MediaWiki - User contributions [en]

Talk:Optimus Prime (Movie)/merchandise

2019-10-22T09:57:27Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* JADA NANO Hollywood Rides 3-pack (Mini-Die Cast Vehicles) */

okay so I have a question.... I have purchased an Optimus Prime Global Alliance Series and inside is a the Cyberhunt Series Transformer. Is this something they Hasbro knows about? Should I call them.. I've just never come across anything like this..

Thank you for your help

Jen

== Souvenir sipper ==

Well, I went to universal and got a, um a cup thingy based on optimuses head. Should it be added?[[User:Potatoman|Potatoman]] ([[User talk:Potatoman|talk]]) 10:43, 16 August 2015 (EDT)potatoman
:Yes. If you could take some well-lit pictures of it in front of a neutral background, and upload them too, that'd be even better! [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:50, 16 August 2015 (EDT)

== JADA NANO Hollywood Rides 3-pack (Mini-Die Cast Vehicles) ==

While at Wal-Mart my sister noticed this three pack from JADA Toys that included three very small Die Cast vehicles. They about the size of a Micro Machine, and way smaller than Hot Wheels vehicles, they are just about 1 1/2 inches long. They have no details on the bottom of the vehicles just an Autobot symbol and strange shaped hole and copyright info. The whole top of the vehicles are die-cast metal, with painted window, and the very small wheels do roll. There is some chrome on Optimus.
The Transformers/vehicles in the set are.....
2016 Chevy Camaro Bumblebee,
Western Star 5700XE Optimus Prime,
and 1977 Chevy Camaro Bumblebee.
The bottom of the package says "Series 1" and has the logos from The Last Knight and the 2007 Transformers movie.
I took pictures of the set still in the package, I have opened them so if you need more pictures I guess let me know, one of the pictures I took was with a comic book so that you can see how small the package of the set is.
I don't really know how to post the pictures I have, nor where to send them, so if you want to see them you will need to let me know how or where to send them.
--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 06:12, 17 October 2019 (EDT)

I just wanted to say again I do have images of this three pack, I just don't know how to post them here, I don't want to mess around with the main page by adding the set until someone in charge decides how and where to post this set. Also since the images were taken by me I don't know if they will meet the criteria of this Wiki. [[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 05:57, 22 October 2019 (EDT)

Talk:Optimus Prime (Movie)/merchandise

2019-10-22T09:56:43Z

Michael Alex Kawa: Undo revision 1376803 by Michael Alex Kawa (talk)

Talk:Optimus Prime (Movie)/merchandise

2019-10-22T09:51:52Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* JADA NANO Hollywood Rides 3-pack (Mini-Die Cast Vehicles) */

okay so I have a question.... I have purchased an Optimus Prime Global Alliance Series and inside is a the Cyberhunt Series Transformer. Is this something they Hasbro knows about? Should I call them.. I've just never come across anything like this..

Thank you for your help

Jen

== Souvenir sipper ==

Well, I went to universal and got a, um a cup thingy based on optimuses head. Should it be added?[[User:Potatoman|Potatoman]] ([[User talk:Potatoman|talk]]) 10:43, 16 August 2015 (EDT)potatoman
:Yes. If you could take some well-lit pictures of it in front of a neutral background, and upload them too, that'd be even better! [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] ([[User talk:Ascendron|talk]]) 16:50, 16 August 2015 (EDT)

[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 05:51, 22 October 2019 (EDT)== JADA NANO Hollywood Rides 3-pack (Mini-Die Cast Vehicles) ==

While at Wal-Mart my sister noticed this three pack from JADA Toys that included three very small Die Cast vehicles. They about the size of a Micro Machine, and way smaller than Hot Wheels vehicles, they are just about 1 1/2 inches long. They have no details on the bottom of the vehicles just an Autobot symbol and strange shaped hole and copyright info. The whole top of the vehicles are die-cast metal, with painted window, and the very small wheels do roll. There is some chrome on Optimus.
The Transformers/vehicles in the set are.....
2016 Chevy Camaro Bumblebee,
Western Star 5700XE Optimus Prime,
and 1977 Chevy Camaro Bumblebee.
The bottom of the package says "Series 1" and has the logos from The Last Knight and the 2007 Transformers movie.
I took pictures of the set still in the package, I have opened them so if you need more pictures I guess let me know, one of the pictures I took was with a comic book so that you can see how small the package of the set is.
I don't really know how to post the pictures I have, nor where to send them, so if you want to see them you will need to let me know how or where to send them.
--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 06:12, 17 October 2019 (EDT)

I just wanted to say again I do have images of this three pack, I just don't know how to post them here, I don't want to mess around with the main page by adding the set until someone in charge decides how and where to post this set. Also since the images were taken by me I don't know if they will meet the criteria of this Wiki.[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 05:51, 22 October 2019 (EDT)

Talk:Optimus Prime (Movie)/merchandise

2019-10-17T10:12:55Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* JADA NANO Hollywood Rides 3-pack (Mini-Die Cast Vehicles) */ new section

Talk:Edmund Burton

2019-02-25T04:37:34Z

Michael Alex Kawa:

== Tomb Stone Prop Made For Sir Edmund Burton In An Auction==

So over on Seibertron.com they reported about a huge auction for props used in some of the movies, this was on February 12th 2019.
Here is a link to the story
[https://www.seibertron.com/transformers/news/huge-transormers-auction-gives-you-the-chance-to-dress-up-as-sam-cade-saxons-and-more/42912/]
Anyways I have an odd query.....if the prop was not used in the movie, was it created for a scene that got cut?
I speculate that perhaps it was created for a scene that might of involved a funeral for Sir Edmund Burton.
I remember that once Josh Duhamel said that they filmed a scene in an old church that was cut out of the final film....I can't find that article that this was said, so this is just based on my memory....but of course the prop of the tomb stone does suggest that it was going to be used for something that never made it into the final cut.

Here is also a link to the auction site with the tomb stone, since the auction is in three days I don't know how long the site with be active.
[http://www.icollector.com/Sir-Edmund-Burton-headstone-prop-from-Transformers-the-Last-Knight_i32421866]
[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 23:32, 24 February 2019 (EST)

Talk:Edmund Burton

2019-02-25T04:32:52Z

Michael Alex Kawa: Auction of a prop of a tomb stone that was made but not used in the movie.

So over on Seibertron.com they reported about a huge auction for props used in some of the movies, this was on February 12th 2019.
Here is a link to the story
[https://www.seibertron.com/transformers/news/huge-transormers-auction-gives-you-the-chance-to-dress-up-as-sam-cade-saxons-and-more/42912/]
Anyways I have an odd query.....if the prop was not used in the movie, was it created for a scene that got cut?
I speculate that perhaps it was created for a scene that might of involved a funeral for Sir Edmund Burton.
I remember that once Josh Duhamel said that they filmed a scene in an old church that was cut out of the final film....I can't find that article that this was said, so this is just based on my memory....but of course the prop of the tomb stone does suggest that it was going to be used for something that never made it into the final cut.

Here is also a link to the auction site with the tomb stone, since the auction is in three days I don't know how long the site with be active.
[http://www.icollector.com/Sir-Edmund-Burton-headstone-prop-from-Transformers-the-Last-Knight_i32421866]
[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 23:32, 24 February 2019 (EST)

Talk:Alpha Trion/Generation 1

2019-01-13T09:44:48Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* His Titan Return figure does have an Autobot insignia */ new section

==BotCon toy==
It seems obvious, given the preview pages from the Transtech comic, that we'll be needing to move the BotCon toy to [[Alpha Trion (SG)|Alpha Trion (Timelines)]] soon... --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 05:52, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
:Actually, I'm not quite so sure. He makes it clear that he's not one of the Transtechs himself, so he could still be from, say, a G1 or UT universe, and thus belong on one of those pages instead. He would only get moved to (Transtech) if he's a new guy. If he's a version of G1 or UT Alpha Trion, he'd still go on either of those pages. We might not ever get a specific answer, either. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 05:39, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
::I just made a note to this effect in the page itself, but didn't think to check this discussion first. If this is too spoilery, feel free to revert.--[[User:G.B. Blackrock|G.B. Blackrock]] 18:34, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
::Given what we now know of his background, I think it's safe to go ahead and set up the Alpha Trion (Transtech) article. Any dissent? [[User:Chip|Chip]] 04:04, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
:::I'd use "Timelines" instead. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 04:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
::::I don't see why we don't just put the Alpha Trion botcon figure as being the G1 version. The figure was released prior the SG fiction even existing. His profile card has the classics insignia just like all the other figs released that Botcon. The usage of the model in SG comes like a year after the toy was released. There isn't anything to officially say the Botcon figure was actually MEANT to be anything other than the G1 version since as far as I know all of the appearances of this charachter model debuted after the figure's release. Its similar to how Galvatron has no appearance in the classics fiction but Galvatron II does, but we still place the Universe release as G1 Galvatron while giving a note that the on package bio could refer to either one. Similarly Alpha Trion's release was in the Botcon 2007 line but was used in the SG fiction, but nonetheless there's nothing explicitly saying he was released with the INTENTION of being of SG Alpha Trion so he would best be put as the G1 version and count as a repurpose.--[[User:BlackStarscream|BlackStarscream]] 18:51, 23 May 2011 (EDT)

==Images==
I think we need some better images. Does anybody have a wider shot of A3 from FIaLTC? And a shot of him from War Dawn? Hey, Monzo, where are ya? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 04:21, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
*yeah that picture of Alpha Trion and Elita One looks like the bad touch.
:That's on purpose! (Since my request above, I have solved the image crisis.) --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 02:07, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

==X-Men==
Am I the only one who thinks that Alpha Trion looks like Onslaught from The X-Men?

Except with a beard.

And a visible face.
--[[User:OctopusPrime|Octopus Prime- King of the Road!]] 23:59, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

We should add something about A3 being the first transformers and abotu A1 and A2 being failures X-BoB58

Therin lies the greatness of Wiki. You don't really need a group consensus to do that.--[[User:OctopusPrime|Octopus Prime- King of the Road!]] 00:53, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

*I don't know how to add it in.

==G1?==
Should this entry have the "(G1)" tag we add to most characters, or is he considered universal, like Unicron or Primus?--[[User:G.B. Blackrock|G.B. Blackrock]] 17:07, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

:I don't see why Alpha Trion would be "universal" (multiversal?). There are versions of him in other continuities, yes, but the same is true for Optimus Prime. I think you probably have to be a god to be the same guy everywhere. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] 17:47, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

==Failures?==
Is there any actual basis for the statement "A1 and A2 were failures" in the cartoon, or was X-Bob just being funny?--[[User:G.B. Blackrock|G.B. Blackrock]] 17:17, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

It was in one of the old Comic Bom-bom issues, it was hosted at Hydra's site but now that's down.
:Who said this? And are Comic Bom-bom issues (which I have no access to) considered canon?--[[User:G.B. Blackrock|G.B. Blackrock]] 23:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

A. The Issiue in question was hosted at TFPulp wich is now down, you can ask Hydra or Buster over at the allspark for more info. [[User:X-BoB58|X-BoB58]] 23:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
:I assume this means that you posted the bit to which I asked "Who said this?" Thanks for the info. However, it doesn't actually answer my main question, which is "are the Comic Bom-Bom issues considered canon?" However, I grant that this is a bad question. More to the point, are they considered in the ''same'' continuity as the G1 cartoon that Alpha Trion originated in? If not, this statement should be sent to a note lower in the article, under a "Comic Bom-Bom" heading (see the Wreckers and Dreamwave Comics headings for examples). It is appropriate to include on the Wiki, but probably should not be part of Alpha Trion's defining bio at the top of the page.--[[User:G.B. Blackrock|G.B. Blackrock]] 23:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
::Agreed. Especially considering how loose the J-fiction tends to play. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 00:03, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I would consider them cartoon-Cannon but others may not [[User:X-BoB58|X-BoB58]] 00:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

::Cartoon-cannon is a dicey issues, because the japanese cartoond is brannch off later, and it had some events even before the movie (scramble city) that were noticably different.
::(Did the Ark awaken in 1985 in the Japanese cartoon? I want to say that it did, but I don't think i have a basis to support that, it just want' released until 85 there.)-[[User:Derik|derik]]18:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

:::From the defunkt TfCyberbon/TFPulp
:::This Bom-Bom continues to move into the 2010 period, with character designs of Cyclonus. There's a paragraph which describes him as holding a position similar to that of Starscream, while mentioning his personality as "having discarded his humanism in order to become a coldhearted battle machine." Interesting to see his cockpit. Then, there's an absolutely fascinating 2-page spread on the Quintessons, describing the function of each face. There's also a timeline in some sort of Seibertron years describing the Quintessons, Vector Sigma, and the first Transformers. According to this, in Seibertronian year 285, A-3 was the first robot to be successfully born via Vector Sigma, A-1 and A-2 having been failures. Then, there are a couple pages showing upcoming releases, foreign items, and some neat merchandise like phone cards. What a month!
:::[http://members.aol.com/regenesis0/art_cbb_01_87_0304.jpg Image] -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 06:27, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
::::In absolute terms, Alpha Trion can't have been the first Transformer/Cybertronian ever created; he had no idea how to deal with the Hate Plague in ''The Return Of Optimus Prime'', which prompted Prime to journey further back. If "further back" was two stillborn guys, he wouldn't have been able to find anyone to combat that menace.

::::That arguement aside - since it's a note from a secondary source (ie nothing of the sort is mentioned in the 'toon), it should probably go in a footnote/Trivia section at the end of his profile rather than the main section, I reckon. -- [[User:Monzo|Monzo]] 23:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

==Moustache==
20mil BC? 9mil, right? -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 06:14, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

11, actually. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 20:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

==Sound effects?==
The instructions say he has them; we're sure he doesn't? --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 02:14, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
: Pretty sure he doesn't. Mine doesn't even have the metal contact points in the battery compartment. The electronics are stripped. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 02:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

==Greatest?==
Not to open a can of worms, beat a dead horse, etc., etc., etc., but I would think the phrase "Cybertron's greatest hero" attributed to Optimus Primal is a contested title, unless all of the fandom voted at some point and time and decided on this.

If so, then fine...I'll curl up in a corner and cry, but if not then I think those kind of statements should be reserved for the Beast Wars Wiki.

Just my opinion. --[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 04:14, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
: BWX Optimus Primal's profile says outright he's at least ONE of Cybertron's greatest heroes. And, frankly, he must be #1, if Primus picked him, out of, well, every Transformer who ever existed in any universe, to fight Primus' armies against Unicron's. He didn't bring back Optimus Prime, he didn't bring back Rodimus Prime, he didn't even bring back [[Big Red]]. Optimus Primal was brought back from death (after saving the entire planet with an army of seven... against millions) to lead Primus' forces in his darkest hour.
: (And, really, this IS the Beast Wars wiki. Beast Wars IS a good chunk of Transformers.) --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 05:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

::I'm not denying Beast Wars its place in the lore. I like Beast Wars 100 times more than the anime crap out there.

::And I have no trouble granting to Primal the status as ONE of Cybertron's greatest heroes. Fine. IMHO, he's better than Rodimus and Ultra Magnus put together. But THE greatest? Again, when was the vote to determine this? My point is, isn't the use of this description on this page an obvious and disputed bias?

::Are you attributing this title to him just because in one comic continuity Primus picks him to return from the dead and fight a battle against Unicron? Is that the official word then?

