primus and Unicron. It keeps them together with the main versions allowing them to be separated onto their own pages. I like it. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 19:26, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::::::Me too. Seems like a good compromise for the cases where we do decide to split. I still think we should avoid articles that are too short. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:29, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:::::::::Also if we utilize a suite, then we can keep main version(s) of guys like [[Primus]] or [[Unicron]] at their own namespace. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 19:55, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::::::::::Suite's suit. We should do that. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:43, 3 November 2015 (EST)

Summary of the multiversal singularities:
*[[Unicron]] (G1, UT, Movie, Animated, Aligned, Kre-O, SG) — I think UT, Aligned, and SG can support their own pages; the others are minor versions based on G1.
*[[Primus]] (G1, UT, SG, Movie, GoBots, Aligned) — Only UT and SG really stand out.
*Prima ([[Prima (G1)|G1, Movie]], [[Prima (WFC)|Aligned]])
*Vector Prime ([[Vector Prime (Cybertron)|UT, Movie, TransTech]], [[Vector Prime (WFC)|Aligned]])
*Alpha Trion ([[Alpha Trion (G1)|G1]], [[Alpha Trion (RID)|RID]], [[Alpha Trion (Energon)|UT]], [[Alpha Trion (SG)|SG]], [[Alpha Trion (Animated)|Animated]], [[Alpha Trion (ROTF)|Movie]], [[Alpha Trion (WFC)|Aligned]], [[Alpha Trion (Kre-O)|Kre-O]])
*Solus Prime ([[Solus Prime (Prime)|Aligned]], [[Solus Prime (G1)|G1]])
*Alchemist Prime ([[Alchemist Prime (Prime)|Aligned]], [[Alchemist Prime (G1)|G1]])
*Nexus Prime ([[Nexus Prime (Classics)|G1?]], [[Nexus Prime (Prime)|Aligned]])
*Onyx Prime ([[Onyx Prime (Prime)|Aligned]], [[Onyx Prime (G1)|G1]])
*[[Amalgamous Prime]] (Aligned, G1 [sorta])
*Liege Maximo ([[Liege Maximo (G2)|G1, TransTech]], [[Liege Maximo (WFC)|Aligned]])
*Megatronus/The Fallen ([[The Fallen|G1, Movie]], [[Megatronus (WFC)|Aligned]]) — Movie could really, really stand to be split out.
*Optimus Prime ([[Optimus Prime (WFC)|lol]]) — lol
My feelings if we're going the "we don't want small pages" route. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 20:42, 2 November 2015 (EST)
:You know, another thought just crossed my mind. Why didn't we think of using a suite for the many versions of Sideways too, instead of turning his disambig page into his main page? --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 22:00, 2 November 2015 (EST)
::Because then we'd have to put the explanation of his whole deal on all the pages. I think that putting a suite on his pages isn't a bad idea, but I do like the set-up we have now. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 07:12, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:Agree on splitting out Movie from the rest of the Fallen's page; SG and Aligned Unicron's are different enough, and with enough fiction in the latter's case, to get a-splitting. --[[User:Charles RB|Charles RB]] ([[User talk:Charles RB|talk]]) 20:43, 3 November 2015 (EST)
:::Movie Fallen should definitely split.--[[User:Primestar3|Primestar3]] ([[User talk:Primestar3|talk]]) 14:12, 4 November 2015 (EST)
:I don't really think that UT Primus is that different from G1 Primus, or at least from the G1 Primuses of fiction that was contemporary of the time (Dreamwave, late 3H, early Fun Pub, etc.). Granted, back then was when the singularity concept was in full swing so UT Primus was viewed as the same dude as G1 Primus anyway, but I don't see anything in particular that would distinct UT Primus from 2002-2006 G1 Primus that much to separate him out. After all, the heavily Marvel G1-influenced Primus/Unicron/Thirteen backstory of that era of was attributed to both the G1 and UT versions of Primus via things like 2004's The Ultimate Book (G1 Primus), the Armada Fleer trading cards (UT Primus), and even Takara's "World of the Transformers" website that [[Talk:World of Transformers/Section5 src#SOURSE-2 － THE ONE & 13PROTTYPES －|told the backstory]] with [[:File:Original13.jpg|imagery of Armada Unicron, Cybertron Primus, and Cybertron Vector Prime (and War Within's '''''G1''''' The Fallen) among the Thirteen]]. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 02:46, 6 November 2015 (EST)

== Formatting of Year pages ==

So I noticed the pages for [[2007]] and [[2012]] are formatted VERY differently from any other Years' pages, being built out of subpages. As a result, the parent page ends up taking on any categories its subpages are tagged with even if they're not really applicable to the larger page (Toys, Media, Games, etc.), plus it creates an inconsistency with the rest of the Year articles. (Plus I'm not so sure this subdivision really makes the editing or upkeep process any easier). Should we move all the information to a single page like the other Year articles, or perhaps change the rest to match these two? -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 14:08, 4 November 2015 (EST)
:At one point we had all the year pages with separate subpages at one point, and then they got merged and then some of the pages got separated again. I'm not sure that there's any benefit to having subpages for each section. It just means the smaller pages come up pointlessly when you do a search or sometimes when you hit the random page link. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 14:41, 4 November 2015 (EST)
::Understood. I've gone in and moved all the 2007 and 2012 content (and [[2006]], which I guess I missed the first time) back to their main pages, and tagged the subpages with speedy deletion. If someone could take care of those, it'd be much appreciated. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 16:28, 4 November 2015 (EST)

