MediaWiki - User contributions [en]

Talk:Theme song

2014-05-29T16:02:07Z

Keepcalm&rollout: /* DA NA-NAH NA-NAH DUM! */

What category would this fall under? -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 00:12, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

And what type of music was the '''TRANSFORMERSTRANSFORMERS''' Cybertron theme? Techno? Trance? Really bad music?
:Wiki sez: "Paul Oakenfold (born August 30, 1963 in Greenhithe, Kent[1] England) is a record producer and one of the best-known Trance DJs worldwide." --[[User:Zodberg|Zodberg]] 06:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

It should be noted that Armada's trance style Transformers theme did have lyrics, but it was only ever heard during the episodes, never as the opening theme song itself. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 05:19, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

== Exterior links ==

So, do we provide link with videos (or at least music) to the themes in questions? (youtube is full of it)

== Cover Versions ==

Should there be a section for various cover versions of this song that have come out from bands like Black Lab and Solarice? Or would something like that fit into the 21st Century portion? [[User:Koh4711|Koh4711]] 02:36, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
:Are they official? As in have they been used in an official Transformers capacity? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 02:57, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
::They've not been part of any show, but given that several of them have been released on commercial CDs, so they'd be official in terms of being licensed by Hasbro, in all likelihood. They'd be something akin to licensed merchandise, I'd think. [[User:Koh4711|Koh4711]] 03:15, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
:::This wiki deals with things in Transformers that have been officially sanctioned or endorsed by Hasbro and/or Takara-Tomy for use in Transformers or the promotion of Transformers. I am not familiar with them but if these covers are just some band somewhere deciding to play the Transformers theme song because of the movie, then it's not likely to be official. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 03:33, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

== Animated Theme ==

Im pretty sure "More than they appear/Justice, bolts and gears!" hasnt appeared in the theme song so can we remove this from the article? [[User:Donutter|Donutter]] 22:02, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
:You have a point about it not appearing, but it does exist and so warrants mentioning. I've modified that section to explain how we know about the verse, even though it hasn't aired on TV.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 22:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
::On the subject of ''Animated''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s theme song, its first verse uses the same word order as ''Cybertron''<nowiki>'</nowiki>s theme. --[[User:ZeldaTheSwordsman |ZeldaTheSwordsman ]] 14:20, 15 January 2010 (PST)

== Smosh ==

I was just thinking, should Smosh's Transformers Rap be mentioned on this page? Just a random thought, sorry if it's a stupid question.{{unsigned|Blitzwing}}
:Who and the what? If they don't have anything to do with Transformers in an official capacity, then they have no reason whatsoever to be mentioned here. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 16:50, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

== Court case ==

Does anyone have details about the Ann Bryant court case? Didn't she claim sole credit for writing the song, too? Should that go into the article?--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 11:48, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

:[http://www.courts.state.ny.us/courts/ad2/calendar/webcal/decisions/2009/D22506.pdf Here's] something about it...I think it says she lost the case, but anyone who knows this legal stuff better should check it out. -[[User:Mazenoise|Mazenoise]] 12:49, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

== "The" ==

I've always been puzzled by the ''the'' in the theme tune ("''The'' Transformers, more than meets the eye" etc). It doesn't fit the music, it's superfluous, and the singers sound pushed to sing it within the split-second they have. As a kid I completely missed it, and assumed the song went "Transformers, more than etc". Was this just pedantry on the part of the writers, or was there e.g. a trademark issue that forced them to put in the definitive article? -[[User:Ashley Pomeroy|Ashley Pomeroy]] 16:45, 1 August 2009 (EDT)

:The line was called "The Transformers" at least in early G1. Look at some pictures of first year g1 boxes, or early issues of the Marvel Comics series. All have "The" in front of the "Transformers" logo. Not sure when they dropped it, or why. [[Special:Contributions/76.226.100.105|76.226.100.105]] 15:57, 19 April 2011 (EDT)

== "RiD commercials" ==

I've found myself watching old commercials and hey, some of the RiD ones feature an Energon-style theme. The music is different, but singing is the same.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTgAV2EMRdQ

I'm afraid to mess the article up with my English though.

== Extended ending ==

I never saw it mentioned here, but I recently discovered an extended cut of the G1 Season 1-2 ending credits theme song which is, basically, the aforemented ending credits song played 4-5 times with some extra sinth beats and someone saying "TRANSFORMERS" with a distorted voice over it. It apparently was the b-side of the vinyl with the French theme song. --[[User:Phantom Dusclops'92]] 15:16, 01/04/2014 (EDT)

== DA NA-NAH NA-NAH DUM! ==

The iconic DA NA-NAH NA-NAH DUM! musical sting obviously originated from the tagline. Example: Ro-Bots-IN-Dis-Guise!--[[User:Keepcalm&rollout|Keepcalm&rollout]] ([[User talk:Keepcalm&rollout|talk]]) 12:02, 29 May 2014 (EDT)

Talk:Theme song

2014-05-29T16:01:53Z

Keepcalm&rollout: /* DA NA-NAH NA-NAH DUM! */ new section

Talk:Beast (G1)

2014-05-21T13:29:31Z

Keepcalm&rollout: /* Unleash The Beast */

Why is he called the Beast? Well, look at him. He's certainly not the Beauty. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] 23:53, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Why is it that everyone seems to hate this guy? Is it just because he's ugly? Something can be ugly or grotesque and awesome as well, like the Alien or most of the monsters from Doom or even... '''Doom 3'''. --[[User:LokitheGrammarNazi|LokitheGrammarNazi]] 14:23, 26 October 2010 (EDT)
:Because half the fanbase came up with better Dinobot combiners in 1985? --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 14:31, 26 October 2010 (EDT)
::Because it's simultaniously increadibly fan-wanky to the point of bad fan-wank cliche and horribly executed on its own merit. --[[Special:Contributions/99.75.104.99|99.75.104.99]] 14:44, 26 October 2010 (EDT)

== Unleash The Beast ==

What are you TALKING about?! The Beast is AWESOME!--[[User:Keepcalm&rollout|Keepcalm&rollout]] ([[User talk:Keepcalm&rollout|talk]]) 09:29, 21 May 2014 (EDT)

Talk:Beast (G1)