::If so...boo, hiss.--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 05:57, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

:I'll admit it's a pretty strong statement when comparing him to someone as iconic as Optimus Prime, but as you said, there is not denying that he is one of Cybertron's greatest heroes. But I don't think there was any sort of fandom vote. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 06:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
::Yes, this isn't a fandom issue. This is more his place in the canon. I like Optimus Prime as much as anyone, but Primal ''did'' do something more significant.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 06:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

::Ah, crap. The truth comes out. You're all a bunch of monkey-lovers. :) --[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 06:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
:::Well, it IS the best Transformers ever. Until Animated comes out, maybe. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 06:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Yeesh, Suzy. It's a statement in the Wreckers/Universe section of the fiction. In the Wreckers/Universe continuity, he's stated to be all that and a bag of chips. It doesn't affect other continuities.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 06:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

::Okay Rosi. Point taken. In this context it makes sense, but -- as the lone Gee-Wun fan here -- I can disagree with its use. :) Good night fellas.--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 06:52, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
:::Besides, Beast Wars is a continuation of the G1 cartoon (mostly, with parts of the G1/G2 comic) and Wreckers/Universe is set after Beast Machines, so if you're going by the original G1 cartoon continuity, then ''canonically'', Primal is the greatest hero in Cybertronian history. Really, G1 Prime never did anything in the cartoon continuity as impressive as what Primal achieved. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 07:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
:Though Prime did kill Unicron in the Marvel Comics. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 17:08, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
::And sacrificed himself to bring the light of Primus to the Swarm, thus paving the way for the creation of the Vok. Which ''is'' in continuity with Wreckers/Universe by way of Primeval Dawn. But Wreckers/Universe is a continuity mess even before it transitioned into multiple continuities crossing over. To this day I'm not sure what they cherry picked from the cartoon and the comic.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 18:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

:::Primal did save earth from the Planet Buster, didn't he? I'll give him that.--[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 05:10, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
::::That was the first time he died. The second, he plunged himself and Megatron into the center of Cybertron, saving that planet, too. And then Primus brought him back to save all planets in all universes in all realities. And he did! --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 05:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Sounds like Primal is one big glory hog. ;) --[[User:Suzyprime|Suzyprime]] 05:28, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
<nowiki>Insert non-formatted text here</nowiki>

== His Titan Return figure does have an Autobot insignia ==

I noticed on the entry for his Titan Return figure is says,
"Curiously, he lacks any Autobot insignia on his body",
But he does in fact have one, which is also visible in the image in used for the figure on the page.
It is located on his front left leg of his lion mode (I have the figure and I just checked to make sure). Sure it is not visible in robot mode and perhaps this is what the writer of the entry meant to say, but it could be confusing for anyone looking up info about the figure. [[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 04:44, 13 January 2019 (EST)

Talk:Bumblebee (film)

2019-01-04T08:04:50Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* The Hoover Dam in the Trailer. */

==Lawsuit?==
So Hasbro just filed a Lawsuit with DC Comics for the Bumblebee Name. [http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/bumblebee-trademark-transformers-dc-comics-warner-bros-1202541577/] [[User:Energizer|Energizer]] ([[User talk:Energizer|talk]]) 04:45, 30 August 2017 (EDT)
:Ah no wait, it's over. DC & Hasbro are cool. [http://news.tfw2005.com/2018/08/17/the-battle-of-the-bumblebees-is-over-hasbro-and-dc-comics-settle-bumblebee-trademark-dispute-370180] [[User:Energizer|Energizer]] ([[User talk:Energizer|talk]]) 19:22, 11 September 2018 (EDT)
==To Scream or not to Scream==
Should Starscream be in the cast list here, when we've not actually had any official announcement/confirmation that the character in the trailer is him? --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 12:58, 8 June 2018 (EDT)
:Nope. --[[User:Dark T Zeratul|Dark T Zeratul]] ([[User talk:Dark T Zeratul|talk]]) 01:11, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
::Aw, come on! Its quite obviously supposed to be starscream, the head design is a slightly more g1-ifies version of michael bay starscream. The colors of the jet (what can be seen of it) are starscream colors, red air intakes, white nose area, and even a orange cockpit. It is highly unlikely this starscream homage isnt him, its clearly a more g1-ified version of michael bay starscream. [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 13:13, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
:::It's not uncommon for [[Blackout (Movie)|movie]] [[Grindor (ROTF)|characters]] to [[Crankcase (DOTM)|not]] [[Berserker|be]] who you think they are. Until Starscream is officially confirmed, we gotta play it safe. [[User:Ikkad|Ikkad]] ([[User talk:Ikkad|talk]]) 14:14, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
::: Only one [[Barricade (Movie)|decepticon]] has been confirmed for the movie. Starscream has not been confirmed yet. [[User:Puppetroblox|Puppetroblox]] ([[User talk:Puppetroblox|talk]]) 19:34, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
Get rekt, it’s confirmed as screamer now! [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 08:24, 21 June 2018 (EDT)
:The rudeness is hardly necessary. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 08:51, 21 June 2018 (EDT)
Sorry, I meant it in a friendlier manner. [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 13:53, 25 June 2018 (EDT)

The reason they had to make an official announcement was because you people kept speculating that it wasn't Starscream when it blattantly was. It's a soft reboot. He doesn't have to turn into a Dorito F-22 to be the same character. This has been common knowledge for months.[[User:Leo1452|King Kid]] ([[User talk:Leo1452|talk]]) 12:03, 28 June 2018 (EDT)
:Well I for one have always enjoyed crow when topped with a little (Whataburger) ketchup. - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 21:55, 21 July 2018 (EDT)

This just in: That Scream is now Blitzwing. [[User:FigureGunplaFan|FigureGunplaFan]] ([[User talk:FigureGunplaFan|talk]]) 07:48, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
:...that just in literally a month ago hence my last comment above. - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 20:33, 15 August 2018 (EDT)

== /* Timeline and Continuity */ ==

This movie is a reboot because if not they should find the way to explain how Bumblebee fought in the WW2, because this movie is supposedly to be the first time Bumblebee came to Earth--[[User:Crosshairs|Crosshairs]] ([[User talk:Crosshairs|talk]]) 22:42, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
:Stop. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 23:29, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
==toyline?==
Is there a toyline? I know the movie has a while to release, but we knew about titans return about a year before release. Why do t we know about this toyline?
[[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 13:39, 10 June 2018 (EDT)

There might be. I have seen pictures showing a prototype of a volkswagen beetle Bumblebee ( redeco from TLK new bumblebee ) [[User:Puppetroblox|Puppetroblox]] ([[User talk:Puppetroblox|talk]]) 20:29, 10 June 2018 (EDT

:The toyline will be absorbed into ''Studio Series.'' [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 20:49, 10 June 2018 (EDT)
==Is this really a reboot?==
I have heard that the reboot is cancelled, but the past events in the movies just don't match up.
Bumblebee went to earth with Hot Rod and fought in world war 2 (ww2) there. Instead the movie shows bumblebee's first time on earth.
So is this a start to the reboot or just a confusing event in the Bayformers Movies? [[User:Puppetroblox|Puppetroblox]] ([[User talk:Puppetroblox|talk]]) 20:39, 10 June 2018 (EDT)
:Dude, it really doesn't matter right now, the movie isn't out yet. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 20:49, 10 June 2018 (EDT)
==bumblebee design==
Is it me, or does bumblebee kinda look like the cancelled alternators g1 bumblebee? If anyone else picks up on this, should we put it in the (currently nonexistent) trivia area that his design is possibly an homage to said toy? [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 13:55, 25 June 2018 (EDT)

==female Decepticon==

A youtuber, AndySupreme99, claims that he saw the trailer at Cinemacon. He says that there is a female Decepticon. Have any of you seen the trailer he mentioned?
:We obviously know now that this was referring to Shatter, but for the record, we need a better source than "This YouTuber says..." next time. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 01:19, 22 July 2018 (EDT)

==new characters confirmed==

The director has confirmed that Cliffjumper, Soundwave and Shockwave will be on Cybertron. [[User:Puppetroblox|Puppetroblox]] ([[User talk:Puppetroblox|talk]]) 06:53, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
:Source? [[User:FigureGunplaFan|FigureGunplaFan]] ([[User talk:FigureGunplaFan|talk]]) 07:47, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
::When I googled, I found a bunch of excited fan videos pointing back to a wordpress blog which mentioned Travis Knight in terms of his appearance at San Diego Comic Con, and then launched into a bunch of other details that were not obviously sourced to anything Knight said. I don't think we should be inclined to add them based on that. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 21:33, 15 August 2018 (EDT)

::Now we all know that it is true because of the second trailer, but we should get an official source first next time instead of info from a fan made video. [[User:Memeuser17|Memeuser17]] ([[User talk:Memeuser17|talk]]) 13:38, 19 October 2018 (EDT)

== Can we not add pages for background randos who may or may not be characters? ==

Have people already forgotten when everyone though Blitzwing was actually Starscream? We shouldn't be saying Acid Storm is in the film, when there's the possibility that the green dude might well turn out to be a completely new character. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 22:38, 24 September 2018 (EDT)
:Sorry, I should've probably just waited or not do it at all instead of telling people to delete if they didn't like it. But I didn't think it would be taken to this extent where pages were being made. Once again, I'm sorry for the inconvenience. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 23:09, 24 September 2018 (EDT)
::The first rule of wikis is that if there is a red link, *somebody* is gonna fill it. - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 01:29, 25 September 2018 (EDT)

==To Scream or not to Scream Part 2==
This fits better here than on Bltizwing's article's talk page, where I'd posted it first:

''We're swiftly disabused of that notion thanks to a barrage of familiar faces including Decepticon premiereship players Shockwave, Starscream and Blitzwing, all in their original, first generation forms.''

This is obviously an incorrect take on the trailer, as Blitzwing is assuredly not there in his "original, first generation form." We therefore can't take the article's identification of Starscream as definitive, especially given that this isn't the first time we've seen a Starscream-looking dude in a trailer, and he turned out named something else. Note that Starscream is not mentioned in any of the article's direct quotes of Travis Knight. --KilMichaelMcC (talk) 16:59, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
:I understand what you mean, but in the background of the Shockwave shot, we see a bot that looks different than Blitzwing, and has more similarities to Starscream. We can especially tell because the international trailer shows us Blitzwing's body. If this ends being Blitzwing ''too'' (for some reason) than sure. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 17:30, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
::We cannot positively ID that guy as Starscream at this point, certainly not based on a sentence that contains at least one clear error. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 17:37, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
:::Blitzwing being in his Generation One style form can just be the error, and that's it. And besides, if Starscream wasnt in the actual movie, wouldn't you think they would've scrubbed his name by now? [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 17:49, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
::::A version of G1 Blitzwing does not appear in the trailer, and that mistaken impression by the author has not been corrected. That mistake renders the sentence unreliable. The author thinks that one Seeker on Cybertron is Starscream, and maybe it is, but we've been down the "this Seeker-looking dude is clearly Starscream" road once already, and we know how that turned out. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 17:58, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
:::::One incorrect part of a sentence doesn't cancel out the whole sentence. It is true that Shockwave and other characters appear in their G1 style bodies. Let's get at a compromise. If the movie comes out and that Seeker in the background isn't Starscream, then, we remove it. But for now we keep it so we can remember. Dealio? [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 18:30, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
::::::No. What? No. When the movie comes out this'll all be moot. We're talking about what our articles are presenting to readers right now as confirmed facts about an upcoming release. And actually, yes, that one error does make the whole sentence unreliable, as it auggests that it's just the author's impression of the trailer and not info from an actual production source. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 19:13, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
::::::Yeah, let's just delete the Starscream stuff for now and see what happens. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:04, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
:::::::Fine. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 20:17, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
Welp, looks like the new, short featurette made this guy look EVEN more like Starscream. By the way, I have "Starscream" hidden along with the other background bots; if the movie comes out, and it turns out this isn't Blitzwing or anyone else, then we can probably un-hide him, along with everyone else. Guess we'll find out soon! [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 17:48, 5 December 2018 (EST)

== Mr. Bee caption ==

I really don't care for it, but the context of that caption is that it's from the Bee Movie during the trial scene with Barry Vs. The Human Race. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 11:03, 16 October 2018 (EDT)
:I know what it's from, I just think it's gross.
:Also Sipher removed it once already, and he's an admin, so. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 11:15, 16 October 2018 (EDT)
::Yeah, I totally agree. Just figured I might add some context. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 13:07, 16 October 2018 (EDT)
:::Good news, its been taken care of in the form of the famous "You like Jazz?" [[User:Energizer|Energizer]] ([[User talk:Energizer|talk]]) 18:29, 17 October 2018 (EDT)

== Officialy Confirmed Characters ==

Recently characters like Arcee,Cliffjumper, Ratchet and Starscream were confirmed in an official featurette. Should we add them?[[User:Memeuser17|Memeuser17]] ([[User talk:Memeuser17|talk]]) 13:17, 27 November 2018 (EST)
:I feel like at this point we can afford to wait three weeks for the film to actually come out before adding tons of characters to the cast list. We've previously had shots of characters in trailers/preview material which have not been in the finished film. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 15:28, 27 November 2018 (EST)
::Besides, just because someone looks like a character doesn't mean they actually are. Remember "Starscream"? -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 15:30, 27 November 2018 (EST)
:::If the "featurette" is the video linked here [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRFv6JVFApk Bumblebee - First Generation Design - Paramount Pictures UK], there is nothing in that video that confirms those characters. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 15:46, 27 November 2018 (EST)
::::Seems to be referencing this TFW2005 article about that featurette http://news.tfw2005.com/2018/11/27/transformers-bumblebee-designing-g1-featurette-jointhebuzz-377449 Which includes some blurry screenshots with background characters circled. Which is not confirmation of who these characters are, especially since you can barely see them. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 15:57, 27 November 2018 (EST)
:::::'''EDIT:''' Yeah, that. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 15:58, 27 November 2018 (EST)

==The novel==
Warning: Spoilers!

The movie novel confirms that there is one more human character named Sheriff Lock who chases Bee and the humans in a tunnel before Bee damages his cop car by jumping on the hood. We should add him because this is from an official source.[[User:Memeuser17|Memeuser17]] ([[User talk:Memeuser17|talk]]) 11:00, 29 November 2018 (EST)
: Characters in novelizations don't always show up in the movie itself. There's no rush; we can wait a few weeks. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 11:02, 29 November 2018 (EST)

== The Hoover Dam in the Trailer. ==

This may be useless information, but it could also be of some interest to some.
I was born in Las Vegas and have lived here for most of my life.....I was born in the 70's BTW.
Anyways as a kid (and even now) I loved going to the Hoover Dam, so I know a bit about it's appearance throughout the years and decades.
So the movie takes place in 1988 right?
If that is the case the way the Dam looked in the trailer (I believe it was in the second trailer) is not correct for the time period.
The parking structure and new visitors center that can be seen on the west (Nevada) side the Dam in the trailer was built (added) in the mid 90's.
I did try to find some sample pics from the 80's online, but could not find any that were stamped for that time period. But I do have two post cards from my personal collection that I did get around that time, that shows how the Hoover Dam would appear in 1988. (I can send pics of them if need be).
So like I said this is not really important info about the movie, but I thought it should at least be said and addressed, you know for the whole "real world" "continuity" section or something. --[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 04:55, 3 December 2018 (EST)
:I would suggest waiting until after the film is released before adding any real-world comparisons like that, so as to make sure it accurately reflects the final version. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 08:11, 3 December 2018 (EST)
:I agree and that does makes sense, because they may change it, or perhaps the scene takes place at some other time period in the film, when I do see the movie I will let you know if it still is an issue. [[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 01:35, 5 December 2018 (EST)
:I just wanted to give a follow up to this subject that I began in the first place. I finally saw the movie, which was awesome BTW, and it seems that the shot of the Dam that was used in the trailer was NOT used in the final film, and the shot that was seemed to be done in such a way to not show any of those structures that I mentioned as being built after the 80's. So I have to say they (the director and editor) did a pretty decent job. --[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 03:04, 4 January 2019 (EST)

==thundercracker==
I’m not sure if it’s just a generic or not, but there’s a seeker colored suspiciously like thundercracker. Does anyone else think it’s thundercracker or is it just me? [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 16:35, 14 December 2018 (EST)
:Dude, just wait a WEEK and you can find out for sure. Geez, what is this obsession people have with playing "wow, that blur in the background looks kind of like random character number 382. If I squint."?--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 20:24, 14 December 2018 (EST)

==Open editing please?==
When will regular users be able to edit this? The movie's already out... [[User:Autoboty|Autoboty]] ([[User talk:Autoboty|talk]]) 05:18, 21 December 2018 (EST)
:"expires 21:17, 21 December 2018 (UTC)". It's only 6:30 am on the East Coast. Not many have had a chance to see it yet... - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 06:26, 21 December 2018 (EST)
:For Christ's sake, would it kill people to just wait a few days and then add information? This does not need to be immediately added; in fact, it's better that it's not, because it gives you time to write up a concise summary. Just...chill. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 10:01, 21 December 2018 (EST)
:The article is unlocked now. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 22:03, 21 December 2018 (EST)

== New universe ==

Since the new film is clearly settled in a new continuity, should we move the new informations of the characters in a separate section in their own pages or create totally new pages ? {{unsigned|RoboWarriorPrime}}
:Same page, we would only make a new page if it's a new continuity family. There is also a discussion on how to tackle the Bee movie [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal#The Bumblebee Movie|here]]. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 10:26, 22 December 2018 (EST)

== Next movie ==

It will be about Grimlock. --[[User:RandomDecepticon67|Random]][[File:Decepticon symbol.png|20px|link=User:RandomDecepticon67]][[User:RandomDecepticon67|67]] ([[User talk:RandomDecepticon67|talk]]) 06:21, 23 December 2018 (EST)
:Source or didn’t happen [[User:Indridcold13|Indridcold13]] ([[User talk:Indridcold13|talk]]) 13:06, 23 December 2018 (EST)

== Caption theme for this film? ==

So what is it this time around? [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 00:33, 27 December 2018 (EST)
:It has been Bee Movie so far, don’t know if it’s going to change [[User:Indridcold13|Indridcold13]] ([[User talk:Indridcold13|talk]]) 00:46, 27 December 2018 (EST)
:Bee Movie. There can be only one. - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 03:01, 27 December 2018 (EST)
::''Hey, I've never seen the Bee Movie. I had no clue!'' [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 10:46, 27 December 2018 (EST)
:::I hear it made a real buzz at the box office! - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 21:04, 27 December 2018 (EST)

== Sector Seven's "first contact" ==

The Sector Seven unit seen in the film calls the entire Bumblebee/Blitzwing fight, and later the meeting with Shatter and Dropkick as "first contact", which seems to imply that this is the first time that Sector Seven has seen Cybertronians. But as we know, at that point in time, Megatron and the Allspark are very clearly in possession of S7. Currently, this is stated to be a continuity error... But is there a chance that the Unit involved under Burns doesn't know of the entire story behind Megatron? Remember, in TF1, Banachek, said that the entire footage acquired from Transformers was deemed "beyond Top Secret." Using real-life Top Secrecy protocols, it isn't hard to imagine that even S7 wouldn't tell their field teams what was going on in their secret base, either A. because they simply don't have to know, or B. in case of interrogation, the soldiers can't tell anything useful.