== Why is Glyph not credited in the Character Roster list for the G1 episode 'Five Faces of Darkness part 4'? ==

She is an official retcon, no different than a bunch of other Botcon retcon characters (eg. Ion Storm), or 'Acid Storm' who was retconned by another official means.

Was her exclusion from the Character Roster done on purpose, or simply forgotten and needs updating?

Update: I've made a change to include Glyph on the 'Five Faces of Darkness part 4' Character Roster...but I do not have the information as to when she appeared, in relation to all the other characters. All the characters have a number beside them to indicate the numerical order they appeared in. So, does anyone know Glyph's number? {{unsigned|Zackmak}}

:1) Please sign your posts.
:2) Please don't make edits to fiction you have not personally watched or read, because of the very problems you suffered above. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 10:46, 23 November 2015 (EST)

Still getting used to how this works. My apologies for the newbie mistakes. Wondering though why even one of the many TFwiki administrators don't make the change? It seems like a no-brainer...but that's why I asked the initial question - to find out why she was left out of the 'Character Roster'--[[User:Zackmak|Zackmak]] ([[User talk:Zackmak|talk]]) 18:17, 28 November 2015 (EST)
:Because editing the wiki is not an automatic thing. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 18:33, 28 November 2015 (EST)

== Page names for planets ==

Some planets in ''Transformers'' with numbers in their names are variably parsed with the number in regular Hindu-Arabic numerals, Roman numerals, or in words. (i.e. [[Hydrus Four]]) When I search on the wiki, I generally think of Roman numerals by default, especially since ''Transformers'' is science fiction. Does anyone else think that we should put planets' pages in Roman numerals as long as such parsing is not overshadowed by different parsing? [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 20:03, 20 November 2015 (EST)
: So, if I am reading your proposal correctly, you suggest that if there are two canonical parsing of the name of a planet, and one uses Roman numerals, that one should have primacy? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 22:16, 20 November 2015 (EST)
:: Correct. That is, as long as a different parsing is not more prominent. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 17:51, 22 November 2015 (EST)
:::I guess I don't see what that gets us. Mind you, I don't see any harm either, I'm just not sold. What are we doing now? Most prominent? First official text parsing? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 18:37, 22 November 2015 (EST)
::::I thought it would help navigability. Not sure what we're doing now, but I think it's first official text parsing. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 18:53, 22 November 2015 (EST)
:::::I guess you can put me down as a tentative yes. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:14, 22 November 2015 (EST)
:I think that seems unnecessary so long as there's a redirect in place, which there should be if the planet has been named with Roman numerals in fiction. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 20:24, 22 November 2015 (EST)

== Italics in headers for toy sections ==

I've noticed that most pages' toy sections don't italicize the toyline section name, but some do. Examples: in my memory, [[Optimus Prime (G1)/toys]] and [[Optimus Prime (WFC)/toys]] have never italicized their toyline name headers but the [[Brawn (G1)]] page currently does. Do we have a rule on this? If we do I haven't been able to find it. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 17:51, 22 November 2015 (EST)

== Proposal: Temporary Moratorium on AVP ==
After GoBots, after Ulchtar, I think we have decidedly reached a point where the act of editing the wiki according to the latest "official" information is getting in the way of wiki informativeness and quality standards. To be frank, the privilege of creating canonical material has been perverted for the sole purpose of changing this website. I propose a two-week cessation on adding any material to this site that appears on AVP or any of its upcoming iterations. I would like to see what discussions we have here, and how the pages are modified, when we're not lurching to the organ grinder's tune.