2014-05-21T13:29:17Z

Keepcalm&rollout: /* Unleash The Beast */ new section

User talk:SanityOrMadness

2014-05-09T13:28:32Z

Keepcalm&rollout: /* well exCUSE me */ new section

== Black Friday Discussion ==
Sorry, I clicked the wrong pair of edits for comparison when I was checking who wrote what. Should've guessed GWolfv2 was behind all the unsigned edits; he established a pattern.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 15:16, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

== Maintenance edits ==

When doing a large number of maintenance edits on a long list of articles, please mark the edits as minor. It's not ''crucial'', but it does help cut through some of the recent changes clutter. Thanks.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 19:47, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

== Monaco 2 on Wikia test box. ==

Change your default Monaco skin to "Beach" and you should be good.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 15:31, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

== What are you doing? ==

We're going to automate copying pages from the downloaded cache files. You don't need to do redundant work, it's just going to get overwritten. --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 14:42, 18 March 2009 (EDT)

=="Again"==
Actually, we are ALL cleaning up after Bookworm. For my part, I was just cleaning up after the import script broke all the Wiki formatting, and you don't see me singling out the import-scriptwriter by name. I have already admitted that I can't tell one line of code from another, which is why I ask questions when things seem to go wrong as I attempt to follow the basic instructions on Damage Control. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 15:36, 22 March 2009 (EDT)
:I meant it light-heartedly - that's why I did the :p. I wasn't trying to slam you (after umpteen hours of this, I'm probably a bit skewish, that said...) - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 15:40, 22 March 2009 (EDT)

== Discussion page recovery ==

[http://www.emopanda.com/motormouth/rewiki_text2.php? Derik's tool] has been updated to deal with indenting of comments. However- it still doesn't deal with LONG pages well, so you'll have to break it up. :(

[http://www.emopanda.com/motormouth/rewiki_text3i.php? This version] (3.0i) does ''only'' the indenting and headers. Run a big page through this first to clean out most of the junk, then paste chunks into 2.5 to clean them up. (It's not a good solution, but it beats nothing.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 03:10, 23 March 2009 (EDT)

== "Marvel Properties" ==

Primus, really? Well, I feel like a moron...but then how is G.B. Blackrock used with no problems in the recent reprints? [[User:Thanos6|Thanos6]] 02:26, 3 May 2009 (EDT)
:Not entirely sure - up until #73, only Circuit Breaker is claimed by Marvel; but from #74 to the end of the series, they all are. I half-suspect they were sold by Hasbro TO Marvel around that point, and possibly they were allowed to reprint the earlier issues with them as part of the deal (I'm actually not sure why IDW are having such trouble in the first place - Titan reprinted all the issues involving Marvel stuff with no trouble, even the one with '''Spider-Man'''). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 04:44, 3 May 2009 (EDT)
::What amazes me is that for years and years I'd seen it said that Hasbro owns all those characters and not Marvel, but apparently somehow no one noticed the indica saying otherwise until now? --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 05:12, 3 May 2009 (EDT)
::::[[Image:TFUSindiciasamples.jpg|thumb|Click for legible version]]I don't understand it myself - especially the fact that from their début (Blackrock in the early issues, the other NKs in #68) until #73, they AREN'T claimed in the indicia for Marvel (except for Circuit Breaker), but, well, click the image for the bigger version. I've submitted this as a question for the Q&A, so try & lean on Walky... - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 10:01, 3 May 2009 (EDT) 
:::::Wait, Marvel claims them as "trademarks". They never used them in such a capacity (as in, publishing a "Circuit Breaker" comic), and their claim of the trademarks should have expired long ago. Do I have this one right?--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 12:23, 13 September 2009 (EDT)
::::::Sure, and that's why I wanted a Q&A answer on it, since the fact that Marvel felt ABLE to claim them - when, by rights, Hasbro should have owned the characters [except Circuit Breaker] based on what we know, and thus would have objected strongly to any such claim - carries a strong implication, if not a definitive one... '''but note that Circuit Breaker was only ever claimed using the exact same wording - the only change was to add the other names in the list'''.
::::::[Further. ould Marvel really have been interested in floating a Neo-Knights comic [as Furman hinted at in the TFUS #80 lettercol] if they had to rent the characters from Hasbro, after ''Transformers'' fell to cancellation levels? Remember, #75 was going to be the end, but it was given a temporary reprieve, which included tacking on the epilogue to that issue. You don't tend to plan a spin-off with [expensive] licensed characters unless the parent title is doing pretty damn well. Moreover, there are prior examples of Marvel spinning off characters they own from dead licensed series (Machine Man from ''2001: A Space Odyssey'', Bug from ''Micronauts''), and I'll have to try and find the indicia from the original issues there. Ultimately, it's the difference between the "Captain Marvel" trademark lapsing, but having to invent your own character to fill it; and being able to pick up the Shazam! CM. If Marvel felt able to claim the "names and distinctive likenesses" then, I doubt Hasbro could have owned them, regardless of how it came to be.] - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 13:56, 13 September 2009 (EDT)
Have you seen [http://www.allspark.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=62852 this question] Hasbro answered recently? Pretty interesting. They seem to be saying Marvel doesn't own the characters that appeared in TF first. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 00:33, 26 September 2009 (EDT)
:Thanks for pointing that out - their general answer is basically what's always been assumed (not least given the hoops Marvel jumped through with Circuit Breaker & Death's Head to start with). I note that they didn't answer about any specific characters though, and if Hasbro '''do''' own the Neo-Knights, I want to know how & why Marvel claimed the others in the last seven issues when they didn't feel able to do so before that (and why Hasbro didn't object if Marvel shouldn't have done so). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 12:07, 26 September 2009 (EDT)

== "Patronizing Dick" ==

I had always heard that as "Specialist skills", but whatever. You were right on that.