The same can be said of allowing Shatter and Dropkick inside Hoover Dam: the field team could know the HQ, but wouldn't know the entirety of the story. And of course, the files that Shatter/Dropkick search through could be doctored, with some sensitive information removed or placed behind bars, allowing access but keeping some of the files a secrecy. Traces of Cybertronian-originated tech inside the files could simply be replaced with the cover-up stories S7 has used before, possibly even to the field teams.

Just a theory based on real-life protocols, and some careful speculation.

[[User:Jirr'kel|Shockblaster's Hideout]] ([[User talk:Jirr'kel|talk]]) 07:34, 27 December 2018 (EST)
:Given they cut a scene they filmed showing frozen ('''G1''') Megatron, they may or may not have Megs and the Allspark in the *Bumblebee* continuity. - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 21:05, 27 December 2018 (EST)

:Admittedly it's been a while since I watched the 2007 film, but Megs was (a) found frozen (and offline?) and (b) kept frozen (and offline?), right? So they can still have him in the freezer and consider this first contact, because it was the first ''actual'' contact, with the words and the talking. Like many things with continuity between these movies, I think it can work if you squint. A lot. --[[User:Guntrip|Guntrip]] ([[User talk:Guntrip|talk]]) 05:54, 28 December 2018 (EST)
::If I were Sector 7, I would not consider Megatron's body to be first contact. And as Travis Knight made clear in interviews, Megatron does not cameo in this film because he is meant to be frozen at the Hoover Dam when the film is set. [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] ([[User talk:Alientraveller|talk]]) 12:39, 28 December 2018 (EST)

Talk:Micromaster

2018-12-16T00:39:02Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* The first sets of Micromasters came out in 1988. */

Does anyone have a scan (or a trsanscript) of the card-blurb Micromaster origin involvign the Pretenders?

(Or has Derik finally lost his mind, and is remembering things that never existed?)

Did the American 1989 Boxback art feature the Micromasters? Botch'a archive lacks it.-[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:19, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Will the Universe Micromasters go here too? --[[User:Terrocon Blot|Terrocon Blot]] 04:31, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
:I believe so. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 04:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

::I thought so too - I was just starting with what I knew. --[[User:Sofaman|Sofaman]] 04:51, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

== Geez ==

Geez, there are a lot of these guys . . . [[User:JW|JW]] 13:43, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
:''Finally,'' all the frickin' Micromasters have a page. Now I need to go through and tidy up any mistakes . . . [[User:JW|JW]] 00:02, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

== Japanese Micromasters ==

We don't list the Japanese Micromasters here. We probably should. (Even though they're the same toys as the American ones, they are separate characters, with different allegiances, personalities, and such.) Or, we can ditch the list entirely, and replace it with categories. [[User:JW|JW]] 16:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

== Micro Transformers ==

Fixed the trivia point as the name "Micro Transformers" ''was'' used for the packaging of the first Patrols. Which makes it an early name variant rather than a mere "working name".--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 14:09, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
:Um, I may be very much mistaken, but weren't the Micromaster toys sold as 'Microtransforemrs' in Japan? Which is a idea distinct from Micromasters? (Japanese microtransformers aren't micro, at least in Victory ,they're almost as tall as Laster Bracer etc.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 14:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
::Speaking of the Micro Transformers logo: How does the logo on the GiG packaging differ from the US/Euro packaging? All initial Patrols had the Micro Transformers logo, and later GiG Micro releases featured the standard 1989+ Transformers logo... That trivia information about them using it all the way is not valid, to my knowledge...--[[User:Fighbird|Fighbird]] 05:53, 27 September 2009 (EDT)

== Same character or not? ==
Should the Japanese characters be seen as distinct from their Western counterparts or not? Some article treat them as such, some not, thus on the one hand leading to separate articles for the same toy and on the other hand to some articles simply stating that the Japanese ones are "bumbling and precocious".

Pro Separation:
* Some do not only have distinct personalities, but also distinct names, like [[Pīpō]] and [[Fixit (G1)|Fixit]].
* Especially those who are Autobots in the West and Decepticons in Japan can hardly be treated as different incarnations of the same character.
* The introductory section should be written continuity-neutral. This is not always the case due to the totally distinct characterizations. And, for example in the case of [[Oiler]] and others, it is not really right to state that they are members of the Metro Squad, because, well, in Japanese continuities they aren't. But on the other side many Micromasters are non-fiction characters in the West, so where else to put it if not in the introductory section?

Contra Separation:
* There's not really much to write about all the Japanese Micromasters beside their "precocious and bumbling" stuff.

Ah, yeah, and is it "precocious" or "precious"? The latter doesn't really make any sense (or?), but can be found way more often. --[[User:2A6|2A6]] 20:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
:"Precious" is correct, and in this context means "cute to the point of being a little annoying".
:The Micromasters who were Decepticons in the US and Autobots in Japan should have separate pages. They're different characters.
:Those who did not change allegiance should be treated as the same character who happens to be very different in two different continuities, and should be handled like on [[Blaster (G1)|Blaster]]'s page, with an explanatory note.
:All of this is just my opinion, of course. [[User:JW|JW]] 20:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

::Okay, I can totally live with that. But I guess the guys with two names should also be treated as separate characters (Fixit/Pipo, Seawatch/Boater etc.) even though they didn't switch sides? And is there no one else out there who cares enough 'bout the Micros to drop a comment here? :) --[[User:2A6|2A6]] 21:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
:::To be fair, many Transformers have different names in English and Japanese (Optimus Prime/Convoy, Blaster/Broadcast, Metroplex/Metroflex) - [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 22:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
::::Yah, it's an odd fact of Transformers that a character with a different name and personality in Japan is still "the same guy" as the American version. So, no, I don't think different names should mean it's a different character. [[User:JW|JW]] 01:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
:::::Speak of that, it reminds me Landmine/Lander things. --[[User:TX55|TX55]] 01:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

== MACAU ==
: I came back this weekend from France after finding some micromasters on a garage sale, but on further inspecting them, they all had the same mark MACAU in paint on them. It can't be that the last owner painted them on, nor do i think they are knockoffs. Does anyone know what that means?--[[User:Sunjumper|Sunjumper]] 16:42, 2 May 2010 (EDT)
::i always assumed that was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macau where the toys were made?] --[[User:Rhymus|Rhymus]] ([[User talk:Rhymus|talk]]) 03:17, 21 August 2014 (EDT)

== Unreleased Base ==

There's a micromaster base ptototype on tfmoon, http://www.transformertoys.co.uk/content.php?/transformers-toys/toy-gallery/1520/Generation+1/Micromaster+Base.html, it has some similarities to the rocket base, but has the final ramp design, as opposed to the rocket base's actual prototype. I don't even know if it has a proper name. the great [[User:Hida Atarasi|Hida Atarasi]] 22:43, 2 May 2010 (EDT)

== One Inch? Really? ==

The page currently says most Micromasters are 1" tall in robot mode. Is that accurate? I've seen pictures which place them closer to 2". [[User:JW|JW]] 22:35, 17 August 2010 (EDT)
:No way. They are about 2″. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 22:59, 17 August 2010 (EDT)
:: Thanks! [[User:JW|JW]] 08:03, 18 August 2010 (EDT)

== Microbots ==

The UK comic (the same one that referred to Dragon's Claws as 'Dragon's Teeth' when two issues were in print and a correctly titled advert was running in its' pages) initially announced these guys as 'Microbots' for a handful of issues (mainly in Dread Tidings). Would this be worth noting as a working title, or is it just more likely that the Marvel bods got the wrong end of the stick somewhere? [[User:Street Heat|Street Heat]] 00:34, 27 November 2011 (EST)

== [[scale]] ==

[[Package art]] from the [http://botchthecrab.com/galleryImage.asp?gallery=2&image=164 back] [http://botchthecrab.com/galleryImage.asp?gallery=2&image=167 of the] [http://botchthecrab.com/galleryImage.asp?gallery=2&image=168 boxes] seems to show Micromasters fighting amid blades of grass as tall or taller than the Micromaster robots. Taken together with the implication that 20 miles is an impressive range for the Decepticon Micromaster [[Cannon Transport]]'s "[http://www.tfu.info/1990/Decepticon/Cement-Head/cement-head.htm state-of-the-art, cybernetic scanner]", perhaps the bio/packaging represents a [[micro-continuity]] where the Micromaster characters are the same size as their toys? ...or maybe "20 miles" was a typo. Not sure if what i'm saying is too speculative to include in the [[Micromaster#Fiction]] or [[scale]] articles, so i'll just leave this here.
--[[User:Rhymus|Rhymus]] ([[User talk:Rhymus|talk]]) 03:42, 21 August 2014 (EDT)

== The first sets of Micromasters came out in 1988. ==

I just saw The Basics video on The Micromasters, and it made me realize something that is technically wrong on this wiki.
The very first three sets of Micromasters came out in 1988, the Off Road Patrol, the Air Strike Patrol, and the Race Car Patrol. The only proof I have of this is that I got the Off Road Patrol on 12/26/1988, I have kept a record of all my figures and the day I got them since 1986 (anyone before that date is based on guessing and memory). But as this is really not evidence, since it is just my records (and word), the only other factor that proves this is true is the packaging used on these three sets, as they use the style and design used in 1988, where as all the other sets (and bases) use the new 1989 design. [[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 19:37, 15 December 2018 (EST)

Talk:Micromaster

2018-12-16T00:37:41Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* The first sets of Micromasters came out in 1988. */ new section

Does anyone have a scan (or a trsanscript) of the card-blurb Micromaster origin involvign the Pretenders?

(Or has Derik finally lost his mind, and is remembering things that never existed?)

Did the American 1989 Boxback art feature the Micromasters? Botch'a archive lacks it.-[[User:Derik|Derik]] 19:19, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Will the Universe Micromasters go here too? --[[User:Terrocon Blot|Terrocon Blot]] 04:31, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
:I believe so. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 04:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

::I thought so too - I was just starting with what I knew. --[[User:Sofaman|Sofaman]] 04:51, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

== Geez ==

Geez, there are a lot of these guys . . . [[User:JW|JW]] 13:43, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
:''Finally,'' all the frickin' Micromasters have a page. Now I need to go through and tidy up any mistakes . . . [[User:JW|JW]] 00:02, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

== Japanese Micromasters ==

We don't list the Japanese Micromasters here. We probably should. (Even though they're the same toys as the American ones, they are separate characters, with different allegiances, personalities, and such.) Or, we can ditch the list entirely, and replace it with categories. [[User:JW|JW]] 16:30, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

== Micro Transformers ==

Fixed the trivia point as the name "Micro Transformers" ''was'' used for the packaging of the first Patrols. Which makes it an early name variant rather than a mere "working name".--[[User:Nevermore|Nevermore]] 14:09, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
:Um, I may be very much mistaken, but weren't the Micromaster toys sold as 'Microtransforemrs' in Japan? Which is a idea distinct from Micromasters? (Japanese microtransformers aren't micro, at least in Victory ,they're almost as tall as Laster Bracer etc.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 14:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
::Speaking of the Micro Transformers logo: How does the logo on the GiG packaging differ from the US/Euro packaging? All initial Patrols had the Micro Transformers logo, and later GiG Micro releases featured the standard 1989+ Transformers logo... That trivia information about them using it all the way is not valid, to my knowledge...--[[User:Fighbird|Fighbird]] 05:53, 27 September 2009 (EDT)

== Same character or not? ==
Should the Japanese characters be seen as distinct from their Western counterparts or not? Some article treat them as such, some not, thus on the one hand leading to separate articles for the same toy and on the other hand to some articles simply stating that the Japanese ones are "bumbling and precocious".

Pro Separation:
* Some do not only have distinct personalities, but also distinct names, like [[Pīpō]] and [[Fixit (G1)|Fixit]].
* Especially those who are Autobots in the West and Decepticons in Japan can hardly be treated as different incarnations of the same character.
* The introductory section should be written continuity-neutral. This is not always the case due to the totally distinct characterizations. And, for example in the case of [[Oiler]] and others, it is not really right to state that they are members of the Metro Squad, because, well, in Japanese continuities they aren't. But on the other side many Micromasters are non-fiction characters in the West, so where else to put it if not in the introductory section?

Contra Separation:
* There's not really much to write about all the Japanese Micromasters beside their "precocious and bumbling" stuff.

Ah, yeah, and is it "precocious" or "precious"? The latter doesn't really make any sense (or?), but can be found way more often. --[[User:2A6|2A6]] 20:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
:"Precious" is correct, and in this context means "cute to the point of being a little annoying".
:The Micromasters who were Decepticons in the US and Autobots in Japan should have separate pages. They're different characters.
:Those who did not change allegiance should be treated as the same character who happens to be very different in two different continuities, and should be handled like on [[Blaster (G1)|Blaster]]'s page, with an explanatory note.
:All of this is just my opinion, of course. [[User:JW|JW]] 20:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

::Okay, I can totally live with that. But I guess the guys with two names should also be treated as separate characters (Fixit/Pipo, Seawatch/Boater etc.) even though they didn't switch sides? And is there no one else out there who cares enough 'bout the Micros to drop a comment here? :) --[[User:2A6|2A6]] 21:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
:::To be fair, many Transformers have different names in English and Japanese (Optimus Prime/Convoy, Blaster/Broadcast, Metroplex/Metroflex) - [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 22:15, 29 April 2008 (UTC)
::::Yah, it's an odd fact of Transformers that a character with a different name and personality in Japan is still "the same guy" as the American version. So, no, I don't think different names should mean it's a different character. [[User:JW|JW]] 01:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
:::::Speak of that, it reminds me Landmine/Lander things. --[[User:TX55|TX55]] 01:50, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

== MACAU ==
: I came back this weekend from France after finding some micromasters on a garage sale, but on further inspecting them, they all had the same mark MACAU in paint on them. It can't be that the last owner painted them on, nor do i think they are knockoffs. Does anyone know what that means?--[[User:Sunjumper|Sunjumper]] 16:42, 2 May 2010 (EDT)
::i always assumed that was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macau where the toys were made?] --[[User:Rhymus|Rhymus]] ([[User talk:Rhymus|talk]]) 03:17, 21 August 2014 (EDT)

== Unreleased Base ==

There's a micromaster base ptototype on tfmoon, http://www.transformertoys.co.uk/content.php?/transformers-toys/toy-gallery/1520/Generation+1/Micromaster+Base.html, it has some similarities to the rocket base, but has the final ramp design, as opposed to the rocket base's actual prototype. I don't even know if it has a proper name. the great [[User:Hida Atarasi|Hida Atarasi]] 22:43, 2 May 2010 (EDT)

== One Inch? Really? ==

The page currently says most Micromasters are 1" tall in robot mode. Is that accurate? I've seen pictures which place them closer to 2". [[User:JW|JW]] 22:35, 17 August 2010 (EDT)
:No way. They are about 2″. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 22:59, 17 August 2010 (EDT)
:: Thanks! [[User:JW|JW]] 08:03, 18 August 2010 (EDT)

== Microbots ==

The UK comic (the same one that referred to Dragon's Claws as 'Dragon's Teeth' when two issues were in print and a correctly titled advert was running in its' pages) initially announced these guys as 'Microbots' for a handful of issues (mainly in Dread Tidings). Would this be worth noting as a working title, or is it just more likely that the Marvel bods got the wrong end of the stick somewhere? [[User:Street Heat|Street Heat]] 00:34, 27 November 2011 (EST)

== [[scale]] ==

[[Package art]] from the [http://botchthecrab.com/galleryImage.asp?gallery=2&image=164 back] [http://botchthecrab.com/galleryImage.asp?gallery=2&image=167 of the] [http://botchthecrab.com/galleryImage.asp?gallery=2&image=168 boxes] seems to show Micromasters fighting amid blades of grass as tall or taller than the Micromaster robots. Taken together with the implication that 20 miles is an impressive range for the Decepticon Micromaster [[Cannon Transport]]'s "[http://www.tfu.info/1990/Decepticon/Cement-Head/cement-head.htm state-of-the-art, cybernetic scanner]", perhaps the bio/packaging represents a [[micro-continuity]] where the Micromaster characters are the same size as their toys? ...or maybe "20 miles" was a typo. Not sure if what i'm saying is too speculative to include in the [[Micromaster#Fiction]] or [[scale]] articles, so i'll just leave this here.
--[[User:Rhymus|Rhymus]] ([[User talk:Rhymus|talk]]) 03:42, 21 August 2014 (EDT)

== The first sets of Micromasters came out in 1988. ==

I just saw The Basics video on The Micromasters, and it made me realize something that is technically wrong on this wiki.
The very first three sets of Micromasters came out in 1988, the Off Road Patrol, the Air Strike Patrol, and the Race Car Patrol. The only proof I have of this is that I got the Off Road Patrol on 12/26/1988, I have kept a record of all my figures and the day I got them since 1986 (anyone before that date is based on guessing and memory). But as this is really not evidence, since it is just my record (and word), the only other factor that proves this is true is the packaging used on these three sets, as they use the style and design used in 1988, where as all the other sets (and bases) use the new 1989 design. [[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 19:37, 15 December 2018 (EST)