If people think this suggestion is totally out of line, by all means say so. If they agree, please say so as well. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 18:01, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:That's actually exactly what I was considering suggesting. This is all getting a little silly; I'd be more than happy with that, as it'd curb "to-the-wiki"-ism while not banning AVP content entirely for no real defensible reason. --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 18:45, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:YES! So much yes! (with the sole exception being the archiving of AVP-and-its-ilk Facebook posts onto their respective archive pages). --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 18:48, 30 November 2015 (EST)
::<s>I'm not really sure what this is supposed to accomplish. I've never had a hard time ignoring the parts of something that annoy me or that I have no interest in. If a robust discussion on a minor character like Ulchtar bugs you so much, maybe you should take a two-week moratorium from editing the wiki. I vote no.</s> Fine. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:09, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:::Are you familiar with the expression "the straw that broke the camel's back"? Ulchtar isn't The Thing, but The Latest Thing In A Long Line Of Things. I say yes. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] ([[User talk:Andrusi|talk]]) 20:13, 30 November 2015 (EST)
Yes. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 19:51, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:I'm down, and let me add this to it: going forward we put stuff from AVP and its mutations on the same waiting period as all the other FP stuff [[Help:Coming_soon#Fun_Publications_Fan_Club_material|we've had basically forever]]. No, it's not part of the "paid content" blardeeblar. But maybe it'll help stem the blatant wiki-gaming going on, and also cut back on the amount of corrective/speculative editing, especially when they have to apologize/retcon/whatever something posted two days prior. Maybe trim it to two weeks rather than one month, but still. The immediate TO THE WIKI! needs to fucking ''stop''. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 19:58, 30 November 2015 (EST)
::Since Escargon brought this to my attention, I'm going to break my usual policy about commenting on my own work and vote '''yes'''. It won't kill anyone to wait a couple of weeks to edit this stuff, and may in fact improve the caliber of the questions we're getting. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] ([[User talk:Jimsorenson|talk]]) 20:17, 30 November 2015 (EST)
Yes. In addition to the reasons mentioned, this should stop the back-and-forth occasionally seen of<BR>
1) AVP posts something.<BR>
2) Someone rushes to add it to the Wiki<BR>
3) Someone else disagrees with the interpretation of AVP<BR>
4) First someone goes back to AVP and asks for further clarification on the first post<BR>
5) AVP responds<BR>
6) Second someone is too busy arguing on the Wiki to check for updates<BR>
7) First someone does victory lap because official source confirmed their idea<BR>
8) Third someone stops by to say this is why they hate AVP.<BR>
We are all children of the internet. We like winning arguments. But being able to ask official sources ''in real time'' to contribute to internet arguments tends to escalate the arguments and the tensions underlying the arguments. New information comes in? Fine -- let's let it breathe for a while before deciding what to do with it. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 21:10, 30 November 2015 (EST)
:Regarding what I said above about updates made to the Facebook post archives being the sole exception to this, it has been suggested that those should have at least a one-day wait after each post is made on Facebook, which sounds reasonable. --[[User:Sabrblade|Sabrblade]] ([[User talk:Sabrblade|talk]]) 00:07, 1 December 2015 (EST)

I can get behind this. I've drawn attention to this resurgent "OMG TO THE WIKI" attitude while commenting on this problem before and putting a cap on it sounds good. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 08:06, 1 December 2015 (EST)

Since the idea of immediate-term write-ups is apparently problematic to a large number of editors, is there any reason to limit the 2 week cooling off period to just the FP material? Given concerns about spoilers and similar (if less heated) arguments about interpertation of ongoing IDW offerings, perhaps a 2-week wait should just be the standard wiki policy for all fiction. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 07:38, 1 December 2015 (EST)
:You KNOW all "immediate-term write-ups" is not the issue at play. Don't even. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 08:00, 1 December 2015 (EST)
::I actually don't. You and Chris both talk about "TO THE WIKI" as if it's a well understood problem without explaining why. Chris, meanwhile, posts detailed summaries of the comics before American comic shops even open. Aside from some people not liking Ask Vector Prime, I honestly don't understand the difference. It offends my sense of order, but I will admit that's probably more my problem than yours. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:24, 1 December 2015 (EST)
::: The difference is that comics- and the information they reveal- are set in stone; people can't just obsessively demand answers from James Roberts/John Barber/Mairghread Scott about background trivia just for the sake of changing the wiki. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 19:40, 1 December 2015 (EST)
:::: I guess I see. Maybe. Maybe not. Looking at the Ulchtar thing, which apparently was very annoying for people, there was a question asked on the 18th of November. Then an answer on the 28th of November. There were a few follow-up questions but none of them got an answer. The answer was never edited. Then there was three days of debate about what the implications of the answer meant. I don't see how, if we had the debate from December 13-15 it would have been appreciably different, or less annoying. But then, I didn't find the debate annoying in the first place, so again, this could point to my inability to understand such things. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:59, 1 December 2015 (EST)
:This is a recurring, AVP-specific problem that doesn't affect other prominent fiction. The Carcer thing was an isolated incident. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 08:06, 1 December 2015 (EST)
ThisIsWhyWeCantHaveNiceThings.jpg --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] ([[User talk:DrSpengler|talk]]) 09:22, 1 December 2015 (EST)

So, like, are we starting this today or what? I will of course respect the consensus and wait till the 14th if we are, but Cy-Kill just had a new adventure if we're still debating. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 13:26, 1 December 2015 (EST)
:I'm going to assume that, yes, this is starting today, and that current content will be added no sooner than two weeks hence, December 14. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:24, 1 December 2015 (EST)

===Mystery Science Theater 3000===
Does anyone object to me making a page for Mystery Science Theater 3000 now, rather than waiting the 2 weeks? I only ask because the latest AVP plugs the MST3K [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mst3k/bringbackmst3k kickstarter campaign], which is over in 4 days. Given the time-sensitive nature, it seemed an exception might be warranted. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 14:47, 7 December 2015 (EST)

===Results===
'''"I would like to see what discussions we have here, and how the pages are modified, when we're not lurching to the organ grinder's tune."'''