As for "[http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/judgement judgement]" - Judgment is the primary and correct spelling, judgement is an incorrect "variant" that is accepted because people still know what you're talking about, even if it's technically a misspelling (you can even see this if you open up the edit screen). As ''you're'' the one who reverted the correct spellings for four instances in that edit, I don't see how I was the one being the dick.[[User:KrytenKoro|KrytenKoro]] 20:37, 17 May 2009 (EDT)
:Oi! "Judgement" is the Queen's bleedin' English, my old cocksparrow! Incorrect variant indeed! Bloody foreigners! :-P - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 20:52, 17 May 2009 (EDT)
::It is? Never mind then. "Judgment" still wasn't incorrect in the first place, though.
::Never mind. I'm going to go ahead now and say you win on this SM, because I honestly couldn't give a crap about a spelling argument.
::[http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/judgement.html Yeah, Chris is right about it being the British variant].[[User:KrytenKoro|KrytenKoro]] 21:04, 17 May 2009 (EDT)

== Unsigned Template ==

Is there a particular reason you edited the unsigned comments on discussion page on the female Starscream Clone the way you did, rather than just using the <nowiki>{{unsigned}}</nowiki> template? If you weren't sure how its formatting works, just check that page now so you can see how I reworked it.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 12:22, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
:I '''did''' use the unsigned template - I just subst:ed it to save the fairly pointless transclusion. If the server's falling over on a regular basis, you don't template silly things. [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 12:59, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
::Sorry, rather than a familiar template, I saw what appeared to be manually typed code, including a span command for reducing the font size (which I've never seen show up when using the template). And as I'm not familiar with the term "subst:ed", I'm afraid you're talking over my head there. I'm not sure how it saves having a transclusion, pointless or otherwise. Wait...was this meant to be something to maintain the "unsigned" format if the template doesn't come along with the eventual server transfer?--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:06, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
:::If you type <nowiki>{{subst:TEMPLATE}} instead of {{TEMPLATE}}</nowiki>, than instead of grabbing the template at each and every page load, it grabs it once and saves the ''output of the template code'' to the page instead. Calling the template incurs a processing overhead on the server, and on stuff like {{tl|unsigned}}, where long-term formatting changes are unlikely and not particularly important, ''and'' is used on talk pages rather than article pages, I generally throw the subst: in unless there's a good reason not to. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 20:14, 18 May 2009 (EDT)
::::Hmm...learn something new every day. For instance, I just now discovered from your response there's such a thing as a "tl" template that calls a link to the template cited after the pipe. Aside from that, I wasn't aware of any processing overhead incurred by template calls; I thought that once it was done, it was "remembered" on that page.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 16:22, 19 May 2009 (EDT)

==Grimlock Main Pic==
I admire your enthusiasm. But there isn't a snowball's chance in hell that folks will allow that main pic to be changed. Have a look at the [[Talk:Springer (G1)]] page for my attempt at changing a main pic :) [[User:Drmick|Drmick]] 09:56, 20 June 2009 (EDT)

==Dinobot page==
What the hell?!? I only edited the tiny bit of the original dinobot toy, i did NOTHING else! I don't even know how i could do something like that by trying! I am sorry that something like that could happen and you had to clean the mess i made.--[[User:Sunjumper|Sunjumper]] 10:38, 31 August 2009 (EDT)

== Mark Gruenwald ==

Yeah, I know about the multiple multiverses. I was actually going to say "...in a multiverse Marvel owns," but decided that would be too complicated; I hadn't counted on finding another Gru fan. :) [[User:Thanos6|Thanos6]] 19:50, 20 October 2009 (EDT)

==Rewind/Sunder==
I agree that the way the bio is written makes it unclear as to who loves dubstep, but given that each of the other Mini-Con two-pack bios has the two guys at odds with each other (never talks/doesn't shut up, solitary/likes to be around others, thinks everyone could get along/just wants to stab people), surely the joke with the Rewind and Sunder is supposed to be that Rewind gets headaches, and then Sunder plays dubstep, which is the ''last'' thing you'd want to listen to if you've got a headache? [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] 13:45, 29 December 2012 (EST)

== Sky Garry Image ==

I got the picture from Cliffbee.com. [[User:Movie09|Movie09]] 20:31, 8 April 2013 (EDT)
:I know, I googled it (and it's been deleted now in favour of a better copy of the original file anyway). The point was that you need to identify this IN THE FILE DESCRIPTION with a link to the source (or note where you got it, if you capped/scanned it yourself), along with a [[:Category:Image templates|image tag]] and - if you can't find a specific tag like {{tl|TFAcap}}, {{tl|PrimeBHstock}}, {{tl|IDWG1interior}}, etc and have to resort to a generic one like {{tl|hastak}} or {{tl|fairuse}} - a relevant category, like <nowiki>[[Category:Return of Convoy toy images]]</nowiki> in the case of the Sky Garry image.
:Tl;dr version: Uploading a file with no description whatsover? Big no-no.
:Other point: Filenames. Something like "Skygarry.jpg" is bad. You should identify the toyline/issue/episode in the filename (e.g. "G1-ROC-toy Sky Garry.jpg", "Scattered WheeljackInjured.jpg", "ReluctantSpecialist Whirl BoomBoomStick.jpg", etc) - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] 22:28, 8 April 2013 (EDT)

== Upright? ==

What is this "upright=1.4" stuff you're adding to File tags? Just wondering! --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 20:43, 18 January 2014 (EST)
:Basically, you can set a thumbnail size in your profile for thumbnails that don't specify a size like 250px directly. If the wikicode sets a fixed number for a given thumnail, that overrides your setting entirely. If instead you specify upright=1.4, then that thumbnail will appear 1.4 times the size of your default, rounded to the nearest 10px - for the default thumbnail setting of 180px, that's equivalent to setting 250px directly.
:Basically, it gives more flexibility to users, especially if they're using the mobile skin primarily and would prefer smaller thumbnails.
:(I did a chart [http://tfwiki.net/mediawiki/index.php?title=User:SanityOrMadness/test&oldid=848155 here] to remind myself of the various sizes, if it helps. Some 10px increases require jumps smaller than 0.1) - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] ([[User talk:SanityOrMadness|talk]]) 22:38, 18 January 2014 (EST)
::Why is it causing all those pictures to become god-awful huge? I don't think I've set any default thumbnail size and this new feature seems to be causing every image in an article to double in size (if not more). --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 12:29, 24 January 2014 (EST)
::Maybe I had changed my default thumbnail size, as it was set to 300px. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 13:45, 24 January 2014 (EST)

== Titan numbering ==

Sorry, that was my fault! When I started doing the Titan issues because whoever was doing them stopped, I just continued on the existing numbering system, not realizing that it was being reset each time the magazine changed franchise. :) --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 18:58, 3 February 2014 (EST)
:Happens :). I didn't catch there at first that the Prime series had a Titan '''Comics''' logo on it, rather than Titan Magazines, hence the wrong category that now needs deleted! - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] ([[User talk:SanityOrMadness|talk]]) 19:22, 3 February 2014 (EST)