Talk:Bumblebee (film)

2018-12-05T06:35:52Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* The Hoover Dam in the Trailer. */

==Lawsuit?==
So Hasbro just filed a Lawsuit with DC Comics for the Bumblebee Name. [http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/bumblebee-trademark-transformers-dc-comics-warner-bros-1202541577/] [[User:Energizer|Energizer]] ([[User talk:Energizer|talk]]) 04:45, 30 August 2017 (EDT)
:Ah no wait, it's over. DC & Hasbro are cool. [http://news.tfw2005.com/2018/08/17/the-battle-of-the-bumblebees-is-over-hasbro-and-dc-comics-settle-bumblebee-trademark-dispute-370180] [[User:Energizer|Energizer]] ([[User talk:Energizer|talk]]) 19:22, 11 September 2018 (EDT)

==To Scream or not to Scream==
Should Starscream be in the cast list here, when we've not actually had any official announcement/confirmation that the character in the trailer is him? --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 12:58, 8 June 2018 (EDT)
:Nope. --[[User:Dark T Zeratul|Dark T Zeratul]] ([[User talk:Dark T Zeratul|talk]]) 01:11, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
::Aw, come on! Its quite obviously supposed to be starscream, the head design is a slightly more g1-ifies version of michael bay starscream. The colors of the jet (what can be seen of it) are starscream colors, red air intakes, white nose area, and even a orange cockpit. It is highly unlikely this starscream homage isnt him, its clearly a more g1-ified version of michael bay starscream. [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 13:13, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
:::It's not uncommon for [[Blackout (Movie)|movie]] [[Grindor (ROTF)|characters]] to [[Crankcase (DOTM)|not]] [[Berserker|be]] who you think they are. Until Starscream is officially confirmed, we gotta play it safe. [[User:Ikkad|Ikkad]] ([[User talk:Ikkad|talk]]) 14:14, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
::: Only one [[Barricade (Movie)|decepticon]] has been confirmed for the movie. Starscream has not been confirmed yet. [[User:Puppetroblox|Puppetroblox]] ([[User talk:Puppetroblox|talk]]) 19:34, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
Get rekt, it’s confirmed as screamer now! [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 08:24, 21 June 2018 (EDT)
:The rudeness is hardly necessary. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 08:51, 21 June 2018 (EDT)
Sorry, I meant it in a friendlier manner. [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 13:53, 25 June 2018 (EDT)

The reason they had to make an official announcement was because you people kept speculating that it wasn't Starscream when it blattantly was. It's a soft reboot. He doesn't have to turn into a Dorito F-22 to be the same character. This has been common knowledge for months.[[User:Leo1452|King Kid]] ([[User talk:Leo1452|talk]]) 12:03, 28 June 2018 (EDT)
:Well I for one have always enjoyed crow when topped with a little (Whataburger) ketchup. - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 21:55, 21 July 2018 (EDT)

This just in: That Scream is now Blitzwing. [[User:FigureGunplaFan|FigureGunplaFan]] ([[User talk:FigureGunplaFan|talk]]) 07:48, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
:...that just in literally a month ago hence my last comment above. - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 20:33, 15 August 2018 (EDT)

== /* Timeline and Continuity */ ==

This movie is a reboot because if not they should find the way to explain how Bumblebee fought in the WW2, because this movie is supposedly to be the first time Bumblebee came to Earth--[[User:Crosshairs|Crosshairs]] ([[User talk:Crosshairs|talk]]) 22:42, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
:Stop. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 23:29, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
==toyline?==
Is there a toyline? I know the movie has a while to release, but we knew about titans return about a year before release. Why do t we know about this toyline?
[[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 13:39, 10 June 2018 (EDT)

There might be. I have seen pictures showing a prototype of a volkswagen beetle Bumblebee ( redeco from TLK new bumblebee ) [[User:Puppetroblox|Puppetroblox]] ([[User talk:Puppetroblox|talk]]) 20:29, 10 June 2018 (EDT

:The toyline will be absorbed into ''Studio Series.'' [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 20:49, 10 June 2018 (EDT)
==Is this really a reboot?==
I have heard that the reboot is cancelled, but the past events in the movies just don't match up.
Bumblebee went to earth with Hot Rod and fought in world war 2 (ww2) there. Instead the movie shows bumblebee's first time on earth.
So is this a start to the reboot or just a confusing event in the Bayformers Movies? [[User:Puppetroblox|Puppetroblox]] ([[User talk:Puppetroblox|talk]]) 20:39, 10 June 2018 (EDT)
:Dude, it really doesn't matter right now, the movie isn't out yet. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 20:49, 10 June 2018 (EDT)
==bumblebee design==
Is it me, or does bumblebee kinda look like the cancelled alternators g1 bumblebee? If anyone else picks up on this, should we put it in the (currently nonexistent) trivia area that his design is possibly an homage to said toy? [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 13:55, 25 June 2018 (EDT)

==female Decepticon==

A youtuber, AndySupreme99, claims that he saw the trailer at Cinemacon. He says that there is a female Decepticon. Have any of you seen the trailer he mentioned?
:We obviously know now that this was referring to Shatter, but for the record, we need a better source than "This YouTuber says..." next time. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 01:19, 22 July 2018 (EDT)

==new characters confirmed==

The director has confirmed that Cliffjumper, Soundwave and Shockwave will be on Cybertron. [[User:Puppetroblox|Puppetroblox]] ([[User talk:Puppetroblox|talk]]) 06:53, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
:Source? [[User:FigureGunplaFan|FigureGunplaFan]] ([[User talk:FigureGunplaFan|talk]]) 07:47, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
::When I googled, I found a bunch of excited fan videos pointing back to a wordpress blog which mentioned Travis Knight in terms of his appearance at San Diego Comic Con, and then launched into a bunch of other details that were not obviously sourced to anything Knight said. I don't think we should be inclined to add them based on that. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 21:33, 15 August 2018 (EDT)

::Now we all know that it is true because of the second trailer, but we should get an official source first next time instead of info from a fan made video. [[User:Memeuser17|Memeuser17]] ([[User talk:Memeuser17|talk]]) 13:38, 19 October 2018 (EDT)

== Can we not add pages for background randos who may or may not be characters? ==

Have people already forgotten when everyone though Blitzwing was actually Starscream? We shouldn't be saying Acid Storm is in the film, when there's the possibility that the green dude might well turn out to be a completely new character. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 22:38, 24 September 2018 (EDT)
:Sorry, I should've probably just waited or not do it at all instead of telling people to delete if they didn't like it. But I didn't think it would be taken to this extent where pages were being made. Once again, I'm sorry for the inconvenience. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 23:09, 24 September 2018 (EDT)
::The first rule of wikis is that if there is a red link, *somebody* is gonna fill it. - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 01:29, 25 September 2018 (EDT)

==Empire article and Starscream==

This fits better here than on Bltizwing's article's talk page, where I'd posted it first:

''We're swiftly disabused of that notion thanks to a barrage of familiar faces including Decepticon premiereship players Shockwave, Starscream and Blitzwing, all in their original, first generation forms.
''

This is obviously an incorrect take on the trailer, as Blitzwing is assuredly not there in his "original, first generation form." We therefore can't take the article's identification of Starscream as definitive, especially given that this isn't the first time we've seen a Starscream-looking dude in a trailer, and he turned out named something else. Note that Starscream is not mentioned in any of the article's direct quotes of Travis Knight. --KilMichaelMcC (talk) 16:59, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
:I understand what you mean, but in the background of the Shockwave shot, we see a bot that looks different than Blitzwing, and has more similarities to Starscream. We can especially tell because the international trailer shows us Blitzwing's body. If this ends being Blitzwing ''too'' (for some reason) than sure. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 17:30, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
::We cannot positively ID that guy as Starscream at this point, certainly not based on a sentence that contains at least one clear error. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 17:37, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
:::Blitzwing being in his Generation One style form can just be the error, and that's it. And besides, if Starscream wasnt in the actual movie, wouldn't you think they would've scrubbed his name by now? [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 17:49, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
::::A version of G1 Blitzwing does not appear in the trailer, and that mistaken impression by the author has not been corrected. That mistake renders the sentence unreliable. The author thinks that one Seeker on Cybertron is Starscream, and maybe it is, but we've been down the "this Seeker-looking dude is clearly Starscream" road once already, and we know how that turned out. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 17:58, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
:::::One incorrect part of a sentence doesn't cancel out the whole sentence. It is true that Shockwave and other characters appear in their G1 style bodies. Let's get at a compromise. If the movie comes out and that Seeker in the background isn't Starscream, then, we remove it. But for now we keep it so we can remember. Deal? [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 18:30, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
::::::No. What? No. When the movie comes out this'll all be moot. We're talking about what our articles are presenting to readers right now as confirmed facts about an upcoming release. And actually, yes, that one error does make the whole sentence unreliable, as it auggests that it's just the author's impression of the trailer and not info from an actual production source. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 19:13, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
::::::Yeah, let's just delete the Starscream stuff for now and see what happens. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:04, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
:::::::Fine. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 20:17, 25 September 2018 (EDT)

== Mr. Bee caption ==

I really don't care for it, but the context of that caption is that it's from the Bee Movie during the trial scene with Barry Vs. The Human Race. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 11:03, 16 October 2018 (EDT)
:I know what it's from, I just think it's gross.
:Also Sipher removed it once already, and he's an admin, so. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 11:15, 16 October 2018 (EDT)
::Yeah, I totally agree. Just figured I might add some context. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 13:07, 16 October 2018 (EDT)
:::Good news, its been taken care of in the form of the famous "You like Jazz?" [[User:Energizer|Energizer]] ([[User talk:Energizer|talk]]) 18:29, 17 October 2018 (EDT)

== Officialy Confirmed Characters ==

Recently characters like Arcee,Cliffjumper, Ratchet and Starscream were confirmed in an official featurette. Should we add them?[[User:Memeuser17|Memeuser17]] ([[User talk:Memeuser17|talk]]) 13:17, 27 November 2018 (EST)
:I feel like at this point we can afford to wait three weeks for the film to actually come out before adding tons of characters to the cast list. We've previously had shots of characters in trailers/preview material which have not been in the finished film. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 15:28, 27 November 2018 (EST)
::Besides, just because someone looks like a character doesn't mean they actually are. Remember "Starscream"? -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 15:30, 27 November 2018 (EST)
:::If the "featurette" is the video linked here [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRFv6JVFApk Bumblebee - First Generation Design - Paramount Pictures UK], there is nothing in that video that confirms those characters. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 15:46, 27 November 2018 (EST)
::::Seems to be referencing this TFW2005 article about that featurette http://news.tfw2005.com/2018/11/27/transformers-bumblebee-designing-g1-featurette-jointhebuzz-377449 Which includes some blurry screenshots with background characters circled. Which is not confirmation of who these characters are, especially since you can barely see them. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 15:57, 27 November 2018 (EST)
:::::'''EDIT:''' Yeah, that. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 15:58, 27 November 2018 (EST)

==The novel==
Warning: Spoilers!

The movie novel confirms that there is one more human character named Sheriff Lock who chases Bee and the humans in a tunnel before Bee damages his cop car by jumping on the hood. We should add him because this is from an official source.[[User:Memeuser17|Memeuser17]] ([[User talk:Memeuser17|talk]]) 11:00, 29 November 2018 (EST)
: Characters in novelizations don't always show up in the movie itself. There's no rush; we can wait a few weeks. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 11:02, 29 November 2018 (EST)

== The Hoover Dam in the Trailer. ==

This may be useless information, but it could also be of some interest to some.
I was born in Las Vegas and have lived here for most of my life.....I was born in the 70's BTW.
Anyways as a kid (and even now) I loved going to the Hoover Dam, so I know a bit about it's appearance throughout the years and decades.
So the movie takes place in 1988 right?
If that is the case the way the Dam looked in the trailer (I believe it was in the second trailer) is not correct for the time period.
The parking structure and new visitors center that can be seen on the west (Nevada) side the Dam in the trailer was built (added) in the mid 90's.
I did try to find some sample pics from the 80's online, but could not find any that were stamped for that time period. But I do have two post cards from my personal collection that I did get around that time, that shows how the Hoover Dam would appear in 1988. (I can send pics of them if need be).
So like I said this is not really important info about the movie, but I thought it should at least be said and addressed, you know for the whole "real world" "continuity" section or something. --[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 04:55, 3 December 2018 (EST)
:I would suggest waiting until after the film is released before adding any real-world comparisons like that, so as to make sure it accurately reflects the final version. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 08:11, 3 December 2018 (EST)
:I agree and that does makes sense, because they may change it, or perhaps the scene takes place at some other time period in the film, when I do see the movie I will let you know if it still is an issue. [[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 01:35, 5 December 2018 (EST)

Talk:Bumblebee (film)

2018-12-05T06:35:19Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* The Hoover Dam in the Trailer. */

==Lawsuit?==
So Hasbro just filed a Lawsuit with DC Comics for the Bumblebee Name. [http://variety.com/2017/biz/news/bumblebee-trademark-transformers-dc-comics-warner-bros-1202541577/] [[User:Energizer|Energizer]] ([[User talk:Energizer|talk]]) 04:45, 30 August 2017 (EDT)
:Ah no wait, it's over. DC & Hasbro are cool. [http://news.tfw2005.com/2018/08/17/the-battle-of-the-bumblebees-is-over-hasbro-and-dc-comics-settle-bumblebee-trademark-dispute-370180] [[User:Energizer|Energizer]] ([[User talk:Energizer|talk]]) 19:22, 11 September 2018 (EDT)

==To Scream or not to Scream==
Should Starscream be in the cast list here, when we've not actually had any official announcement/confirmation that the character in the trailer is him? --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 12:58, 8 June 2018 (EDT)
:Nope. --[[User:Dark T Zeratul|Dark T Zeratul]] ([[User talk:Dark T Zeratul|talk]]) 01:11, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
::Aw, come on! Its quite obviously supposed to be starscream, the head design is a slightly more g1-ifies version of michael bay starscream. The colors of the jet (what can be seen of it) are starscream colors, red air intakes, white nose area, and even a orange cockpit. It is highly unlikely this starscream homage isnt him, its clearly a more g1-ified version of michael bay starscream. [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 13:13, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
:::It's not uncommon for [[Blackout (Movie)|movie]] [[Grindor (ROTF)|characters]] to [[Crankcase (DOTM)|not]] [[Berserker|be]] who you think they are. Until Starscream is officially confirmed, we gotta play it safe. [[User:Ikkad|Ikkad]] ([[User talk:Ikkad|talk]]) 14:14, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
::: Only one [[Barricade (Movie)|decepticon]] has been confirmed for the movie. Starscream has not been confirmed yet. [[User:Puppetroblox|Puppetroblox]] ([[User talk:Puppetroblox|talk]]) 19:34, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
Get rekt, it’s confirmed as screamer now! [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 08:24, 21 June 2018 (EDT)
:The rudeness is hardly necessary. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 08:51, 21 June 2018 (EDT)
Sorry, I meant it in a friendlier manner. [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 13:53, 25 June 2018 (EDT)

The reason they had to make an official announcement was because you people kept speculating that it wasn't Starscream when it blattantly was. It's a soft reboot. He doesn't have to turn into a Dorito F-22 to be the same character. This has been common knowledge for months.[[User:Leo1452|King Kid]] ([[User talk:Leo1452|talk]]) 12:03, 28 June 2018 (EDT)
:Well I for one have always enjoyed crow when topped with a little (Whataburger) ketchup. - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 21:55, 21 July 2018 (EDT)

This just in: That Scream is now Blitzwing. [[User:FigureGunplaFan|FigureGunplaFan]] ([[User talk:FigureGunplaFan|talk]]) 07:48, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
:...that just in literally a month ago hence my last comment above. - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 20:33, 15 August 2018 (EDT)

== /* Timeline and Continuity */ ==

This movie is a reboot because if not they should find the way to explain how Bumblebee fought in the WW2, because this movie is supposedly to be the first time Bumblebee came to Earth--[[User:Crosshairs|Crosshairs]] ([[User talk:Crosshairs|talk]]) 22:42, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
:Stop. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] ([[User talk:M Sipher|talk]]) 23:29, 9 June 2018 (EDT)
==toyline?==
Is there a toyline? I know the movie has a while to release, but we knew about titans return about a year before release. Why do t we know about this toyline?
[[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 13:39, 10 June 2018 (EDT)

There might be. I have seen pictures showing a prototype of a volkswagen beetle Bumblebee ( redeco from TLK new bumblebee ) [[User:Puppetroblox|Puppetroblox]] ([[User talk:Puppetroblox|talk]]) 20:29, 10 June 2018 (EDT