It looks like the discussions we have when not lurching to the tune is... [[Talk:Grand Galvatron|more of the same]]. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 10:48, 11 December 2015 (EST)
:There are 63 new "official facts" about Grand Galvatron hitting the wiki every single day, most of them by wiki editors feeding them through a revolving door Facebook page in order to validate their own ideas? I must've missed it. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 11:36, 11 December 2015 (EST)
::Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were complaining about an argument about Ulchtar, one which Grand Galvatron has already exceeded in length. One that started when someone saw some half-translated info and immediately declared TO THE WIKI. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 11:44, 11 December 2015 (EST)

== Notes and whitespace issue ==

A while back I put up some notes in several characters' pages, in order to include a link to the ''[[The Transformers: The Movie]]'''s adaptations within those pages' fiction sections. Unfortunately, it didn't work out quite as well as I wanted. Unlike the Live-action film series, where a similar note would always come up at the end of a section's write-up, the note came right in the middle of the section for many Generation 1 characters. On top of that, because of how some images were included in the section write-ups, several characters got large amounts of white-space in their section write-ups to accommodate the note.

At the time, I had heard that there was a piece of code that could fix the white-space issue, but I've been looking for a while and found nothing. (The closest I got to any sort of result with was: '''<nowiki><div class="floatright">Text on the right</div></nowiki>''' but that didn't solve much either.)

I'd still very much like to keep the links to the movie adaptations on those characters' pages, as those are still pieces of fiction wherein those characters appeared. But at this point, I've given up on finding a solution that will make the note look like less of a mess. And I will admit that the amount of white-space the note sometimes generates is rather unseemly. I figured a note pointing out that characters appeared in an adaptation of the G1 cartoon movie could be put at the bottom of the article, in the "Notes" section.

Either that, or I could double up links within the cartoon section like this: {{storylink|The Transformers: The Movie}} {{storylink|Transformers: The Animated Movie}} {{storylink|Transformers the Movie (Ladybird adaptation)|Transformers the Movie}}. I'm also open to any other suggestions. Either way, I wanted other people to weigh in and give their opinions before I started any kind of wide-spread editing. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 17:07, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:I think the extra storylinks look lot better than a note. It's what we already do for flashbacks. [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 18:10, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:Multiple storylinks make me think that there is something more to be written up, rather than them being multiple versions of the same events. Putting a note at the end of the page seems to divorce the adaptations from the source material. My personal preference is for the note templates, regardless of the whitespace issue. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 18:39, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:: I'm not convinced that multiple story links or notes are needed at all, at least on a character page. If there are multiple tellings of the same event, probably a character only needs the primary one. Then, anyone who clicks off to the primary story can see a note that there are other adaptations. I'm not sure it adds anything to Bumblebee, for instance, to know that yes, he did this in the Transformers movie but also in a novel and a comic and a story book. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 18:48, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:::I'd rather keep some indication of which adaptation which character shows up in on their own pages, considering it is inconsistent from character to character how many adaptations they show up in. Some characters show up in all of them, some show up in only some of them, and others show up in none of the adaptations. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 19:02, 3 December 2015 (EST)
:::: I guess I just don't see what the value is of that. Especially because the adaptation itself will have the character roster. Mind you, I don't feel particularly strongly about it one way or the other. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 19:07, 3 December 2015 (EST)

==Proposal: A "Former multiversal singularities" category==

As probably know, a recent story has split up multiversal singularities into separate characters, or something like that. Because of this, the "multiversal singularities" category has been dissolved, and is no longer linked to on character pages. But why? The idea of multiversal singularities shaped several years of ''Transformers'' fiction. My proposal: a "Formal Multiversal singularities" category, so that we can acknowledge the characters who were once multiversal singularities while not inadvertantly implying that they still ''are'' multiversal singularities. Thoughts? -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 01:22, 13 December 2015 (EST)
:Isn't that, like, only the Thirteen, Primus, and Unicron? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 02:04, 13 December 2015 (EST)

::Yeah. So it'd be an easy thing to do. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 03:15, 13 December 2015 (EST)

:Or we just re-instate "Multiversal Singularities" as a category because categories have '''''NEVER''''' been predicated on current status. BW Blackarachnia doesn't lose her "Predacon" category because she ultimately ended up a Decepticon after being a Maximal for a while. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 17:01, 13 December 2015 (EST)
::Did we ''ever'' have that category? I mean, we ''should'', but yeah, we wouldn't have removed if we had for exactly the reason Sipher states. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 17:51, 13 December 2015 (EST)
:::I checked a few relevant articles at random. Went back to last version before this October. Couldn't find that category in their category lists. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 20:04, 13 December 2015 (EST)
::::I was probably mistaken. I probably just happened to notice Unicron/Primus/one of the Thirteen didn't have a multiversal singularity category on their page, and assumed that it was deleted because of the because of the retcon. My bad. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 13:49, 14 December 2015 (EST)