== What Images? ==

Seriously, what images have been watermarked? They are just official images (nobody can argue about that). If I uploaded images that were watermarked, why aren't the new ones deleted? Also I did get the message last year when I uploaded the Platinum Edition Ultra Magnus. [[User:Movie09|Movie09]] ([[User talk:Movie09|talk]]) 19:20, 5 May 2014 (EDT)

== "No Casseticon Laserbeak" ==

Actually, Casseticon Laserbeak shows up in the Soundwave operation issue. Plus, Armada Laserbeak showed up first. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:37, 6 May 2014 (EDT)
:Ah. Well it will still be [[Laserbeak (Kre-O Autobot)]] and [[Laserbeak (Kre-O Decepticon)]], not "(Armada Kre-O)" and "(G1 Kre-O)".
:<nowiki>*</nowiki>is beginning to see Sipher's point about these background guys not meriting their own pages until they actually DO something...* - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] ([[User talk:SanityOrMadness|talk]]) 19:40, 6 May 2014 (EDT)
::Also, I think since we got Universe Soundwave at ICBM Soundwave, maybe "Bomber Starscream" would be a better name for Machine Wars Starscream? [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 19:50, 6 May 2014 (EDT)
:::I'd go with that (I went through a few permutations before I actually moved the pages, including "Bomber Starscream" and "Space Case Soundwave" - the latter after the other guy in the 2-pack in question), but Sabrblade wants to move ICBM Soundwave to Universe Soundwave. And at this stage, I'm kind of too tired to argue. - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] ([[User talk:SanityOrMadness|talk]]) 19:55, 6 May 2014 (EDT)
::::Alright. One last question. There's two Astrotrains, ones the G1 version, and the other is the Cybertron version. Would something like "Astrotrain (Kre-O Triple Changer)" and "Astrotrain (Kre-O Duoformer)" work, or would it have to be something a bit less clunky? [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:01, 6 May 2014 (EDT)
:::::If (a) they're background cameos and (b) they don't appear in the same strip, I'd just stick them on one page. There's plenty of precedent for Kreons in that comic changing looks to alternate versions who are radically different in one way or another (Prime and BB keep switching back and forth from Prime to G1 - we even saw BB contemplating some of his collection of body parts in "[http://24.media.tumblr.com/e2156ffdafcca39e46702ce8fc60d2dd/tumblr_mz4a0uFajg1r6p67zo1_1280.jpg Two Giant Bases]" and Vortex switched from pink FOC to grey G1). - [[User:SanityOrMadness|SanityOrMadness]] ([[User talk:SanityOrMadness|talk]]) 20:12, 6 May 2014 (EDT)

== well exCUSE me ==

OPTIMAL OPTIMUS IS HARDLY MENTIONED UNDER OPTIMUS PRIMAL!!!!!!! [[User:Keepcalm&rollout|Keepcalm&rollout]] ([[User talk:Keepcalm&rollout|talk]]) 09:28, 9 May 2014 (EDT)

Optimal Optimus

2014-05-09T13:15:54Z

Keepcalm&rollout: created separate page for Optimus Primal.

Optimal Optimus is [[Optimus Primal]] with the [[spark]] of [[Optimus Prime (G1)]]. For the other guy who isn't him, go here: [[Primal Prime]]

Talk:Optimal Optimus

2014-05-09T13:15:16Z

Keepcalm&rollout: created discussion for Optimal Optimus.

DO NOT delete this page without consideration, as it (a) has potential and (b) originally redirected to Optimus Primal, which provided little information on Optimal Optimus. Thank you. [[User:Keepcalm&rollout|Keepcalm&rollout]] ([[User talk:Keepcalm&rollout|talk]]) 09:15, 9 May 2014 (EDT)

Optimal Optimus

2014-05-09T13:11:20Z

Keepcalm&rollout: created separate page for Optimus Primal.

Optimal Optimus is [[Optimus Primal]] with the [[spark]] of [[Optimus Prime (G1)]. For the other guy who isn't him, go here: [[Primal Prime]]

Talk:Optimus Primal (BW)

2014-05-09T13:05:01Z

Keepcalm&rollout: /* Optimal Optimus is... not here?! */ new section

Robot Masters would be a better title for the article, when it's made. After all, we have articles at [[Transformers: Robots in Disguise (franchise)|Robots in Disguise]] and [[Transformers: Generation 2 (franchise)|Generation 2]], rather than either prefixed with "Transformers:". --[[User:Suki Brits|Suki Brits]] 06:28, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Is there a reason why this isn't in chronological order anymore? [[User:X-BoB58|X-BoB58]] 02:08, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
: Robot Masters does not occur in American continuity. (Nor does BWII. Our Primal does not possess the Matrix.) --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 02:13, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't realy agrea with that but I guess your the admin... [[User:X-BoB58|X-BoB58]] 02:28, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Says BWX Primal was designed for Cybertron and "slapped into the ann line at the last minute." Do we know that? I would imagine it was always intended to be used in both to help ammeliate the cost.

Why aren't there any images of Optimal Optimus in this article?
~Ithekro

== Bat-Primal ==

I've hear a lot of so-and-so about the Japanese view on bat-primal as G1 convoy.

So, for someone who reads nipponese... does [http://members.aol.com/regenesis0/batprimal.jpg this] say anything at all helpful/interesting? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 10:33, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Nothing that I can make out. --[[User:Ratbat|Ratbat]] 11:06, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
:The first sentence under the name says ''Konboi ga Amason de Megatoron to ta ta ka tsu ta to ki no sugata.'' As I have no idea what words are being referred by the Hiragana, I've put the symbol transliteration separate except the obvious one. It seems to say something about Convoy fighting Megatron in the Amazon and changing shape. [[User:Interrobang|Interrobang]] 18:02, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

*“When Convoy battled Megatron in the Amazon, this was his appearance. In order to protect the homes and peace of all living creatures, he changed.”
It would appear he took on this appearance in order to more appropriately battle Megatron in the Amazon jungles. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 18:17, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
: Ah, I didn't think of that angle. I just assumed they were referring to the Convoy that we call Optimus Primal. --[[User:Ratbat|Ratbat]] 23:55, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

:''Ga'' was really confusing me, as my dictionary said it meant "moth". [[User:Interrobang|Interrobang]] 18:41, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

*Ah, "ga" is actually a particle, though there ''is'' a noun "ga" as well. You just kinda have to look at the context. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 18:59, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

==man, whatever steve-o==

BURNING HEART-O PROTECT MY BALLS!!! [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 13:54, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

==Blurgh.==

How come nobody mentions how OpOp's techspecs reference Jetfire? They have the same kind of jet engine, or something like that. Little nifty tidbits like that, 'that's' the kinda stuff we should have here. Honestly.