:The toyline will be absorbed into ''Studio Series.'' [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 20:49, 10 June 2018 (EDT)
==Is this really a reboot?==
I have heard that the reboot is cancelled, but the past events in the movies just don't match up.
Bumblebee went to earth with Hot Rod and fought in world war 2 (ww2) there. Instead the movie shows bumblebee's first time on earth.
So is this a start to the reboot or just a confusing event in the Bayformers Movies? [[User:Puppetroblox|Puppetroblox]] ([[User talk:Puppetroblox|talk]]) 20:39, 10 June 2018 (EDT)
:Dude, it really doesn't matter right now, the movie isn't out yet. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 20:49, 10 June 2018 (EDT)
==bumblebee design==
Is it me, or does bumblebee kinda look like the cancelled alternators g1 bumblebee? If anyone else picks up on this, should we put it in the (currently nonexistent) trivia area that his design is possibly an homage to said toy? [[User:YourBestPal|YourBestPal]] ([[User talk:YourBestPal|talk]]) 13:55, 25 June 2018 (EDT)

==female Decepticon==

A youtuber, AndySupreme99, claims that he saw the trailer at Cinemacon. He says that there is a female Decepticon. Have any of you seen the trailer he mentioned?
:We obviously know now that this was referring to Shatter, but for the record, we need a better source than "This YouTuber says..." next time. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 01:19, 22 July 2018 (EDT)

==new characters confirmed==

The director has confirmed that Cliffjumper, Soundwave and Shockwave will be on Cybertron. [[User:Puppetroblox|Puppetroblox]] ([[User talk:Puppetroblox|talk]]) 06:53, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
:Source? [[User:FigureGunplaFan|FigureGunplaFan]] ([[User talk:FigureGunplaFan|talk]]) 07:47, 15 August 2018 (EDT)
::When I googled, I found a bunch of excited fan videos pointing back to a wordpress blog which mentioned Travis Knight in terms of his appearance at San Diego Comic Con, and then launched into a bunch of other details that were not obviously sourced to anything Knight said. I don't think we should be inclined to add them based on that. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 21:33, 15 August 2018 (EDT)

::Now we all know that it is true because of the second trailer, but we should get an official source first next time instead of info from a fan made video. [[User:Memeuser17|Memeuser17]] ([[User talk:Memeuser17|talk]]) 13:38, 19 October 2018 (EDT)

== Can we not add pages for background randos who may or may not be characters? ==

Have people already forgotten when everyone though Blitzwing was actually Starscream? We shouldn't be saying Acid Storm is in the film, when there's the possibility that the green dude might well turn out to be a completely new character. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 22:38, 24 September 2018 (EDT)
:Sorry, I should've probably just waited or not do it at all instead of telling people to delete if they didn't like it. But I didn't think it would be taken to this extent where pages were being made. Once again, I'm sorry for the inconvenience. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 23:09, 24 September 2018 (EDT)
::The first rule of wikis is that if there is a red link, *somebody* is gonna fill it. - [[User:TBR|TBR]] ([[User talk:TBR|talk]]) 01:29, 25 September 2018 (EDT)

==Empire article and Starscream==

This fits better here than on Bltizwing's article's talk page, where I'd posted it first:

''We're swiftly disabused of that notion thanks to a barrage of familiar faces including Decepticon premiereship players Shockwave, Starscream and Blitzwing, all in their original, first generation forms.
''

This is obviously an incorrect take on the trailer, as Blitzwing is assuredly not there in his "original, first generation form." We therefore can't take the article's identification of Starscream as definitive, especially given that this isn't the first time we've seen a Starscream-looking dude in a trailer, and he turned out named something else. Note that Starscream is not mentioned in any of the article's direct quotes of Travis Knight. --KilMichaelMcC (talk) 16:59, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
:I understand what you mean, but in the background of the Shockwave shot, we see a bot that looks different than Blitzwing, and has more similarities to Starscream. We can especially tell because the international trailer shows us Blitzwing's body. If this ends being Blitzwing ''too'' (for some reason) than sure. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 17:30, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
::We cannot positively ID that guy as Starscream at this point, certainly not based on a sentence that contains at least one clear error. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 17:37, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
:::Blitzwing being in his Generation One style form can just be the error, and that's it. And besides, if Starscream wasnt in the actual movie, wouldn't you think they would've scrubbed his name by now? [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 17:49, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
::::A version of G1 Blitzwing does not appear in the trailer, and that mistaken impression by the author has not been corrected. That mistake renders the sentence unreliable. The author thinks that one Seeker on Cybertron is Starscream, and maybe it is, but we've been down the "this Seeker-looking dude is clearly Starscream" road once already, and we know how that turned out. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 17:58, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
:::::One incorrect part of a sentence doesn't cancel out the whole sentence. It is true that Shockwave and other characters appear in their G1 style bodies. Let's get at a compromise. If the movie comes out and that Seeker in the background isn't Starscream, then, we remove it. But for now we keep it so we can remember. Deal? [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 18:30, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
::::::No. What? No. When the movie comes out this'll all be moot. We're talking about what our articles are presenting to readers right now as confirmed facts about an upcoming release. And actually, yes, that one error does make the whole sentence unreliable, as it auggests that it's just the author's impression of the trailer and not info from an actual production source. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 19:13, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
::::::Yeah, let's just delete the Starscream stuff for now and see what happens. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 20:04, 25 September 2018 (EDT)
:::::::Fine. [[User:Notirishman|--notirishman]] ([[User talk:Notirishman|talk]]) 20:17, 25 September 2018 (EDT)

== Mr. Bee caption ==

I really don't care for it, but the context of that caption is that it's from the Bee Movie during the trial scene with Barry Vs. The Human Race. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 11:03, 16 October 2018 (EDT)
:I know what it's from, I just think it's gross.
:Also Sipher removed it once already, and he's an admin, so. -[[User:Foffy the Sheep|Foffy]] ([[User talk:Foffy the Sheep|talk]]) 11:15, 16 October 2018 (EDT)
::Yeah, I totally agree. Just figured I might add some context. [[User:Escargon|Escargon]] ([[User talk:Escargon|talk]]) 13:07, 16 October 2018 (EDT)
:::Good news, its been taken care of in the form of the famous "You like Jazz?" [[User:Energizer|Energizer]] ([[User talk:Energizer|talk]]) 18:29, 17 October 2018 (EDT)

== Officialy Confirmed Characters ==

Recently characters like Arcee,Cliffjumper, Ratchet and Starscream were confirmed in an official featurette. Should we add them?[[User:Memeuser17|Memeuser17]] ([[User talk:Memeuser17|talk]]) 13:17, 27 November 2018 (EST)
:I feel like at this point we can afford to wait three weeks for the film to actually come out before adding tons of characters to the cast list. We've previously had shots of characters in trailers/preview material which have not been in the finished film. --[[User:Abates|abates]] ([[User talk:Abates|talk]]) 15:28, 27 November 2018 (EST)
::Besides, just because someone looks like a character doesn't mean they actually are. Remember "Starscream"? -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 15:30, 27 November 2018 (EST)
:::If the "featurette" is the video linked here [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRFv6JVFApk Bumblebee - First Generation Design - Paramount Pictures UK], there is nothing in that video that confirms those characters. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] ([[User talk:Khajidha|talk]]) 15:46, 27 November 2018 (EST)
::::Seems to be referencing this TFW2005 article about that featurette http://news.tfw2005.com/2018/11/27/transformers-bumblebee-designing-g1-featurette-jointhebuzz-377449 Which includes some blurry screenshots with background characters circled. Which is not confirmation of who these characters are, especially since you can barely see them. --[[User:KilMichaelMcC|KilMichaelMcC]] ([[User talk:KilMichaelMcC|talk]]) 15:57, 27 November 2018 (EST)
:::::'''EDIT:''' Yeah, that. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 15:58, 27 November 2018 (EST)

==The novel==
Warning: Spoilers!

The movie novel confirms that there is one more human character named Sheriff Lock who chases Bee and the humans in a tunnel before Bee damages his cop car by jumping on the hood. We should add him because this is from an official source.[[User:Memeuser17|Memeuser17]] ([[User talk:Memeuser17|talk]]) 11:00, 29 November 2018 (EST)
: Characters in novelizations don't always show up in the movie itself. There's no rush; we can wait a few weeks. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 11:02, 29 November 2018 (EST)

== The Hoover Dam in the Trailer. ==

This may be useless information, but it could also be of some interest to some.
I was born in Las Vegas and have lived here for most of my life.....I was born in the 70's BTW.
Anyways as a kid (and even now) I loved going to the Hoover Dam, so I know a bit about it's appearance throughout the years and decades.
So the movie takes place in 1988 right?
If that is the case the way the Dam looked in the trailer (I believe it was in the second trailer) is not correct for the time period.
The parking structure and new visitors center that can be seen on the west (Nevada) side the Dam in the trailer was built (added) in the mid 90's.
I did try to find some sample pics from the 80's online, but could not find any that were stamped for that time period. But I do have two post cards from my personal collection that I did get around that time, that shows how the Hoover Dam would appear in 1988. (I can send pics of them if need be).
So like I said this is not really important info about the movie, but I thought it should at least be said and addressed, you know for the whole "real world" "continuity" section or something. --[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 04:55, 3 December 2018 (EST)
:I would suggest waiting until after the film is released before adding any real-world comparisons like that, so as to make sure it accurately reflects the final version. -- [[User:Cyberlink420|Cyberlink420]] ([[User talk:Cyberlink420|talk]]) 08:11, 3 December 2018 (EST)
:I agree and that does makes sense, because they may change it, or perhaps the scene takes place at some other time period in the film, when I do see the movie I will let you know if is still is an issue. [[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 01:35, 5 December 2018 (EST)

User:Michael Alex Kawa

2018-12-05T06:26:00Z

Michael Alex Kawa:

[[Image:Michael Alex Kawa.jpg]] Michael Alex Kawa is a Transformers collector, his has been into Transformers since April 1985.
He got his first TRANSFORMERS figure which was G1 Bumblebee in August of that same year. Unlike some other people that call themselves "FANS", Michael continued to be a fan even after the first show got cancelled. Stayed a fan through "The Masters", "The Pretenders", "The Micromasters" and "The Action Masters" which he also loves, like they are so cool. When G2 brought back the return of the series in the USA he was so ecstatic.....I mean like really ecstatic, and has not stop collecting since.....seriously has not stopped. He still has every figure he has ever purchased or was given.....and absolutely has no space for them. Favorite Series is "Robots in Disguise"2001, and unlike others fans has no problem with "The KissPlayers", he actually loves them....they are like so cute. Believes that Marissa Faireborn(G1) and Melissa (KissPlayers) are NOT connected, but will let that one go considering he has been given the riot act over it. He HATES RUBSIGNS (even though his first figure had one), that one he will not let go......but I guess he thinks they are not that bad....just annoying to look at. Besides Transformers his other loves are G.I.Joe, Marvel Comics, D.C.Comics and especially Anime. Some Anime Series he loves are "Project A-Ko","Pokemon", "Evangelion", "K-ON!","The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya", and Girls und Panzer.........PANZER VOR!!!! Has made some videos, you know reviews and AMVs (some with Transformers) that are on Youtube. And if you care he was born on 9-25-1974.
BTW I re-edited this.......finally.
And yes that is the image I am using to show my love for Transformers. lol --[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 23:32, 26 January 2018 (EST)

Talk:Bumblebee (film)

2018-12-03T09:55:35Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* The Hoover Dam in the Trailer. */ new section

Talk:Prisoner of War!

2018-01-27T10:21:20Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* Artist of the cover for Issue 3 */

But the early Marvel issues clearly take place in the Marvel universe (references to the Savage land, SHIELD, Circuit Breaker in Secret Wars, etc).- DJ Convoy 11:10, 15 November 2006

:The Marvel Transformers takes place on Earth-120185. --[[User:Crockalley|Crockalley]] 19:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Right- I was protesting the addition of "Spider-man's presence makes this an error, etc." which Walky already fixed. --[[User:Dj_convoy|DJ Convoy]] 19:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

No, Spiderman's appearance was not an honest-to-goodness error, but it IS an "error" in the sense that it should NEVER SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED! Was there any valid reason for randomly interjecting him into the storyline other than a marketing ploy by Marvel? Methinks not.
: So what about the Savage Land appearance? Was Marvel doubtless trying to shamelessly raise sales of their Ka-Zar book? The Early Transformers books were set in the Marvel Universe, so it wasn't random at all. In fact, it's, well, more common than not for big Marvel guys to show up in new book -- not to raise sales for those big Marvel guys, but to raise sales for the new book. Marvel was trying to help out Transformers. (The direction of this ploy is confirmed. Sources state that Marvel tried to put Spider-Man into the book to help Transformers' sales, but Hasbro at first refused because Spider-Man toys were being sold by their competitors. But Marvel was, like, dude, we're trying to help you out. That's why he's in the black symbiote costume and backdated, because that's not a figure their competitors were selling.) Marketing ploy, yes, but... dude, these are comics. Merely being superheroes is already a marketing ploy. Being male is a marketing ploy. Always beating the bad guys is a marketing ploy. The ''Transformers'' comic book itself is a marketing ploy to sell the toyline. Your cynicism is kinda uneven. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

== UK Printing ==

Did by chance Marvel UK #6 leave out US page 20, where Spiderman and gears finish off Ravage and face Soundwave? My UK scans skip that page, and I don't know if it was not in the comic (like the Autobot introduction pages from US 1, or if it's just a missing scan. --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 01:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
:I just checked the issue and yes they did print it (in glorious black and white no less).[[User:Omnisvalidus|Omnisvalidus]] 18:02, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

== Inkers ==

As I can't find anything on "Jim Esposito", I suspect that the inker in question is actually Mike Esposito, who'd been inking a lot of Spider-Man comics a few years before. I'm not sure where "Jim" came from though — is his full name credited in any of the reprints? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 02:28, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

== Artist of the cover for Issue 3 ==

[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 23:11, 26 January 2018 (EST)

I just found out some info that the artist for the US cover, you know the one with Spider-Man, might not be Michael J. Zeck, like it has been believed, but it might be Mark Texiera. According to Stephen Baskerville on his Facebook page, he asked Bob Budiansky who drew it and Bob said it was Texiera. I thought this might be something to look into, so I thought I would share, of course I am not at all sure if its at all true. Here is a link to the Facebook post and I am sure you can find the comment made by him, that is if you are friends with him on Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10209985757794022&set=a.1661851679644.73163.1637788060&type=3&theater
: The biggest strike against this idea is that Texeira always seems to sign his name obviously somewhere on his composition. A big TEXEIRA or TEX somewhere, and this is true of his The Transformers #4 cover as well. But there's no TEX or anything anywhere on the Spider-Man cover. MAYBE he put it on the Megatron foot, which was covered up by the Spider-Man box at the bottom? I dunno. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 23:40, 26 January 2018 (EST)
:: I GUESS WE COULD, LIKE, ASK HIM: https://twitter.com/artbytex --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] ([[User talk:ItsWalky|talk]]) 00:01, 27 January 2018 (EST)
I am not on Twitter, but I am "friends" with Mr. Texiera on Facebook and I sent him a PM asking him about the cover, if he gets back to me I will let you know. Hopefully someone will find out if this is all true or not, just thought it was some intriguing info about the cover. --[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 05:21, 27 January 2018 (EST)

User:Michael Alex Kawa

2018-01-27T09:12:01Z

Michael Alex Kawa:

[[Image:Michael Alex Kawa.jpg]] Michael Alex Kawa is a Transformers collector, his has been into Transformers since April 1985.
He got his first TRANSFORMERS figure which was G1 Bumblebee in August of that same year. Unlike some other people that call themselves "FANS", Michael continued to be a fan even after the first show got cancelled. Stayed a fan through "The Masters", "The Pretenders", "The Micromasters" and "The Action Masters" which he also loves, like they are so cool. When G2 brought back the return of the series in the USA he was so ecstatic.....I mean like really ecstatic, and has not stop collecting since.....seriously has not stopped. He still has every figure he has ever purchased or was given.....and absolutely for space for them. Favorite Series is "Robots in Disguise"2001, and unlike others fans has no problem with "The KissPlayers", he actually loves them....they are like so cute. Believes that Marissa Faireborn(G1) and Melissa (KissPlayers) are NOT connected, but will let that one go considering he has been given the riot act over it. He HATES RUBSIGNS (even though his first figure had one), that one he will not let go......but I guess he thinks thet are not that bad....just annoying to look at. Besides Transformers his other loves are G.I.Joe, Marvel Comics, D.C.Comics and especially Anime. Some Anime Series he loves are "Project A-Ko","Pokemon", "Evangelion", "K-ON!","The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya", and Girls und Panzer.........PANZER VOR!!!! Has made some videos, you know reviews and AMVs (some with Transformers) that are on Youtube. And if you care he was born on 9-25-1974.
BTW I re-edited this.......finally.
And yes that is the image I am using to show my love for Transformers. lol --[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 23:32, 26 January 2018 (EST)

Talk:Prisoner of War!