==Vandalism==
Um, yeah. So one of the pages on the Wanted pages list is...''Spiral Vagina''. That means that someone tried linking to a page called Spiral Vagina at some point. I'm not really sure how to handle that or who to let know about it, so I'm just posting it here. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 18:27, 15 December 2015 (EST)
:[[Genital System]]. I'm very sorry. Incidentally, if you wanted to find what pages link to that, you could have used this page: http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Spiral_Vagina --[[User:Riptide|Riptide]] ([[User talk:Riptide|talk]]) 18:32, 15 December 2015 (EST)
::Oh. Thank you. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 18:54, 15 December 2015 (EST)
"'''''Kiss Players!''''' ''No, It's Really Not Vandalism, This Actually Happened.''" --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] ([[User talk:Xaaron|talk]]) 21:33, 15 December 2015 (EST)
:The entire page should just be this discussion. [[User:Chip|Chip]] ([[User talk:Chip|talk]]) 05:44, 21 December 2015 (EST)
I seriously want to make that page, but something so epically horrible might need s comitte just to handle the comedy potential. [[User:Lush City|Lush City]] ([[User talk:Lush City|talk]]) 08:52, 18 December 2015 (EST)

== We're all sick of arguing about GoBots ==

But here we are again. I restate my position as detailed in an AllSpark post: since moving to its own page, with Cy-Kill returning to his own universe and talking exclusively about "unmade" GoBots episodes, "Renegade Rhetoric" has become ''GoBots'' fiction, not ''Transformers'' fiction, and we do not cover GoBots fiction. Events from ''Challenge of the GoBots'' "season 2" do not warrant coverage on the wiki, and I think that any events described from the original, actually-existing cartoon should be reduced to minimum, and all GoBots characters only mentioned in these stories consolidated into simplified "List of Guardian" and "List of Renegade" pages with only brief write-ups, linking readers to our archive of the Facebook posts if they want the full scoop. Characters such as Cy-Kill and those who have actually appeared in Transformers-universe stories should, of course, retain their own articles. We have editors actively working in bad faith, manipulating Renegade Rhetoric by asking leading questions to force the inclusion of ''GoBots'' on this wiki when it has been repeatedly decided that it won't be, and I am all for an exception being made so that this type of behaviour is not rewarded. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] ([[User talk:Chris McFeely|talk]]) 19:48, 6 January 2016 (EST)
: THIS WEBSITE'S EMPEROR-KING AGREES --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 20:03, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::Thirded. GoBots fiction, and cheating, do not belong here. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 20:05, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:100% agreement. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 20:06, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:::EDIT: See Below[[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:07, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:::I'm in! -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 20:11, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::::I don't mind either. If nothing else, this entire debacle has taught us that GoBots and Transformers will never be able to peacefully coexist, on toy shelves or otherwise. 20:50, 6 January 2016 (EST)

Changing my vote. The RR page links to the Club page. AVP references and comments on RR. This is canon just as everything else, gaming the system or no. I may be weary, but I won't buckle. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:23, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:I second Escargon. [[User:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47]] ([[User talk:S.H.I.E.L.D. Agent 47|talk]]) 21:21, 6 January 2016 (EST)

I don't think anyone will be surprised that I disagree. There seem to be two arguments. 1, it's not Transformers fiction. 2, editors working in bad faith. Going case by case,
1: I don't see how Renegade Rhetoric is GoBots fiction and not Transformers fiction. It's being broadcast on Axiom Nexus News, on Cybertron. It stars Cy-Kill, the hybrid Hanna-Barbara/TransTech version. It features a number of characters who are proper Transformers, from the Aligned continuity and the Unictron Trilogy, and more who are powered by sparks stolen from Mirror Alpha Trion's lab. That seems to be the main intellectual foundation for the argument, and I'll grant that it's novel, but I think it's flawed.
2: Were some editors (including me, I'll admit) asking leading questions? Yes, we were. It seems to have largely stopped, mostly because the column stopped rewarding it. But that applies to ALL of Ask Vector Prime, and that's undoubtedly canon. Are we going to start trying to look at the motivation of every creator now and altering coverage accordingly? Milne draws Hot Shot as dead to poke at Walky, should we undocument that?

And now, additional factors. I hate making slippery slope arguments, but really, the real reason we're having this conversation and everyone knows it is that there's a sizable block of people who don't like the content. That's what all of this boils down to. And if the wiki starts picking and choosing what to document, or at what detail to document, based on that, then it will have well and truly lost its way. Because if we decide that we can come up with a pseudo-logical justification to exclude this content, then we'll use it as precedent and do it again. All of Ask Vector Prime. Kiss Players. The Beast Within. That weird retcon about Cyclonus and Bombshell from a video. Big swaths of the Dreamwave run. I don't see it ending. Yes, people are sick of arguing, but this policy will lead to more, not less, arguments.

Another, lesser factor, is that these pages are already made. So we're proposing going through some 200 articles that are already created in compliance with this wiki's policies and changing them due to an exception, making more work for ourselves to make the wiki less informative.