==Different DVD?==
I know the TRU two pack Primal - Megatron set comes with "Possession". Heck, mine did. But while carousing for TFs recently, I realized that the ones in the store NOW have Cheetor's "Equal Rites". Anyone else experiancing this apparent running change?
:Blech. Equal RITES? I meant Equal Measures. I must have had Discworld on the brain or something. --[[User:Terrocon Blot|Terrocon Blot]] 08:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

== Optimal Optimus's handheld gun ==

Did Primal the handheld gun from his Optimal for mon the show? I've been trying to figure out which versions of the various BW toys are closest to the show models, and Optimal Optimus is one of the easy ones (i.e, not slightly different shade of plastic that is hard to judge by tfu.info photos). --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 17:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

== Blackjack? ==

Which version of Primal was called Blackjack? --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] 15:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
: Original ape. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

== Optimal Megatron? ==

Re: Titanium Optimal Optimus, "Some fans have identified it more as a representative of Megatron from the final episodes of Beast Machines than as Optimus Primal." Where does this statement come from? Is there actual discussion somewhere on the Web about this? At a glance, that face looks pretty damn Primalicious to me, but if there really are fans who think otherwise... - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 05:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
: At a guess, it's because he has no ape mode. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 06:23, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

::Yeah, I got that part. But with Primal's face, it seems like a leap to say it's "more representative" of Megatron, so I'm questioning the statement that "some fans" actually think of the toy that way. If anyone can point to an Allspark thread or something, then I'll buy it. But otherwise, I think that line should be deleted. '''EDIT:''' Okay, I've changed the line to retain the observation without the questionable judgement. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 21:26, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

== Optimal Optimus ==
Uh, am I the only one thinking Optimal Optimus's upper torso (including arms) is a little similar to [[Jhiaxus (G2)|Jhiaxus]]'? --[[User:TX55|TX55]] 20:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

So, does McDonalds Primal go in Merch or Beast Machines? --[[User:Chiasaur11|Chiasaur11]]

== Optimus Primal vs Megatron! ==

As it is noted on this page, the events of this mini-comic depicts Optimus Primal as G1 Optimus Prime. Shouldn't that section be included in [[Optimus Prime (G1)]] instead? (or as well?) Same goes for Megatron and his namesake. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 22:03, 26 August 2009 (EDT)

== Split? ==

Would anybody mind if the cartoon continuity section was split off into its own article? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 21:15, 20 January 2012 (EST)

:Seems okay to me. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:28, 20 January 2012 (EST)
::Coolsville, daddy-o.--[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 23:16, 20 January 2012 (EST)

:-> ''Rearranging; mostly putting the Japanese stuff in its own section.''
::Nice job! ;-D --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 13:15, 21 January 2012 (EST)

== "Down-to-cybertron" ==

That is a great turn of phrase. My compliments. [[User:Cr85747|Cr85747]] 21:09, 5 May 2013 (EST)

== Optimal Optimus is... not here?! ==

There is (A) ZERO information on Optimal Optimus, and Optimal Optimus should be an independent article, rather than redirecting here. A link to my attempt is here: [[Optimal Optimus]][[User:Keepcalm&rollout|Keepcalm&rollout]] ([[User talk:Keepcalm&rollout|talk]]) 09:05, 9 May 2014 (EDT)

Talk:Devastator (ROTF)

2014-02-03T18:55:09Z

Keepcalm&rollout: /* I AM... mute */

== Seven vehicles ==
Paramount listing mention 7 constructicons vehicles, Overload is the not-mentioned-before seventh one:
http://www.slashfilm.com/2009/04/01/tranformers-2-robots-announced/ --[[User:GUIGUI|GUIGUI]] 17:33, 2 April 2009 (EDT)
:Can we put somewhere on this page a link to either the seven Constructicons or the group page?[[User:KrytenKoro|KrytenKoro]] 14:04, 11 May 2009 (EDT)

: A leaked image of legends class construction group even cofirms it...and might i add that they actualy combine into devastator?--[[User:Sunjumper|Sunjumper]] 05:47, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
::Not to us though. You just said a ''leaked'' image of the Constructicons, we only use ''confirmed'' news about this stuff (Hasbro, Wal-Mart, Target, etc.). Until then, Devastator only has six components.--[[User:AWT88|AWT88]] 10:51, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
:::I withdraw my previous statement.--[[User:AWT88|AWT88]] 10:57, 12 May 2009 (EDT)

Was the Paramount listing officially released? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 10:54, 12 May 2009 (EDT)
: Yes. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:06, 12 May 2009 (EDT)

I gather [http://tformers.com/transformers-takara-announces-revenge-of-the-fallen-transformable-legends-devastator-combiner/11492/news.html Takara] has an upcoming toy that makes the whole thing ''much'' clearer.