2018-01-27T09:08:57Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* Artist of the cover for Issue 3 */

User:Michael Alex Kawa

2018-01-27T04:33:39Z

Michael Alex Kawa:

[[Image:Michael Alex Kawa.jpg]] Michael Alex Kawa is a Transformers collector, his has been into Transformers since April 1985.
He got his first TRANSFORMERS figure which was G1 Bumblebee in August of that same year. Unlike some other people that call themselves "FANS", Michael continued to be a fan even after the first show got cancelled. Stayed a fan through "The Masters", "The Pretenders", "The Micromasters" and "The Action Masters" which he also loves, like they are so cool. When G2 brought back the return of the series in the USA he was so ecstatic.....I mean like really ecstatic, and has not stop collecting since.....seriously has not stopped. He still has every figure he has ever purchased or was given.....and absolutely for space for them. Favorite Series is "Robots in Disguise"2001, and unlike others fans has no problum with "The KissPlayers", he actually loves them....they are like so cute. Believes that Marissa Faireborn(G1) and Melissa (KissPlayers) are NOT connected, but will let that one go considering he has been given the riot act over it. He HATES RUBSIGNS (even though his first figure had one), that one he will not let go......but I guess he thinks thet are not that bad....just annoying to look at. Besides Transformers his other loves are G.I.Joe, Marvel Comics, D.C.Comics and especially Anime. Some Anime Series he loves are "Project A-Ko","Pokemon", "Evangelion", "K-ON!","The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya", and Girls und Panzer.........PANZER VOR!!!! Has made some videos, you know reviews and AMVs (some with Transformers) that are on Youtube. And if you care he was born on 9-25-1974.
BTW I re-edited this.......finally.
And yes that is the image I am using to show my love for Transformers. lol --[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 23:32, 26 January 2018 (EST)

User:Michael Alex Kawa

2018-01-27T04:32:26Z

Michael Alex Kawa:

[[Image:Michael Alex Kawa.jpg]] Michael Alex Kawa is a Transformers collector, his has been into Transformers since April 1985.
He got his first TRANSFORMERS figure which was G1 Bumblebee in August of that same year. Unlike some other people that call themselves "FANS", Michael continued to be a fan even after the first show got cancelled. Stayed a fan through "The Masters" The Pretenders" "The Micromasters" and "The Action Masters" which he also loves, like they are so cool. When G2 brought back the return of the series in the USA he was so ecstatic.....I mean like really ecstatic, and has not stop collecting since.....seriously has not stopped. He still has every figure he has ever purchased or was given.....and absolutely for space for them. Favorite Series is "Robots in Disguise"2001, and unlike others fans has no problum with "The KissPlayers", he actually loves them....they are like so cute. Believes that Marissa Faireborn(G1) and Melissa (KissPlayers) are NOT connected, but will let that one go considering he has been given the riot act over it. He HATES RUBSIGNS (even though his first figure had one), that one he will not let go......but I guess he thinks thet are not that bad....just annoying to look at. Besides Transformers his other loves are G.I.Joe, Marvel Comics, D.C.Comics and especially Anime. Some Anime Series he loves are "Project A-Ko","Pokemon", "Evangelion", "K-ON!","The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya", and Girls und Panzer.........PANZER VOR!!!! Has made some videos, you know reviews and AMVs (some with Transformers) that are on Youtube. And if you care he was born on 9-25-1974.
BTW I re-edited this.......finally.
And yes that is the image I am using to show my love for Transformers. lol --[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 23:32, 26 January 2018 (EST)

Talk:Prisoner of War!

2018-01-27T04:11:20Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* Artist of the cover for Issue 3 */ new section

But the early Marvel issues clearly take place in the Marvel universe (references to the Savage land, SHIELD, Circuit Breaker in Secret Wars, etc).- DJ Convoy 11:10, 15 November 2006

:The Marvel Transformers takes place on Earth-120185. --[[User:Crockalley|Crockalley]] 19:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Right- I was protesting the addition of "Spider-man's presence makes this an error, etc." which Walky already fixed. --[[User:Dj_convoy|DJ Convoy]] 19:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

No, Spiderman's appearance was not an honest-to-goodness error, but it IS an "error" in the sense that it should NEVER SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED! Was there any valid reason for randomly interjecting him into the storyline other than a marketing ploy by Marvel? Methinks not.
: So what about the Savage Land appearance? Was Marvel doubtless trying to shamelessly raise sales of their Ka-Zar book? The Early Transformers books were set in the Marvel Universe, so it wasn't random at all. In fact, it's, well, more common than not for big Marvel guys to show up in new book -- not to raise sales for those big Marvel guys, but to raise sales for the new book. Marvel was trying to help out Transformers. (The direction of this ploy is confirmed. Sources state that Marvel tried to put Spider-Man into the book to help Transformers' sales, but Hasbro at first refused because Spider-Man toys were being sold by their competitors. But Marvel was, like, dude, we're trying to help you out. That's why he's in the black symbiote costume and backdated, because that's not a figure their competitors were selling.) Marketing ploy, yes, but... dude, these are comics. Merely being superheroes is already a marketing ploy. Being male is a marketing ploy. Always beating the bad guys is a marketing ploy. The ''Transformers'' comic book itself is a marketing ploy to sell the toyline. Your cynicism is kinda uneven. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

== UK Printing ==

Did by chance Marvel UK #6 leave out US page 20, where Spiderman and gears finish off Ravage and face Soundwave? My UK scans skip that page, and I don't know if it was not in the comic (like the Autobot introduction pages from US 1, or if it's just a missing scan. --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 01:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
:I just checked the issue and yes they did print it (in glorious black and white no less).[[User:Omnisvalidus|Omnisvalidus]] 18:02, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

== Inkers ==

As I can't find anything on "Jim Esposito", I suspect that the inker in question is actually Mike Esposito, who'd been inking a lot of Spider-Man comics a few years before. I'm not sure where "Jim" came from though — is his full name credited in any of the reprints? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 02:28, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

== Artist of the cover for Issue 3 ==

[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 23:11, 26 January 2018 (EST)

I just found out some info that the artist for the US cover, you know the one with Spider-Man, might not be Michael J. Zeck, like it has been believed, but it might be Mark Texiera. According to Stephen Baskerville on his Facebook page, he asked Bob Budiansky who drew it and Bob said it was Texiera. I thought this might be something to look into, so I thought I would share, of course I am not at all sure if it at all true. Here is a link to the Facebook post and I am sure you can find the comment made by him, that is if you are friends with him on Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10209985757794022&set=a.1661851679644.73163.1637788060&type=3&theater

Talk:Prisoner of War!

2018-01-27T04:10:32Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* Inkers */

Talk:Prisoner of War!

2018-01-27T04:09:11Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* Artist of the cover for Issue 3 */

But the early Marvel issues clearly take place in the Marvel universe (references to the Savage land, SHIELD, Circuit Breaker in Secret Wars, etc).- DJ Convoy 11:10, 15 November 2006

:The Marvel Transformers takes place on Earth-120185. --[[User:Crockalley|Crockalley]] 19:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Right- I was protesting the addition of "Spider-man's presence makes this an error, etc." which Walky already fixed. --[[User:Dj_convoy|DJ Convoy]] 19:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

No, Spiderman's appearance was not an honest-to-goodness error, but it IS an "error" in the sense that it should NEVER SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED! Was there any valid reason for randomly interjecting him into the storyline other than a marketing ploy by Marvel? Methinks not.
: So what about the Savage Land appearance? Was Marvel doubtless trying to shamelessly raise sales of their Ka-Zar book? The Early Transformers books were set in the Marvel Universe, so it wasn't random at all. In fact, it's, well, more common than not for big Marvel guys to show up in new book -- not to raise sales for those big Marvel guys, but to raise sales for the new book. Marvel was trying to help out Transformers. (The direction of this ploy is confirmed. Sources state that Marvel tried to put Spider-Man into the book to help Transformers' sales, but Hasbro at first refused because Spider-Man toys were being sold by their competitors. But Marvel was, like, dude, we're trying to help you out. That's why he's in the black symbiote costume and backdated, because that's not a figure their competitors were selling.) Marketing ploy, yes, but... dude, these are comics. Merely being superheroes is already a marketing ploy. Being male is a marketing ploy. Always beating the bad guys is a marketing ploy. The ''Transformers'' comic book itself is a marketing ploy to sell the toyline. Your cynicism is kinda uneven. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

== UK Printing ==

Did by chance Marvel UK #6 leave out US page 20, where Spiderman and gears finish off Ravage and face Soundwave? My UK scans skip that page, and I don't know if it was not in the comic (like the Autobot introduction pages from US 1, or if it's just a missing scan. --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 01:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
:I just checked the issue and yes they did print it (in glorious black and white no less).[[User:Omnisvalidus|Omnisvalidus]] 18:02, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

== Inkers ==

As I can't find anything on "Jim Esposito", I suspect that the inker in question is actually Mike Esposito, who'd been inking a lot of Spider-Man comics a few years before. I'm not sure where "Jim" came from though — is his full name credited in any of the reprints? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 02:28, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 23:09, 26 January 2018 (EST)== Artist of the cover for Issue 3 ==

I just found out some info that the artist for the US cover, you know the one with Spider-Man, might not be Michael J. Zeck, like it has been believed, but it might be Mark Texiera.
According to Stephen Baskerville on his Facebook page, he asked Bob Budiansky who drew it and Bob said it was Texiera.
I thought this might be something to look into, so I thought I would share, of course I am not at all sure if it at all true.
Here is a link to the Facebook post and I am sure you can find the comment made by him, that is if you are friends with him on Facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10209985757794022&set=a.1661851679644.73163.1637788060&type=3&theater

Talk:Prisoner of War!

2018-01-27T04:08:31Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* Artist of the cover for Issue 3 */ new section

But the early Marvel issues clearly take place in the Marvel universe (references to the Savage land, SHIELD, Circuit Breaker in Secret Wars, etc).- DJ Convoy 11:10, 15 November 2006

:The Marvel Transformers takes place on Earth-120185. --[[User:Crockalley|Crockalley]] 19:34, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Right- I was protesting the addition of "Spider-man's presence makes this an error, etc." which Walky already fixed. --[[User:Dj_convoy|DJ Convoy]] 19:48, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

No, Spiderman's appearance was not an honest-to-goodness error, but it IS an "error" in the sense that it should NEVER SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED! Was there any valid reason for randomly interjecting him into the storyline other than a marketing ploy by Marvel? Methinks not.
: So what about the Savage Land appearance? Was Marvel doubtless trying to shamelessly raise sales of their Ka-Zar book? The Early Transformers books were set in the Marvel Universe, so it wasn't random at all. In fact, it's, well, more common than not for big Marvel guys to show up in new book -- not to raise sales for those big Marvel guys, but to raise sales for the new book. Marvel was trying to help out Transformers. (The direction of this ploy is confirmed. Sources state that Marvel tried to put Spider-Man into the book to help Transformers' sales, but Hasbro at first refused because Spider-Man toys were being sold by their competitors. But Marvel was, like, dude, we're trying to help you out. That's why he's in the black symbiote costume and backdated, because that's not a figure their competitors were selling.) Marketing ploy, yes, but... dude, these are comics. Merely being superheroes is already a marketing ploy. Being male is a marketing ploy. Always beating the bad guys is a marketing ploy. The ''Transformers'' comic book itself is a marketing ploy to sell the toyline. Your cynicism is kinda uneven. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

== UK Printing ==

Did by chance Marvel UK #6 leave out US page 20, where Spiderman and gears finish off Ravage and face Soundwave? My UK scans skip that page, and I don't know if it was not in the comic (like the Autobot introduction pages from US 1, or if it's just a missing scan. --[[User:FortMax|FortMax]] 01:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
:I just checked the issue and yes they did print it (in glorious black and white no less).[[User:Omnisvalidus|Omnisvalidus]] 18:02, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

== Inkers ==

As I can't find anything on "Jim Esposito", I suspect that the inker in question is actually Mike Esposito, who'd been inking a lot of Spider-Man comics a few years before. I'm not sure where "Jim" came from though — is his full name credited in any of the reprints? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 02:28, 4 October 2010 (EDT)

== Artist of the cover for Issue 3 ==

I just found out some info that the artist for the US cover, you know the one with Spider-Man, might not be Michael J. Zeck, like it has been believed, but it might be Mark Texiera.
According to Stephen Baskerville on his Facebook page, he asked Bob Budiansky who drew it and Bob said it was Texiera.
I thought this might be something to look into, so I thought I would share, of course I am not at all sure if it at all true.
Here is a link to the Facebook post and I am sure you can find the comment made by him, that is if you are friends with him on Facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10209985757794022&set=a.1661851679644.73163.1637788060&type=3&theater

Talk:Devastator (G1)

2016-04-11T12:14:16Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* Generation 2 tampographed. */

Whats the deal with this line? "Along the way, he demolished the World Trade Center. That terrorist scum." Did I miss something? was this in a cartoon, or is some person trying to be funny and failing horribly?
:He really did bust right through the World Trade Towers in Zone.--[[User:MCRG|MCRG]] 04:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
okay, thanks I didn't notice that in the cartoon, but I didn't watch the whole thing.

This is borrowing trouble against the future release of an un-prefixed Devastator...

Add a disambig for the other 2, at any rate, prefix or no. (Shoulda bene one before now.) -[[User:Derik|Derik]] 05:56, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
:When a unprefixed Devastator comes along (which is unlikely to begin with), it's not amazingly difficult to move the page. There's already a disambig at [[Devastator (disambiguation)]]. [[User:Singularity|Singularity]] 06:24, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

== Action Master size (fiction) ==

Devastator must have shrunk when he became an Action Master, right? He must have, because he can pilot the same vehicles. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:19, 22 December 2009 (EST)

== Hercules ==

Why is there no info on the Hercules toy by TFC Toys? I know it's not Hasbro/Takara, but it's still a toy and the most show-accurate rendition of Devastator. [[User:Hfc2x|Hfc2x]] 21:48, 8 March 2013 (EST)
:You answered your own question by aknowledging that it's not Hasbro/Takara. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 22:09, 8 March 2013 (EST)
::So, what's with it? I've seen many collectors getting that toy and they don't care at all. [[User:Hfc2x|Hfc2x]] 00:18, 9 March 2013 (EST)
:::We have a rule here about no third party toys. I don't see why what collectors are buying is relevant. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 00:36, 9 March 2013 (EST)
:::So are we going to list every other unlicensed and pretty illegal item Transformers fans might happen to purchase too? Because my ex-girlfriend had a large Chinese knockoff Decepticon tote bag. We should totes list that. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 00:46, 9 March 2013 (EST)

== Split? ==

Does it look like Devastator's G1 cartoon continuity could use its own sub-page at this point? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 08:31, 1 May 2013 (EDT)
:Eh, if the ''rest'' of the page was big enough that it felt like it was bloating it out I'd say yes, but I think it's fine as is for now. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 08:48, 1 May 2013 (EDT)
:I thought we only split pages if they go over 100K or so. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 16:39, 1 May 2013 (EDT)

== Quote Change ==

Would it be more appropriate to put the famous phrase "Constructicons, merge for the kill." as the primary quote. {{unsigned|Rock76222}}
:No, not really. That quote might be well known, but it doesn't tell you anything about Devastator other than the fact that he's a combiner. The current one actually shows you something about Devastator's personality. [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] 19:36, 24 July 2013 (EDT)
::Neither of them are particularly useful quotes. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:40, 24 July 2013 (EDT)
:::Aren't basically all quotes regarding Devastator all going to boil down to "Devastator gives hyperbolic description of own power," "Megatron gives order to Devastator/hyperbolic description of Devastator's power," or "Autobots express fear of Devastator"? [[User:Jalaguy|Jalaguy]] 20:02, 24 July 2013 (EDT)
::::Sure, but the thing is, we're not required to put quotes at the top of pages. We could not have a quote, actually! --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 20:32, 24 July 2013 (EDT)

== IDW Faction ==

In light of recent events... should we treat Devastator's faction any differently? During Dark Cybertron, sure, he's got a giant Decepticon logo on his chest, but 1/6 of him is ardently Autobot. Just curious what, if any, precedent there might be for this situation. [[User:Magaroja|Magaroja]] ([[User talk:Magaroja|talk]]) 16:52, 4 May 2014 (EDT)

== Generation 2 tampographed. ==

In your article it says that "only Hook and Bonecrusher featured a Generation 2-style Decepticon logo and the word "DECEPTICON" tampographed on them", and that is wrong.
All six of them have the Tampograph G2 symbol and the word Decepticon, not just Hook and Bonecrusher, trust me I have all six. If you need a pic to prove it let me know. :)
I did not know how else to inform you then written it here, and I did not want to change the page myself cause I would probably mess it up or something.
--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] ([[User talk:Michael Alex Kawa|talk]]) 08:14, 11 April 2016 (EDT)

Talk:Devastator (G1)

2016-04-11T12:13:41Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* Generation 2 tampographed. */ new section

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2011-06-03T18:32:49Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* I don't know if this was what you are looking for when you asked for Kiss Players radio play translations ,but i hope this helps . */

__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]]
 <div class="list-header">'''New Ad Policy:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki:Ads|Ads]]
 <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]]
 <div class="list-header">'''Server Move:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving2|Arriving Take 2]]
 <div class="list-header">'''Relicensing:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Relicensing|Relicensing]]
 <div class="list-header">'''Dealing With Vandalism:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Vandalism|Vandalism]]
 <div class="list-header">'''GoBots Sister Wiki:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/GoBots|Discussion on the place of GoBots in this wiki]]
}} 