And a third factor, is that these posts are popular. Ask Vector Prime's readership is in the thousands. Every post gets liked, shared, commented upon. People are enjoying it, and some of them will come here to see what we have to say about it. The cost of having a possibly extraneous article is negligible, but the cost of not having an article is real.

I also think that we should do what we always do on weighty matters, and have the debate first and THEN call for a vote. I would suggest that all the "seconded" to the proposal are premature. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:38, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:''the real reason we're having this conversation and everyone knows it is that there's a sizable block of people who don't like the content. That's what all of this boils down to.''
:NO. No. No no no. I don't give a rip about the content itself either way. (I mean, okay, I think the endless supply of numbering universes and other such non-story wankery is dumb and pointless and has made a Big Giant Thing of something that was meant to be just a sidelong atmospheric technical footnote in a couple of years-ago stories, but that's not the point.)
:No. The point is that this content is being created explicitly and for no other purpose than to circumvent the wiki's rules, to alter its content and organization, by fans who otherwise were unable to get their way on the very content in question. It's not being done as part of a story in any meaningful sense. It's not a unintended side effect by some uninformed pro writer. It's not part of a carefully considered larger universe. It's not something dictated from on high within Hasbro. It's purposefully, transparently, and most of all ''pointlessly'' manipulative, seemingly all because a handful of OCD minds can't handle the thought of a 30 year old cartoon not being related to another 30 year old cartoon.
:THAT is what I and, I presume, other editors don't like. Because it's bullshit. Canon generated by bullshit -- maybe we should consider treating it accordingly. -- [[User:Repowers|Repowers]] ([[User talk:Repowers|talk]]) 20:53, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::I call bullshit on your bullshit. Because if you have been reading Renegade Rhetoric, it's hilarious. It's practically daily new episodes of an 80s cartoon that get the tone spot-on perfect. It's passionate, it has good stories, it even manages to have good characters despite most episodes being about 2 pages long. And none of it is about circumventing wiki rules. If it was, they'd have stopped doing it once they got everyone in, but they haven't. They're telling new stories, and they're quality, and I defy anyone who is actually reading them to disagree with that. Because, really, I'd love a show of hands, how many of the people who are voting no have actually read a single Renegade Rhetoric Season 2 episode? --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 20:57, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:::You yourself said you and others "were asking leading questions until you stopped getting rewarded for it." This is not the place for such a "reward." That kind of "reward" does not belong here and the entire mechanism for gaining it is what really subverts our rules for inclusion. Any alleged humor in Renegade Rhetoric now is just, as the saying goes, the fruit of the poisoned tree. Also, the debates have been had, since 2007 at least. Also also, "people will want to come here to see more RR/GoBots articles" leaves me quite unmoved. They can see RR on RR, they can read about GoBots on Counter-X, and in the year 2016 they can make their own GoBot wiki. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] ([[User talk:Thylacine 2000|talk]]) 21:20, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::::Your "fruit of the poisonous tree" argument leaves me unmoved. Because, according to this proposal, ALL OF THAT STUFF WILL STAY. Because that's all from the Axiom Nexus bit not covered by Chris McFeely's proposal. So you'll leave the poisonous tree, and get rid of all the fruit. Because that makes sense. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:23, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::This was created because the fans voted for it, after a whole month of guests colummist. Some of these fans have been taking advantage of it, yes, but that's not why it was created.[[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:00, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:: The thing is that the RR stories ''are'' funny and clever and well-written, but fundamentally they don't have anything to do with TFs. They're using characters and settings that were never created by Hasbro/Takara. If, say, Renegade Rhetoric wrote a story where Cy-Kill was on an adventure and bumped into Optimus Prime, then yeah, that particular escapade could be added to the wiki, but fundamentally Renegade Rhetoric is Gobots fanfiction; well written fanfic, but basically completely outside this wiki's coverage sphere. [[User:Grum|Grum]] ([[User talk:Grum|talk]]) 21:20, 6 January 2016 (EST)
I vote no to this proposal as a whole. Whilst I'm not a fan of wiki gaming, the GoBots stuff happening these days is nothing like that. They're fun stories for the sake of fun, and I'd be sad to see them banished. (I could probably deal with "List of Guardians" and "List of Renegades" articles, though.) [[User:Sky Shadow|Sky Shadow]] ([[User talk:Sky Shadow|talk]]) 21:10, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:Yeah, or at least group articles for a good number of them. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:11, 6 January 2016 (EST)
If I say yes, will people actually go back to making significant contributions instead of complaining about everything AVP does? [[User:Saix|Saix]] ([[User talk:Saix|talk]]) 21:15, 6 January 2016 (EST)
::No. If you say yes to this proposal, it will lead to more arguments, more complaining about AVP, and then Thy will say, "hey, it worked well for GoBots, let's undo all 1000 AVP articles." Remember, "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." I urge you to vote with your conscience and not give in to a crowd to try to forestall an argument, for this change WILL open the floodgates. Plus, it will lead to people spending time UNDOING informative articles they don't like rather than making informative articles they do. --[[User:Giggidy|Giggidy]] ([[User talk:Giggidy|talk]]) 21:19, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:::I didn't even think about this, but it makes a lot of sense. Any breaking of the rule of putting What Is Canon before anything else (when that's been the wiki's entire modus operandi up until this started) is a dangerous path to follow. [[User:Sky Shadow|Sky Shadow]] ([[User talk:Sky Shadow|talk]]) 21:25, 6 January 2016 (EST)
:I got Armada and Energon DVDs for Christmas. Sure. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 21:17, 6 January 2016 (EST)
Like Escargon and Giggidy, I am against this proposal. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy the Sheep]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 21:34, 6 January 2016 (EST)
So I'm only a recent editor of this Wiki, but I've been reading it religiously for years. And as a deeply devoted and long time TF fan, despite what some may feel, AVP, RR, and the collective of Club FB Pages have been some of the most entertaining pieces of TF canon. Yes, Go-Bots has a different lineage than the rest of Transformers proper, but at least since the Almanacs, and especially through these FB Pages, Go-Bots has become recognized as legitimate canon within the TF Multiverse. While I admit to being a completionist, and ideally, I'd love to see the entirety of Go-Bots, Brave, Zoids, etc. covered on this wiki due to their relation with Transformers; but worry not, for I understand that realistically, that truly would become far too distractedly cluttered - which is why I can even agree with not having extensive coverage for anything Go-Bots related that is outside of anything under the umbrella of Transformers. But as it was mentioned earlier, Renegade Rhetoric is treated with the same regard as Ask Vector Prime, Spacewarp's Logs and all the Axiom Nexus News Pages. It may not be "directly" Transformers, but it's far more intertwined than the 80's cartoon. No, people shouldn't be abusing to ability to have canon produced just for the sake of the Wiki, but that REALLY doesn't seem to be the case with what RR is producing currently. They're great stories in good fun, and I believe they should be treated as being just as much canon to any other TF media. I vote to include it. Hail Cy-KIll! [[User:IKY|IKY]]