Can someone who is ''not'' me use this to add altmodes to the list of names? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 20:56, 12 May 2009 (EDT)

* 2010 for Legends class? Say it ain't so! [[Special:Contributions/82.41.72.10|82.41.72.10]] 18:42, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

Should Devastator's various toy descriptions be revised? Majorish spoilers: In the film, there are at least two sets of constructicons, as they appear both as induviduals and as Devastator simultaniously, or else shown to be incapacitated to such a degree that the could not be a part of him. More importantly, the ones that form Devastator are not shown to have robot modes of their own.(although the supreme toy is still inacurate since Overload's vehicle is a clear part of Devastator) The acuracy of the figures should not have been brought into question before there was something to compare them to. Simple as that.[[User:Thelastallosaur|Thelastallosaur]] 18:38, 20 June 2009 (ED

In what stores will Legends Devastator be available in the US? [[Special:Contributions/205.188.117.8|205.188.117.8]] 17:43, 22 June 2009 (EDT)

;Another interview
Micheal Bay confirmed that Devastator is combined from seven vehicles. And, seems each individual is able to transform (Oh...) just like the Legends class. ''Argh''.
http://michaelbay.com/2009/06/30/shooting-at-the-pyramids-of-giza/
:''In the final cut, much of that scene is dominated by CG-animated alien robots, including Devastator — ''the new villain made out of seven individual robots'' who hide in the form of construction equipment. But the flesh-and-blood actors also got to romp on the pyramids.''
--'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 03:28, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
::That article was written for ''USA Today'', it is not a quote from Bay, and as the film shows, Devy is made of more than seven vehicles, his right hand is separate from his arm, plus there's a blue and yellow dump truck that shows up above the pit he combines in. [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 19:04, 1 July 2009 (EDT)

==Blind packaged?==
Where has it been stated that the EZ Constructicons would be blind-packed in Japan? The other EZ guys are, but that seems to be a different assortment to the Constructicons, who were shown in US Legends-like packaging once at some show, and at least HLJ is selling them separately. -[[User:Mazenoise|Mazenoise]] 12:15, 28 June 2009 (EDT)
:They will be blind packed as it would be seriously stupid to sell them so you know exactly what you get when each case contains a case figure. [[User:Dead Metal|Dead Metal]] 12:28, 28 June 2009 (EDT)
::In what sense is it "seriously stupid"? It's logical, and perhaps inevitable, given that the rest of the EZ Collection are blind-packed, but it's not a dumb question for Mazenoise to ask. Devastator's a combiner. Even non-collectors are going to want to catch them all in that instance. If they're blind-packed, that's going to be a nightmare. (I'm still figuring the number of packs you'd need to buy to get even a 50/50 chance of completing the set.) Of course, given the relative crappiness of some of the Legends Constructicons, if they're not blind packed then the distribution will shift in favour of pegwarmers over time, which would ''also'' be unfavourable for people trying to complete the set. [[Special:Contributions/137.195.68.169|137.195.68.169]] 07:11, 1 July 2009 (EDT)
:::I meant it would be stupid if they weren't blind packed as that way you would know what you get so you could easily pick the rare case figure. And these aren't part of the normal EZ collection but of a special Devastator set, each case contains 3.5 Devastators and a case figure.[[User:Dead Metal|Dead Metal]] 09:20, 5 July 2009 (EDT)
::::Ah, got you, I misunderstood you. So we're on the same page then. [[Special:Contributions/82.41.72.10|82.41.72.10]] 10:35, 5 July 2009 (EDT)
:::::So turns out their not blindpacked. [[User:Dead Metal|Dead Metal]] 08:06, 6 July 2009 (EDT)
::::::Everyone's a winner! [[Special:Contributions/82.41.72.10|82.41.72.10]] 18:19, 6 July 2009 (EDT)

== Voiced? ==

Unless I missed something else the second time I watched the movie, that is not Devastator speaking, it is Megatron announcing/shouting to him. So Devastator doesn't speak, just roars.[[User:KrytenKoro|KrytenKoro]] 17:55, 28 June 2009 (EDT)
:Welker often does... less verbose critters, where he just growls or makes animal sounds. There's a few he's even famous for.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 17:59, 28 June 2009 (EDT)
::I think he voised him in the game and the voise-box of the toy.--[[User:Sunjumper|Sunjumper]] 08:25, 4 July 2009 (EDT)

== Film-specific transformation? ==

Okay, I know the toys can only approximate the live-action design, but Devastator's combination doesn't seem to be at all consistent. To ''start'' with, the shots of the construction vehicles arriving in the canyon are off; Scrapper and Hightower are on Mixmaster's right and Overload's on his left, with Scavenger behind the other vehicles, and Rampage and Long Haul on a higher-level cliff edge. When the combination starts, however, Scrapper's on the left of Scavenger, Mixmaster is in front of the others and Overload seems to have completely disappeared. Maybe the big D ''is'' a six-Con combiner after all?

It gets worse when, from what I can tell, Rampage (who's actually on ground level along with Long Haul) apparently gets picked up by Hightower to become D's ''left hand''. What the hell forms the left leg, then? Did Overload switch jobs and colour scheme when nobody was looking? I'd seriously appreciate some help in a consensus on what happened. [[User:Tarrn|Tarrn]] 07:51, 16 July 2009 (EDT)
::It all just got swallowed into a writhing mass of metal, and reemerged where it should have been all along, apparently.[[User:KrytenKoro|KrytenKoro]] 20:22, 16 July 2009 (EDT)
:Yes, the set-up scene with the vehicles driving up was wrong, but set that aside. Overload does not, in any way, form part of Devastator! Rampage transforms wrong, he transforms like Scavenger, with his scoop breaking into three pieces. Devastator's left arm (which already has Hightower attached) slams down on top of Rampage to form... a longer arm. You also don't see Long Haul actually attach to Devastator, but he does begin his transformation sequence. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 23:58, 24 July 2009 (EDT)
::Hightower does not slam down on top of Rampage to complete the arm. That is a [[Unknown Constructicon shovel|completely different vehicle mode and Transformer]]. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:20, 21 January 2010 (EST)

== Non-individual transformation ==

I've read the Battle bio, but I haven't read the Movie Universe Ultimate Guide. I'd like to know what is written about Devastator's entry in the book because I think "In the film, none of the components of Devastator are shown as individual Transformers. This would justify why the components of the Constructicon Devastator playset to have no individual humanoid modes" is still notable. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 22:08, 22 July 2009 (EDT)
:"Did you know? ... The individual intellects of the six Constructicons are largely lost during the combination process." [http://transformerslive.blogspot.com/2009/07/ask-orci-final-edition.html Roberto Orci was also asked about it] and said, "I suppose since we didn't commit either way, I wouldn't want to tie the hands of future writers with my non-canon opinion." So the writers didn't commit either way, which means the work of "future writers" settles the matter. So far that means the battle bio and The Movie Universe. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 22:22, 22 July 2009 (EDT)

::So it seems safe to add back only "In the film, none of Devastator's components are shown as individual Transformers. This would(might) justify why the components of his Supereme class toy to have no individual humanoid modes.", since the note doesn't mention any speculation whether Devastator is not a combiner or any suggestion which contradicts to the bio. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 08:39, 23 July 2009 (EDT)

== Wrecking balls? ==

Those are overhaul balls! The one had a hook on it. That's a major clue, because a hook on a wrecking ball would quickly become scrap.