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


==Didn't we have a Transformers Appearances/References in Other Media page?==
I could have sworn we did, mentioning stuff like Family guy etc. If we don't have such a page, would it be allowed to be created? [[User:Drmick|Drmick]] 11:53, 18 December 2010 (EST)
:Unless it's officially sanctioned by Hasbro, no, we do not mention Transformer appearances in other media. --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 11:54, 18 December 2010 (EST)
:: If it ever existed, it would have been destroyed with fire in about 30 seconds. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 12:46, 18 December 2010 (EST)
::: Of course, if we did have such a page, we could use it as a lighting rod, keep anons from adding something to Soundwave's page every time Seth Green says the word "transformers." -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 16:28, 18 December 2010 (EST)
::::Of course, NO. Discussion over. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 16:45, 18 December 2010 (EST)
::::Discussion not quite over. If the unofficial nature of the topic is the reason why it is not allowed, then there are several articles that already exist that are pushing boundaries on the wiki. I would have thought that the biggest problem would be it's size.[[User:Drmick|Drmick]] 09:26, 20 December 2010 (EST)
:::::Yeah, that'd be the other big reason. There's so many such references it would be impossible to keep track of them all. It would also involve making sure what's added there is actually a TF reference. And given all the Toms, Dicks and Harrys that'll come out of the woodwork to add such stuff, that's going to be more trouble than not having a page. Best not to get a larger headache for the sake of reducing a smaller one. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 12:44, 20 December 2010 (EST)

=="Knockoff warning" for toy sections?==
Just something that occurred to me... as I skimmed this page http://www.highendtfs.com/?q=node/17 and looked at alllllll the "could be mistaken for real and paid stupid money for" knockoffs... is there any objection to some form of link to this in the relevant toy sections? Sadly, the page lacks a "jump to" feature of any kind, but alerting people to the potential danger of dropping several hundred on what they think is a genuine Defensor box set... --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 02:50, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:I think it skirts the line with our "we don't really discuss knockoffs" policy, but on the other hand, yeah, it's a useful bit of information, almost to the point where we could stand to have a special page about ''these specific knockoffs''. I am not opposed to adding a link to that site, no, as long as it's got a massive and specific caveat attached to it (maybe even with a special template box thing ("A Prime Problem"-themed perhaps?)). Hell, maybe the highendtfs people would be willing to throw up navigation in exchange for the inevitable deluge of hits - anyone got contact info for the owner? [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 09:11, 19 December 2010 (EST)

::It's worth noting that there are some very well-done Henkei seekers knockoffs now, too. The really expensive ones even, like Thundercracker. Their sections could use warnings as well. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 17:56, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:::Are they in knockoff PACKAGING that is meant to look like the real thing? That's the really tricky part. G1 MIB shit is much, much more expensive. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 20:27, 19 December 2010 (EST)
::::Yes, they are: http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/news/buyer-beware-update-on-ko-henkei-seekers/20380/ -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 23:03, 19 December 2010 (EST)

::I am not sure I want to attach more template boxes to pages as is. Especially over something like knockoffs. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 20:55, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:::I'd ''thought'' about a template, but... ehn. I think a simple link under the TFU.info (or whatever), perhaps with a bolded "'''Knockoff alert'''" text. Like...

::::*''[http://www.highendtfs.com/?q=node/17 '''Knockoff alert''': More information on packaged imitations of this toy at HighendTFs.com]''

:::Thoughts? This would ONLY cover stuff that is in packaging meant to deceive you by looking as real as they can get it. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 21:05, 19 December 2010 (EST)

::::I could agree with that. This is a step beyond your standard knock off crap, some notice might be appropriate.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 21:44, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:::::I think it is a good idea to have it, since it is useful. This is different from putting info of some KO or unlicensed products on the page. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:49, 19 December 2010 (EST)

== Extension:Oversight ==

Quite a few times I've seen admins delete and undelete pages to clean out bad revisions. Why they do this I have no idea, since we have [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Oversight the Oversight extension] installed.

Perhaps we should look into granting some people "oversighter" access? --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 05:09, 25 December 2010 (EST)
:I've just noticed that deleting and then restoring pages in the manner mentioned above has the side effect of resetting a page's page views stats, so that's another point in favour of the Oversight extension. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:40, 11 January 2011 (EST)

== Wikipedia, revisited ==

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#The_.22Campaign_of_Deletion.22_against_the_Transformers_Wiki_Project_by_NotARealWord_and_TFWiki.net]

Just in case anyone's interested. --[[Special:Contributions/84.193.193.10|84.193.193.10]] 10:54, 5 January 2011 (EST) (-Blackout-, can't be bothered to log back in)
:NEWSFLASH: Nobody cares. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 16:21, 5 January 2011 (EST)

== Captcha to prevent spambots? ==

Is there any way we could implement captcha to account creation to prevent the spambot problem we're having now? I've seen other wikis use that measure. Maybe also disable new page creation by anons? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 12:56, 6 January 2011 (EST)
:We already have CAPTCHA implemented on the account creation service. --[[Special:Contributions/84.193.193.10|84.193.193.10]] 13:09, 6 January 2011 (EST) (-Blackout-, can't be bothered to log in)
::Never mind, then! [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 13:30, 6 January 2011 (EST)

== Real world events by day Category ==

These of course comprise every date of the year. However, I notice recently people have been adding fictional events to these dates. That basically invalidates the Category, since it's no longer comprised of only real-world events. The fictional events should be moved out into another section, or the category name should be changed to "Events by day". Thoughts? --[[User:MistaTee|MistaTee]] 22:01, 9 January 2011 (EST)
:I agree with changing to "Events by day". I would also support having separate fictional and real world sections on the pages. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 22:38, 9 January 2011 (EST)

== Project Wonderful ads ==

Um, guys, I found there [http://www.projectwonderful.com/img/uploads/pics/53018-1293943633.gif Non-official products] in the ads of CapturedPrey. I know the small ads are showing up randomly (and may not be controllable since we can't regulate them), but I think it is still need to be reported here. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 01:04, 16 January 2011 (EST)
: I don't mind them in the non-permanent ads. TFSource used them all the time in their ads before we made them permanent sponsors. It was only when we made them a permanent sponsor did we ask to make them free of third-party product. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:57, 16 January 2011 (EST)

== Games <strike>fiction</strike> ==

Okay, now that [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] has flooded the character pages with stubs for 30 years worth of crappy Transformers games, can we reconsider how the Games sections are treated? I really don't think in-universe fiction descriptions are the way to handle it. [[War for Cybertron]] may've had a plot, but the majority of TF games are more in the vein of "hit things until they stop coming". A fiction section makes even less sense for games where the character selection is variable. ''"[[Hardhead (G1)#Transformers:_The_Headmasters|Hardhead]] may (or may not) have been present at this battle. Or this one. Or this..."'' Ditto for generic drone soldiers. Isn't there a way to address the games without trying to craft a sensical fiction for them? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 08:46, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:I agree. The games should appear as merchandise on all relevant characters pages, but there is no need for a fiction write up for most games on those same pages. A generic write up on the game page should suffice. Something like "An Autobot warrior participated in a battle...", with a character box listing all potential "Autobot warriors" (aka playable characters). --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:21, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::Moving games to merchandise sounds awful. It would result in amazing amounts of lost information. I have no idea what doing that would solve. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 09:44, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::I think it depends on the game - for example in the ROTF console game, while you CAN play as multiple characters, the game provides a suggested one for you. IMO, that's who "actually" did the stuff depicted in the game (and the opposing side's campaign generally suggests it as well). When you can just pick from a half-dozen dudes and it doesn't matter, then maybe a brief summary of the game's plot and a note. "Jerkwagon was one of many Autobots involved in blah blah plot synopsis bluh. NOTE: Such-and-such game allowed players to choose multiple protagonists, including Jerkwagon." [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 13:19, 25 January 2011 (EST)
I agree that Games should be their own section -- there's certainly enough of them, and they should be treated differently than keychains and what-not. But I think an out-of-universe description of the games would be better in most cases. Instead of having to write vague text like ''"As Ultra Magnus searched for the truth behind Optimus Prime's death, he battled Trypticon in a game of death and suffering."'', which is about all the plot I could wrangle out of [[Transformers: Mystery of Convoy|Convoy no Nazo]] and tells you virtually nothing, we could write something more informative, like ''"Trypticon is the boss of Stage 10."'', and describe what actually happens in the game instead of trying to make it sound like believable fiction. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 11:29, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:::My personal view on the matter is, from a character's page, I should be able to find EVERY place that character has appeared. And when we do list guys having an appearance when they're most likely an animation error in the far-background of an episode, I don't think there's any excuse to NOT list an appearance of a character wherever he might appear, including board and video games. Is that a lot of work? Yeah. But beneath all the jokes that make this place so great, this is still an encyclopedia, and purposely leaving out information out of an encyclopedia is wrong. Though I think Hooper X has the right idea... I doesn't have to be the most super-extensive write up. Heck, I was even going to suggest just having a link saying "See Return of Convoy article" or something like that. Also: I apologize if I had started getting very sloppy last night, but looking back, it was like 5 in the morning by the time I finished up. Yikes. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 14:10, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::::I totally agree that the games should be dealt with on the character pages. I'm just looking for an option other than a completely in-fiction description. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 15:14, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::::: The first idea that comes to mind is having a subsection called "Gameplay" or something like that for each game write-up, something that would be similar to a note? Though really, my main solution for stuff like that has been, up to this point, to just stick a couple of notes in the game write-up, like on [[Cheetor (BW)|Cheetor]]'s page. I'll keep on trying to think up other solutions though... --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 15:26, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::::Storylinks already serve as that, so what's the point of another link? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 15:47, 25 January 2011 (EST)

== Fiction order guide? ==

I've been over the Style guides a few times trying to find if a page like this already exists, but it doesn't look like it. I'll be the first to admit that when adding in new fiction/game subsections to a character's article, I sometimes confuse and probably put them out of order. So I've been wondering if a page that lists every fictional work and game in the proper order of each other would be a good idea? On one hand, it seems like an ABSURD amount of work for a style guide, one that would have to be CONSTANTLY updated as new things come out. On the other hand, it would be very handy to have a list to reference for character pages. Especially because it can get VERY frustrating trying to hunt down which book/cartoon/whatever came first in the same year. For those who don't understand what I'm talking about, here's an example I quickly put together, using the [[Cheetor (BW)]] and [[Optimus Prime (G1)]] pages as reference.

When listing a character's media appearances, use this sorting order:
*Fiction
**Generation 1 Marvel Comics continuity
**Generation 1 S.T.A.R.S. pack-in flyers
**Generation 1 cartoon continuity
**Generation 1 Kid Stuff Talking Story Books
**Generation 1 Big Looker Story Books
**Generation 1 Ladybird Books continuity
**''Transformers in 3-D''
**''Transformers PD Type'' comic
**''Comic Bom Bom G-2'' comic
**Beast Wars First wave toy bios
**Beast Wars Cartoon continuity
***Dawn of Future's Past
***''Beast Wars'' cartoon
***Fast Action Battlers toyline
***3H ''Tales from the Beast Wars'' comics
***IDW ''Beast Wars'' comics
***''Transformers Legends'' anthology
***''Beast Machines'' cartoon
***''Beast Machines'' toy bio
***''Universe'' comic
***''Beast Wars Metals'' comic
***Beast Wars ''Henkei! Henkei!'' pack-in comic
**Generation 1 Dreamwave comics continuity
**''G.I. Joe vs. the Transformers''
**''Transformers/G.I. Joe''
**Generation 1 IDW comics continuity
**''Hearts of Steel''
**''Music Label''
**''Henkei! Henkei!'' (pack-in comic)
**''Henkei! Henkei!'' Bun Bun manga
**Alternity
**''Robot Heroes'' comic
**''Universe'' cartoon
**Wings of Honor

Is this a good idea? Would anyone actually like to see this kind of thing, or would I just be putting a whole bunch of work into something we don't need? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:28, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:We do need standardization of section names. The section order, however, depends on order in which the character appeared in those continuities in the real world. Then the subsections are ordered by the fictional chronology. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:35, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::No wonder I get confused by this fiction order thing. @_@ I guess I might just be one of those people that will never get the hang of some of these things. And yeah, the section names was definitely something else I wanted to tackle, since I've seen at times no less than four different ways to refer to a certain media. I sometimes have to check the storylinks at the end to be sure it's all part of the same story! --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:45, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::Note that, within a continuity, flashbacks and time travel can mean that experiential fictional chronology for one character requires a different order of headings than for another. [[User:JW|JW]] 20:16, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:::In regards to standardization, I have an idea. What if we create a list of headers (kept on this page perhaps) used on Optimus Prime (G1)'s page (probably has the greatest number of different headers), use that as our initial standards list, then update it as we find other headers or decide to change the existing standards? Once we think we've covered the majority of possibilities, we could move it to a help page and make it official policy. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:49, 6 February 2011 (EST)
::::I put together [[User:Jackpot/Sandbox/Sections|a sandbox along these lines]] a couple of years ago. It hasn't been updated in quite a while, and I'm not sure it was ever actually complete, and it was the subject of [[User_talk:Jackpot/Sandbox/Sections|a bit of debate]]... but there it is, for what it's worth. (Also, I support standardization of headers, but I've run into [[Talk:Ricochet_(Headmasters)#Header|some]] [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive22#Section_naming_conventions|opposition]] over the nitty-gritty before, so best of luck.) - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 06:11, 8 February 2011 (EST)

== Foreign name reorganization ==

Is there any chance we could consider moving the foreign names somewhere else in the article other than at the top? We've already established a new standard for episodes, but characters could stand to have their names moved to their own dedicated section, likely under "Notes". There, we could add things like kana and Cyrillic forms of names not different from the English version. Opinions? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 15:56, 4 February 2011 (EST)
:I'm in favor of it. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 16:33, 4 February 2011 (EST)

::All things considered, since this is (mostly) an english-centric wiki when it comes to stuff, the foreign names do come off as being interesting trivia more than anything else. I'm in favour of this too. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:37, 4 February 2011 (EST)

:I'm fine with where they are now, personally. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 16:39, 4 February 2011 (EST)

:I can see the logic in them being moved down to notes. You've got an in-universe profile, then a bunch of out-of-universe names, then the in-universe fiction section. The only argument I have against it is that I'm used to seeing the foreign names at the top. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:05, 4 February 2011 (EST)

::If it can be moved downward (to the first entry of the notes section or a new section after the notes section) instead of being on the top, MOVE it. Originally, I'm fine withe where they are {{m-}} but that would be a character with fewer foreign names. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 19:55, 4 February 2011 (EST)
Any further opinions on this? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 00:36, 21 February 2011 (EST)
:What about cases where some of the extra names at the top are English, e.g. Omni Productions names, or preliminary or nicknames? Would they remain at the top or become notes too? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 01:29, 21 February 2011 (EST)
::The Malay dub still technically counts as foreign in my mind. Nicknames should be integrated in the introduction (or notes section), and preliminary names should have been in notes in the first place, since they aren't the characters' "real names" in any sense. Further elaboration of the preliminary names better suits the notes section, anyway. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:43, 21 February 2011 (EST)
Japanese names are often for a character in a slightly different continuity. Like "Fire Convoy" is a Car Robots character and "Optimus Prime" is an RID character, but they share the same page. Or "Flame Convoy" is a Galaxy Force character but "Scourge" is a Cybertron character. In that case they should have the Japanese name up top. The names that are just different language versions of the English character can go on bottom. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 13:18, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:... no. ''Cybertron'' and ''Galaxy Force'' are NOT different stories (Takara officially put GF back in the same timeline as the prior two series), and the ''RID/CR'' split is a unique case. In neither case should the names go up top. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 13:44, 23 February 2011 (EST)
::They are slightly different continuities. Galaxy Force doesn't have the [[Omega Frequency]] for example. And the Grand Black Hole is different. And the [[Japanese Generation 1 cartoon continuity]] is different. [[Blaster (G1)|Broadcast]] never became Twincast in English. I think Japanese names are a special case and deserve to be on top since Japanese toyline & fiction continuity is always slightly separate. But I can hit the "end" key on the keyboard easy enough. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:56, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::Every single foreign language version of something is technically a slightly different continuity, strictly due to the nature of translation. This is not a arena in which Galaxy Force is unique. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:01, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== Commercial Appearances section ==

Alright, so I plan later on to start going through characters' pages and add in a "Commercial Appearances" section where it applies (sorry, I can't this weekend... homework to do!). Several characters already have this section and a lot of these commercials have nice short animations or other interesting characterizations and tidbits that I think they bear to be included in the characters' pages. Although, much like the Games sections, I'll only be able to marginally help by adding in the section itself to let people know that there's work to be done on a character's page... MY computer is so incredibly shitty that I can't even play videos off youtube. D:

But anyways, the reason I'm bringing this up here is because before I get started, I'd like to discuss what kind of format we want for this section, so it can be done right the first time around. Obviously, where it applies, stuff like indicating who the voice actor for the character makes sense, but should the write-up be in-universe or not? Since commercials fluctuate between using a short animation telling a mini-story and just being a straight-up commercial saying "buy this toy!" should a combination of both in-universe and out-of-universe description be used? And should we count the parts where the kids brandish their action figures and talk for the character as dialog spoken by the character? That's all the questions on the subject I can really think of for now... --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 15:12, 6 February 2011 (EST)
:I would write up the animation segments in-universe so long as they're unique to the commercial (i.e. not just recycled footage from one of the cartoons). Anything else that's notable enough could qualify for an out of universe note. But I wouldn't bother with recycled animation or the kids talking for the figures. That doesn't qualify as fiction to me.
:In regards to your inability to view the commercials, would it help if you could download them in some fashion and then watch them offline? Maybe burn the videos to a DVD disc? --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:43, 6 February 2011 (EST)
::Yeah, any clips taken from pre-existing mediums would be redundant from those scenes being already covered in other sections on that character's page. Personally though, I'm still on the fence about the kids talking for the figures... I find it comparable to botcon script readings in a way... People just talking out loud for a character without any accompanying animation... I'm prone to be swayed either way. As for me viewing the commercials themselves, my spring break is a week from now. I might have access to a better computer then, but otherwise I'll just be putting in information already available on the wiki to the appropriate pages throughout the week, I guess. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 17:53, 6 February 2011 (EST)

==How to resolve monster debates?==
[[User:-Blackout-]]'s recent meltdown over being prevented from editing [[Goldbug (IDW)]] has made me think again about how policy/content discussions tend to go on this wiki. It's a big part of why I haven't been around since last summer: I found myself perpetuating these miles-long debates that few cared to read, everyone was irritated by, and most importantly ''were impossible to resolve.''