Ace (GoBots)

2015-10-15T02:16:32Z

IKY:

:''Ace is a [[Guardian (GoBots)|Guardian]] from the [[GoBots (franchise)|GoBots]] [[continuity family]].''
{{faceless}}
'''Ace''' is a Guardian. He turns into a P-51 Mustang fighter bomber.

==Fiction==
===Ask Vector Prime===
In [[Gargent 087.0 Kappa]], Ace, along with [[Hans-Cuff]], [[Wrong Way]], [[Royal-T]], [[Good-Knight]], [[Bolt]], and [[Heat Seeker (GoBots)|Heat Seeker]], joined [[Turbo (GoBots)|Turbo]] in battle against [[Optimus Prime (G1)|Optimus Prime]] and his team of [[Spy Changer]]s, assuming them to be [[Renegade]]s. The Spy Changers were outnumbered until they were suddenly aided by [[Cy-Kill (GoBots)|Cy-Kill]]'s elite lieutenants, [[Cop-Tur (GoBots)|Cop-Tur]], [[Crasher (GoBots)|Crasher]], [[Fitor (GoBots)|Fitor]], [[Tank]], and [[Geeper-Creeper]]. The Guardians were driven off, but not before capturing [[Bluestreak (G1)|Silverstreak]]. {{storylink|Ask Vector Prime}}

==External link==

* [http://www.tfu.info/Gobots/Guardians/Ace/ace.htm Ace at TFU.info]

[[Category:Fiction-only characters]]
[[Category:GoBots]]

Ace (GoBots)

2015-10-14T19:52:27Z

IKY:

:''Ace is a [[Guardian (GoBots)|Guardian]] from the [[GoBots (franchise)|GoBots]] [[continuity family]].''
{{faceless}}
'''Ace''' is a Guardian. He turns into a P-51 Mustang fighter bomber.

==Fiction==
===Ask Vector Prime===
Ace, along with [[Hans-Cuff]], [[Wrong Way]], [[Royal-T]], [[Good-Knight]], [[Bolt]], and [[Heat Seeker (GoBots)|Heat Seeker]], joined [[Turbo (GoBots)|Turbo]] in battle against [[Optimus Prime (G1)|Optimus Prime]] and his team of [[Spy Changer]]s, assuming them to be [[Renegade]]s. The Spy Changers were outnumbered until they were suddenly aided by [[Cy-Kill (GoBots)|Cy-Kill]]'s elite lieutenants, [[Cop-Tur (GoBots)|Cop-Tur]], [[Crasher (GoBots)|Crasher]], [[Fitor (GoBots)|Fitor]], [[Tank]], and [[Geeper-Creeper]]. The Guardians were driven off, but not before capturing [[Bluestreak (G1)|Silverstreak]]. {{storylink|Ask Vector Prime}}

==External link==

* [http://www.tfu.info/Gobots/Guardians/Ace/ace.htm Ace at TFU.info]

[[Category:Fiction-only characters]]
[[Category:GoBots]]

Guardian (GoBots)

2015-10-14T19:21:51Z

IKY:

{{disambig3|Guardian}}
:''The Guardians are a faction from the [[GoBots (franchise)|GoBots]] [[continuity family]].''