They're not for demolition; they're to make sure the relatively light hook goes down smoothly when lowered.

Those where maybe hightowers and he also seems to be part dragon

== Two Rampages form Devastator? ==

That is a good catch if it is true. I didn't notice. Can it be confirmed that two Rampages formed Devastator in the film? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 20:59, 24 July 2009 (EDT)
:And what is Overload's bullet? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 21:01, 24 July 2009 (EDT)
::Overload's bullet specifies that it's not always a part of Devastator in every medium. If the twin Rampage thing turns out to be true ''for the movie'', it needs to have the same qualification to it.[[User:KrytenKoro|KrytenKoro]] 23:10, 24 July 2009 (EDT)
:Don't know how canonical it is, but one of Devastator's promotional art pieces (http://idigitalcitizen.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/1440x960-devastator-specs.jpg) definitely has two sets of treads in the left leg - one as the foot, one up in the knee, and comparing the size of the treads to the leg itself it'd need two Rampages to have that much mass. I haven't seen a good enough shot of his leg in any other media to confirm this. Should it be three, though? It definitely seemed like a third Rampage became the left hand. [[User:Tarrn|Tarrn]] 18:56, 4 August 2009 (EDT)
::That same piece of art labels the left leg as "Rampage component" (singular). I'm not sure who originally wrote that there were two Rampages or why, but I think it is because in the movie Transformation sequence Rampage forms part of the left arm along with Hightower. It is not shown where Devastator gets his left leg but presumably it is (also) Rampage. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:27, 4 August 2009 (EDT)
:That bit for the knee doesn't look like the same kind of tread, though. It could be an unwrapped wheel, like with Scrapper.[[User:KrytenKoro|KrytenKoro]] 23:46, 4 August 2009 (EDT)
----------------
Well, i studyed it and I found something. Lets look on it when Construcitons arrive to canyon. Lets take it from Scavengers view as the center.
- Mixmaster is in front of him. Thats right.
- Hightower in on left side, thats right too.
- Scrapper is on right side along with Overload, but farrer like Hightower. When he arrive he is behind Overload but then he is in front of overload.
- Overload is on right side behind Scrapper.
- Long Haul is there twice!!! Because he isnt only on higher ground, but ALSO near Simmons and Leo.
- Rampage is on high ground along with one Long Haul.

So now we got there 8 Constructicons in the pit!!! Now transformations:

- Scavenger becomes body.
- Mixmaster becomes head combined with Scavenger (red).
- Hightower becomes left arm, but attachs "something" as its fist.
- Scrapper becomes "probably" right arm.
- Overload dissappears.
- Long Haul becames very quickly right leg.
- Rampage becomes quickly left leg.

So now there are only 2 Constructicons!!! What happened to Overload and second Long Haul? And also when he arrives he is also behind Overload AND on left side from Mixmaster. So there are 9 Constructicons. Now i will say my theory.

- Scavenger and Mixmaster are obvious.
- Hightower attach second Scrapper as his fist.
- First Scrapper becomes a right fist when Overload attach him.
- Overload became right arm.
- One Long Haul jump from the cliff and form right leg.
- Rampage also jump from the cliff and make left leg.

This explain some things, but still I dont know what exactly happened to second Long Haul near Twins and Simmons (and Leo)... hmmm. And if you really want to know that, why you simply dont send Email to Paramount, Hasbro or that other company r directly to Michael Bay how it really is with Devastator. Like his "balls", they should be from Hightower, but how something from his arm could be in his pelvis? [[User:V.Metalic|V.Metalic]] 20:10, 19 September 2009 (EDT)

== Supreme Class Constructicon Devastator==
The second Supreme Class Devastator is impossible to find information about online. Does anyone know if this is a toy that is going to be released, or has it already been out? It looks like it is made up of the Legends Class figures, so does one have to buy all of the Legend Class vehicles to make Devastator? [[User:Fergalicious|Fergalicious]] 01:53, 9 August 2009 (EDT)
:Um, what second Supreme Class Devastator?[[Special:Contributions/82.41.72.10|82.41.72.10]] 18:17, 5 September 2009 (EDT)
::I know what Fergalicious means. It's not a Supreme Class, it's just made of the Legends Constructicons. The size is really closer a Deluxe, if I'm right. [[User:Fallen13|Fallen13]] 20:02, 5 September 2009 (EDT)
::: Oh, right, the Legends ones. Yeah, it's out in Japan as a selection of EZ Collection Constructicons which you can collect and combine, but Hasbro's suggested that it'll bring them to the US (at the very least) as a store exclusive next year, containing all 7 Constructicons. [[Special:Contributions/82.41.72.10|82.41.72.10]] 17:49, 7 September 2009 (EDT)

==Page protection==

Is this page still meant to be protected? [[Special:Contributions/137.195.68.169|137.195.68.169]] 05:08, 18 September 2009 (EDT)
:Surely it can be unprotected by now![[Special:Contributions/81.108.237.26|81.108.237.26]] 14:51, 22 January 2010 (EST)

==Required components==

Couldn't it be possible that some of Devastator's components aren't ''required'' for combination, they're just extra parts that augment him internally to make him extra powerful. Also, the fact that there are a bunch of duplicates of his components would make it possible that there are lots of Devastators, wouldn't it. Correct me if I'm wrong. {{unsigned|70.100.242.133|12:33, November 6, 2009 (EST)}}
:You are basically right. It is possible. See [http://unicron-events-interviews.blogspot.com/2009/10/hasbro-q-10212009.html Hasbro's answer] to the question (#2). "...there are a race of Transformers called Combiners that are not limited to one form or method of combining. Needless to say, there are a lot of things that can happen within this and other races of Transformers." - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 12:45, 6 November 2009 (EST)

==Legends Class Poseablity==
"The only real drawback he has is that he almost has no articulation."
To be fair, he has about as much articulation as the G1 Devastator, and he holds together better. His arms swing out, he bends at the elbows. His hands open and close, his head moves and he has some wiggle in his legs.