The peacekeeping force on the then-organic world of [[Gobotron]], the '''Guardians''' were forced into a civil war when the rebels known as the [[Renegade]]s revolted.

Long after the population had been converted into cyborg chassis to protect their organic brains, and after the original conflict and organic origins of Gobotron had passed into myth, the Guardian [[Leader-1 (GoBots)|Leader-1]] would try to seek out the Last Engineer in order to save the life of his friend [[Turbo (GoBots)|Turbo]], and fight the re-awakened Renegades led by [[Cy-Kill (GoBots)|Cy-Kill]].

==Known Guardians==
*[[Leader-1 (GoBots)|Leader-1]]
*[[Ace (GoBots)|Ace]]
*[[Bolt]]
*[[Good-Knight]]
*[[Hans-Cuff]]
*[[Heat Seeker (GoBots)|Heat Seeker]]
*[[Scooter (GoBots)|Scooter]]
*[[Small Foot]]
*[[Path Finder]]
*[[Road Ranger]]
*[[Royal-T]]
*[[Treds]]
*[[Tic Toc]]
*[[Tri-Track]]
*[[Turbo (GoBots)|Turbo]]
*[[Wrong Way]]
*[[Zeemon]]
*[[A.J.]] (Human, honorary)
*[[Nick (GoBots)|Nick]] (Human, honorary)

{{groupstub}}

[[Category:Factions]]
[[Category:Guardians| Guardian]]

Ace (GoBots)

2015-10-14T19:21:28Z

IKY: Created page with ":''Ace is a Guardian from the GoBots continuity family.'' {{faceless}} '''Ace''' is a Guardian. He probably turns into a plane..."

:''Ace is a [[Guardian (GoBots)|Guardian]] from the [[GoBots (franchise)|GoBots]] [[continuity family]].''
{{faceless}}
'''Ace''' is a Guardian. He probably turns into a plane.

==Fiction==
===Ask Vector Prime===
Ace, along with [[Hans-Cuff]], [[Wrong Way]], [[Royal-T]], [[Good-Knight]], [[Bolt]], and [[Heat Seeker (GoBots)|Heat Seeker]], joined [[Turbo (GoBots)|Turbo]] in battle against [[Optimus Prime (G1)|Optimus Prime]] and his team of [[Spy Changer]]s, assuming them to be [[Renegade]]s. The Spy Changers were outnumbered until they were suddenly aided by [[Cy-Kill (GoBots)|Cy-Kill]]'s elite lieutenants, [[Cop-Tur (GoBots)|Cop-Tur]], [[Crasher (GoBots)|Crasher]], [[Fitor (GoBots)|Fitor]], [[Tank]], and [[Geeper-Creeper]]. The Guardians were driven off, but not before capturing [[Bluestreak (G1)|Silverstreak]]. {{storylink|Ask Vector Prime}}

==Notes==

==External link==

[[Category:Fiction-only characters]]
[[Category:GoBots]]

Renegade

2015-10-14T19:19:02Z

IKY:

:''The Renegades are a faction from the [[GoBots (franchise)|GoBots]] [[continuity family]].''

A terrorist organization on the then-organic world of [[Gobotron]], the '''Renegades''' thwarted the peacekeeping efforts of the [[Guardian (GoBots)|Guardians]], the primary law enforcement on the planet. Under the machinations of the Master Renegade, these insurgent cells eventually committed the act of sabotage that resulted in a meteor rendering Gobotron uninhabitable to organic life.

Long after the population had been converted into cyborg chassis to protect their organic brains, and after the original conflict and organic origins of Gobotron had passed into myth, the Guardian [[Cy-Kill (GoBots)|Cy-Kill]] would seek to rule Gobotron. Defecting from the Guardians to lead a reconstituted force of Renegades, war swept over the world once again.

==Known Renegades==
*[[Cy-Kill (GoBots)|Cy-Kill]]
*[[Bad Boy]]
*[[Bug Bite (GoBots)|Bug Bite]]
*[[Crasher (GoBots)|Crasher]]
*[[Crain Brain]]
*[[Cop-Tur (GoBots)|Cop-Tur]]
*[[Creepy]]
*[[Fitor (GoBots)|Fitor]]
*[[Geeper-Creeper]]
*[[Loco (GoBots)|Loco]]
*[[Dr. Go]]
*[[Gong (Renegade)|Gong]]
*[[Herr Fiend]]
*[[Snoop]]
*[[Stretch]]
*[[Tank]]
*[[Vamp]]
*[[Zero (GoBots)|Zero]]
*[[Zebediah Braxis]] ([[human]], honorary)

==Fiction==
===''TransTech''===
{{stub|Withered Hope}}

===Ask Vector Prime===
{{stub|Ask Vector Prime}}

[[Category:Factions]]
[[Category:Renegades| Renegade]]