== Talky Toy Tips ==

Didn't know about the clip-the-jaws-open trick before reading this. I'm not sure if I'll find it visually pleasing enough to utilize, but it's interesting to find out.

As for gabby Mixmaster, yeah, if you move him in any way in vehicle mode (or bump the surface on which he's sitting, or sometimes just look at him funny), his sound gimmick will go off. For some reason, however, mine seems a lot less talky in Devastator-head mode. Once you click the rear of the vehicle into place underneath it, switching the sound gimmick to robot mode, it isn't nearly as sensitive, and it's even less so once Mixmaster is plugged into place as part of Devastator.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 00:58, 25 December 2009 (EST)

== Argos ==

I didn't mean to imply that Argos had the UK exclusive. However it's definitely on sale, today, in Argos. Whether they have the exclusive or not is rather orthogonal. [[Special:Contributions/82.41.72.10|82.41.72.10]] 16:46, 24 January 2010 (EST)

== Larger Legends class ==

There is a larger Legends class Devastator toy that, apart from the size, appears to be identical to the original. It is being sold on Ebay here http://preview.tinyurl.com/y9nzhgy
Should this go in?[[Special:Contributions/81.108.237.26|81.108.237.26]] 14:07, 22 February 2010 (EST)
:No. Because it's a bootleg. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 14:13, 22 February 2010 (EST)
::Ah, thought so.[[Special:Contributions/81.108.237.26|81.108.237.26]] 13:43, 23 February 2010 (EST)

== Another Devastator render? ==

http://www.tfw2005.com/boards/transformers-movie-discussion/274497-can-someone-post-some-high-res-screen-shots-119.html

Go to the post by TFW member SKowl. He claims it was from BotCon 2009. Think this could go on the page, like in the trivia section? Just something I thought I'd share. {{unsigned|70.253.134.107}}

== I AM... mute ==

Devastator doesn't speak, so why does his TOY say: "I AM... DEVASTATOR!"?--[[User:Keepcalm&rollout|Keepcalm&rollout]] ([[User talk:Keepcalm&rollout|talk]]) 13:55, 3 February 2014 (EST)

Talk:Devastator (ROTF)

2014-02-03T18:54:47Z

Keepcalm&rollout: /* I AM... mute */ new section

Talk:Scorponok (Movie)

2013-11-24T02:25:11Z

Keepcalm&rollout: /* robot or plane or scorpion? */

Now that Scorponok's on the Game website, any of you flash diggers think you can fish out his CG art? I think it'd make a good image for the this entry. --[[User:Terrocon Blot|Terrocon Blot]] 08:56, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

:There's more than one of us?
:(I'll see what I can do, they're buried in a resource file somewhere I wasn't able to find...) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 09:26, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

::And apparently I like,d it was the Lunchables site that hid things in resource files- they're right there for the taking on Transformersgame.com. -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 09:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I've noticed in one of the latest TV spots that Scorponok is only around 8-10 feet long. Should this be mentioned in the article? ...seeing as how wiki's work by the "truth by consensus" principal.

He appears as a Zord in Power Rangers?

No, somebody put that as joke.

So he turns into the helicopter's engine right? I always did wonder about that. - [[User:Bumblejumper|Bumblejumper]] 22:49, 4 November 2013 (EST)

== Scorponok - individual character, symbiont or drone? ==

I just added some details to the trivia sections regarding what parts of Blackout's alternate mode Blackout consists of, and how Jeff Mann described Scorponok as being "birthed" from Blackout. Can we say for sure whether he is a character of his own, rather than being to Blackout what Roller is to G1 Prime?--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 19:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I personally saw him as more like what the animal-form cassettes are to G1 Soundwave, rather than a simple drone like Roller. --[[User:Nightshade83|Nightshade83]] 19:57, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I have always considered Skorponok as an individual character, though more of an animal than any of the others in the movie. Simply Blackout’s pet, but not a drone of any kind. -- Guest 16:00, 19 February 2008

One thing I'm curious about: One of the documentaries on the second DVD of Transformers states that Scorponok's alternate mode is actually the engine of Blackout's helicopter mode. If so, did Scorponok actually survive, or, given that Blackout dies shortly after transforming from copter to robot, did he die with Blackout when the larger robot was destroyed? --[[User:IMAGinES|IMAGinES]] 07:33, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

== Robot mode mainpic ==

I'm probably the minority, but I think his robot mode should be used for his mainpic. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 11:08, 18 July 2009 (EDT)
:His real robot-mode is his scorpion mode [[User:Dead Metal|Dead Metal]] 11:17, 18 July 2009 (EDT)
::So his alternate mode is a bipedal humanoid? Interesting theory. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 11:35, 18 July 2009 (EDT)
:::Actualy, his main alternate mode in the movie is blackout's engine, his robot mode is only used in a flash game and in a comic. Besides, if his main mainpic was of the robot mode, it can only be the toy or an image from the comic.--[[User:Sunjumper|Sunjumper]] 12:41, 18 July 2009 (EDT)

== robot or plane or scorpion? ==

DOES he actually HAVE a robot/altmode? or is he IN robot mode as a scorpion? Also, I heard he transforms into a Predator drone aircraft...--[[User:Keepcalm&rollout|Keepcalm&rollout]] ([[User talk:Keepcalm&rollout|talk]]) 21:25, 23 November 2013 (EST)

Talk:Scorponok (Movie)

2013-11-24T02:24:43Z

Keepcalm&rollout: /* robot or plane or scorpion? */ new section

User:Keepcalm&rollout

2013-11-24T02:20:16Z

Keepcalm&rollout: Created page with "I like: Bonecrusher, Megatron, Soundwave, Blackout, Hatchet, Scorpinok, Wheelie, The Fallen, Devastator (the BIG one), Ravage, and Landmine from the live-action movies. Favori..."

I like: Bonecrusher, Megatron, Soundwave, Blackout, Hatchet, Scorpinok, Wheelie, The Fallen, Devastator (the BIG one), Ravage, and Landmine from the live-action movies.
Favorite quotes: "Bonecrusher rolling." -Bonecrusher (He somehow makes that sound AWESOME), and
"All hail Megatron!" -Blackout (Best. Refference. EVER!) Also, my username would be awesome on a T-Shirt.