That Goldbug article is a sterling example. Right now, people are talking about it as if the [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive1|giant]] [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive2|debate]] had resolved in favor of the current setup, so changing the article at this point is taboo because it "was dealt with already." But that's not how it went at all. Blackout's dickishly unilateral edit-war was definitely the Wrong Way to reopen this, but it's also wrong to pretend that we had achieved consensus or closure on the issue.

At [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive2#Breaking down the problem|the end of the debate]], I had restated the case for [[User:Jackpot/Sandbox/Goldbug (G1)|my "Goldbug (G1)" sandbox]], which is definitely different from the current setup, and 6 other people declared support for it while 2 objected at length. But the objectors were also against the current setup: Jeysie wanted the toy gone, and Derik wanted... something inscrutable and Deriky. Combining those numbers with the [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive1#Vote Tally|premature vote]] that had been taken earlier (and adjusting for the voters who changed their minds by the end), I count:

Sandbox: 8 
Sandbox with modifications: 3 
Current page: 7 
Current page without the toy: 2

That's not consensus. That's deadlock. In fact, there were fewer votes to keep the page as-is than there were to change it in some fashion. The current setup didn't win out in terms of votes, logic, precedent, or any other measure: It won out because it was what happened to be there when the debate died of exhaustion.

So we're stuck with an awkward page that most people want to be different, encased in concrete forevermore. I don't see any way out of this situation, and I've watched the same principle play out with other debates too many times. At the very least, I wonder if it would be helpful to have a Template:Deadlock that we could slap on inconclusive debates (with a picture of [[Drift (G1)|Deadlock]], natch) so people know the true state of things.

Taking that idea further, maybe it could come with a period of enforced moratorium – say, two weeks – followed by a revote and/or a formalized "final statements" opportunity? The most extreme option I can think of is to create a "council of elders" that has the community-bestowed power to resolve intractable debates and declare relevant policy principles. Basically, a Supreme Court. I do worry that creating an authoritative heirarchy might produce even more problems, but I figured I'd throw it out there.

Thoughts? Other ideas?

- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 18:20, 9 February 2011 (EST)
: This whole argument goes to the heart of what we mean when we say two characters are "the same". The Bumblebee toy was produced and fiction was made to promote that toy, thus all of those fictions (which differ from each other) are about "the same" character. The Goldbug toy was produced with a tech spec that stated that it was "the same" character as Bumblebee. Fiction was produced to promote that toy, thus all those varying depictions of Goldbug are "the same" character as Bumblebee. The same argument applies to the differing backstories of Optimus Prime; Orion Pax and Optronix are "the same" character because they both are earlier forms of the character that was used to promote the sale of the Optimus Prime toy. The problem comes in with later stories that are not produced to promote those original toys. How do we decide what is the same? When is a character "the same character under different circumstances/in a different universe" and when is it simply an homage character? I really can't see how others see the IDW Goldbug as "the same" character as the original toy and not (as I see him) as a simple homage character. Under their viewpoint the toy belongs, under mine it doesn't. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:15, 10 February 2011 (EST)

: I NOMINATE MYSELF AS FINAL ARBITER AND SUPREME OVERLORD. all decisions will be made based on what amuses me the most. (seriously, we probably ought to have some kind of "no consensus" tag for articles like that.) [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 12:58, 10 February 2011 (EST)

Mmm...probably best not to restart the Goldbug debate itself here, Khajidha -- that would quickly distract from what Jackpot's actually asking here, which is how debates should be resolved ''in general''.

Some of the basic rules we already follow should remain. No "edit-warring"...leave it up to the Talk Pages to hash out the problem. I don't think a mere two weeks is enough to give people time to change their minds, though, especially in this crowd. One thing I notice is that despite dozens of regular contributors and hundreds overall, most Talk Page or Community Portal votes I've seen have less than 20 votes at the end. Many of these debates fly right under the radar. I'm relatively active here, but the Goldbug (IDW) chaos completely passed me by.

What about, when a Talk Page debate has clearly reached an impasse between <strike>obstinant</strike> strong-willed parties, a Vote is taken on the ''Main Page''? Some sort of easy-to-see box temporarily added to the Main Page, "above the fold" so that its visible to all visitors when they enter? It would be more noticeable than if the vote is hidden away on a single Talk Page people may or may not see. Something like ''"A [[Deadlock]] has arisen! Choose from the following choices: Should [[Goldbug (IDW)]] have the G1 toy on his page? Yes or No? (See the Goldbug (IDW) Talk Page for the full debate.)"''

I realize many debates won't be as simple as Yes or No, but if the debating parties agree in advance how to phrase the Voting Box, it could be a useful tool. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 13:07, 10 February 2011 (EST)

:Yeah, wasn't really trying to restart that debate. Was bringing up questions about general character debates, as they seem to occur quite often. But other debates also bog down, so I recognize that my questions don't apply to those debates.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 13:35, 10 February 2011 (EST)

:I like the idea of keeping a debate in the regulars' faces until a decision has been reached by enough people (at least 20? 25?). Many debates I keep away from because I think they'll disappear anyway and my vote doesn't really matter <s>and I also can't deal all that well with the aggressive nature of most debates, making it actively a lose-only situation if I'd enter</s>. I'm not sure if others feel that way, but I imagine this would be a boost for all to participate. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 13:23, 10 February 2011 (EST)
::I absolutely disagree with the premise that people who don't care enough to read the argument should have it shoved in their face until they vote. AT MOST, we should mention it somewhere prominent, like the community portal. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] 18:53, 10 February 2011 (EST)
:::I agree that essentially putting a ballot on the front page is asking for trouble. You might get the dozens of votes you're looking for, but they'll all be uninformed gut reactions. One of the reasons these debates happen is that issues can be much more complicated and subtle than they seem at first glance. Plus one would hope that the reasoning behind the winning option would help develop our policies, but if the decisions are made by the majority of an explicitly uninformed mob, it's hard to glean any substantial precedent out of that.
:::But I think an approach like that ''could'' be combined with my "final statements" suggestion. Thinking out loud here: After a cooling-off period has been declared and a set amount of time has passed, anyone who wants to present a case can write up a defense of his or her preferred option. Those are all submitted to a neutral volunteer, who then posts them simultaneously on the relevant Talk page, and those become the voting choices. No replies are allowed, only votes. We put a notice up at least on the Community Portal, possibly on the Main Page, for another set time period, then close voting and go with the majority.
:::How does that sound? Like I said, thinking out loud, so suggestions are more than welcome.
:::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:18, 10 February 2011 (EST)
::::Sounds pretty good to me. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:19, 11 February 2011 (EST)

==How featured articles are chosen==
On a side note, would a box like that also be useful to start a voting system for featured pages? Because I'm fine with Drift and Wreck-Gar and all others before, but I am absolutely clueless as to who chose them to become featured for what reasons. I'd like to see a better system for that. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 13:23, 10 February 2011 (EST)
: If there was a recently-completed article that's of respectable length, I choose it. The pool for featured articles is pretty damn small. Not many articles are finished, and the ones that are finished have usually already been Featured Articles already. Finished articles don't happen very frequently, so sometimes we find one that's close to completion near the end of a month and then push to finish it before the month is over. Sometimes we think a subject or a character is timely (like around BotCon, or before an episode or movie premiere) and push for that. If you want a heads up, Chris McFeely's [[Matrix of Leadership]] article is so totally March's. (I think Chris has the record for number of articles he's completed which have become featured.) --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:31, 10 February 2011 (EST)
: Long story short, if you want an article to be featured, finish it. That means photos for every toy and known merchandise, and storylinks (with summaries) to every piece of fiction they've appeared in. Behind the scenes information helps. The longer and more involved the article, the more appealing it is. Meaning, finishing an article for a Mini-Con who showed up in the background somewhere, or finishing an article for someone who doesn't have any illutrated appearances... these are probably not going to be featured. But people like Perceptor (G1) or Side Burn (RID) or High Wire (Armada) have enough about them to say to make an interesting featured article. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:36, 10 February 2011 (EST)
: "Long story short," my ass. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:37, 10 February 2011 (EST)
:: Have we done any episodes as Featured yet? I know the over-arching "Target 2006" article was chosen once. You'd think we could get, say [[Code of Hero]] up to that standard pretty quickly. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 07:42, 11 February 2011 (EST)
:::I really think we need to get [[BotCon]] up to that standard. We're pretty close! --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 15:22, 11 February 2011 (EST)
:::[[B.O.T. (episode)|B.O.T.]] is a Featured article about an episode. [[User:Excise|Excise]] 00:00, 16 February 2011 (EST)

== Letterers ==
On images of comic pages, do we credit the ''letterers'' by placing the image in an "Image by Letterer Name" category? We've got a few contradictory examples around. [[User:JW|JW]] 15:32, 12 February 2011 (EST)
:Okay, three options: For images currently in categories like "Images by Mike Scott" (where Mike Scott is a letterer), we can:
:# Create the category and treat letterers just like artists, inkers, and colorists.
:# Instead place them in a "Images ''lettered'' by Mike Scott" category.
:# Remove the category, and not attempt to categorize images by letterer.
:I'm probably going to go with option 3 barring dissent. [[User:JW|JW]] 17:25, 16 February 2011 (EST)
::I added galleries to a few of the pages for letterers (eg [[Bill Oakley]], [[Peri Godbold]]) on the basis that lettering can make or [[:Image:Cryotekmrrghmraghmrugghagh.jpg|break]] a comic. As well as adding the text, the letterer has to pick where the balloons will go and place, them, so they do have a large degree of control over how the comic turns out. That said, I don't know that we need to categorise images by letterer. The original intention was [[:Category talk:Images by artist|not to]], but it looks like we ended up doing it anyway, and at least one template is set up to put images into category by letterer. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:44, 16 February 2011 (EST)

:I'd vote for option 3 as well.--[[User:MistaTee|MistaTee]] 22:02, 16 February 2011 (EST)
::I'm leaning towards option 3 myself. My reasoning is that even though letterers can have a large effect on a comic, I don't see too many people wanting to find every image lettered by a given letterer. The galleries, on the other hand, are useful for demonstrating the quality of an individual's work. So those should be used. While the obsessive in me thinks we should categorize images by every applicable characteristic, it's not realistic. I don't think it benefits us enough to go through all that work for categories that only a few people might find useful. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 01:09, 17 February 2011 (EST)
'Kay, I'm going to go with option 3. This may involve editing a template or two. [[User:JW|JW]] 10:35, 17 February 2011 (EST)

== Categories by toy size class? ==
Do we ''want'' the following categories?
 Leader class toy images
 Deluxe class toy images
 Voyager class toy images
 Scout class toy images
 They currently have a very few things in them (and could obviously have many more), but the cat' pages themselves have not been created. [[User:JW|JW]] 15:43, 12 February 2011 (EST)

:No. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 16:13, 12 February 2011 (EST)

::No. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:06, 15 February 2011 (EST)

:::As long as it's only the images and not the articles, I couldn't care less. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 21:09, 15 February 2011 (EST)

:There's also a "Legends class toy images" category which has 90 images in it. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:21, 15 February 2011 (EST)

::Legends are kind of an exception because they're a different scale/play pattern, as evidenced by the upcoming Cyberverse stuff. Scouts-on-up are ''generally'' meant to intermingle, Legends aren't. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 07:41, 16 February 2011 (EST)

:I could go either way on this one. It's a lot of work to fill these categories out, but the ability to find all the Deluxe figures easily intrigues me. If we did institute this I would also think that this would be the proper place to put the "exclusive figure" categories and such. Basically, any category that pertains to a particular toy and not to the character could be tagged to the image of that toy. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 23:08, 15 February 2011 (EST)

:I've been doing them because I saw other people do them. I don't mind either way. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 05:51, 16 February 2011 (EST)
So, counting me as "no", that's three "no"s, an "I don't care", an "I don't mind either way", and an "either way/intrigues me". I think we're leaning toward "no". Final comments? [[User:JW|JW]] 07:08, 16 February 2011 (EST)

::I guess it's "no" or at least "not the time"? (Though I'm "I'm not sure".) --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 11:21, 16 February 2011 (EST)
:::I've gone with "no", and added a note to that effect to [[Transformers_Wiki:Images]]. [[User:JW|JW]] 14:27, 16 February 2011 (EST)

Ha ha, none of the no's have actually said why they've said no. Such super debating skills that. [[Special:Contributions/213.105.226.130|213.105.226.130]] 17:44, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== Undo Redone? ==

I just undid an edit, but instead of getting the automatic "Reverting edit ##### by User1 to last version by User2" summary, that box was blank. In addition, above the edit window were the captions "Current revision" and "Your text", side by side, as if there's meant to be one editable text window under each. Instead, there was only one such text window beneath them, stretching across under both captions. The page is protected so only registered users can edit it, so that MIGHT have something to do with the problem, though I doubt it.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:28, 19 February 2011 (EST)
:It doesn't automatically create an edit summary if you're doing an undo on multiple revisions, so that might be it. Not sure about the other part - it's always shown me a diff at the top of the screen when I've done an undo. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:54, 19 February 2011 (EST)
::Okay, blank edit summary's explained, because it was indeed a group of 3-4 edits being undone all at once. Still inexplicable is the fact that I just checked the page history; it didn't even accept my Undo! LoneGamer78 ended up doing it instead. I've noticed some sluggish response from the site over the past fifteen minutes or so, perhaps whatever caused that was a factor? It may never be known...--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 21:02, 19 February 2011 (EST)
:::Is it possible she just beat you to it by a few moments and thus there was an edit conflict? I've had that happen sometimes, and so there's no diff shown because now the page already matches what you were going to change it to. (Uh, does that make sense?) --[[Special:Contributions/67.252.49.31|67.252.49.31]] 22:17, 19 February 2011 (EST)
::::Can't rule it out entirely, but edit conflicts usually announce themselves as such, and they DO have two distinct editable text windows: one showing the text as it stands after someone edited while you were typing, the other as it would have been if you'd edited without interference.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 22:24, 19 February 2011 (EST)
:::::A few times I've "undone" an edit, but someone else beat me to it. It doesn't seem to show an edit conflict if that happens, probably because the change is identical to the previous one. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:06, 19 February 2011 (EST)

== Banner ad question. ==
The small side box ad (the one that's still a free-floater) currently has an ad for some webcomic. Which is fine, but one of the panels has GIANT ERECT LADY NIPPLES ALL OVER THE PLACE. I'm not offended by it, but it's, uh, something. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 06:39, 21 February 2011 (EST)
:Ah, yeah. That'd be because it's an NSFW comic called DarkBrain which is read aloud by "adult film star Tabitha Stevens." -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 16:50, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:: If people don't like it, I can yank it. I didn't think its THO was that objectionable, apparently, when I okayed it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:27, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== help ==

I cant find the latest talk please help([[User:Manmcmanman|Manmcmanman]] 15:44, 21 February 2011 (EST))
:What do you mean by the latest talk? -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 15:54, 21 February 2011 (EST)

== Revenge of the Fallen Online Games ==

So, I figured I might as well finish up the online game write-ups for Revenge of the Fallen online games, in case they go offline once Dark of the Moon comes out. But, hot damn, do I ever suck. Which means I'm not very likely to get pics of later levels in some of these games. I'll be trying to add in whatever I can to these sections, but some help would be much appreciated! --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 14:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:I can have a go at getting some screencaps tonight if no one else does. Which games in particular? I noticed some of them are already gone a couple of weeks ago, as Hasbro has redirected most of the monkeybar site they were on to the Hub site, which doesn't have them. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:58, 22 February 2011 (EST)
::Well, personally I'm having difficulty getting pics of every character's sprite from Battle for the Matrix. I'm currently working on The RPMs Devastator game. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 18:41, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:::I got caps of everyone except the Fallen, haven't uploaded them yet though. I couldn't get the [[flying drone]]s to transform either. They just seem to fly around wildly in robot mode. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:56, 23 February 2011 (EST)
::::Dang! The Fallen is the only one I can't get to either! And yeah, the flying drones are near-impossible to get a screencap of. I got a couple mid-transformation, but that's it. If any of your pics are better than mine, feel free to replace them. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 13:55, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::::I went and got pics from Flight of the Bumblebee and Allspark Highway. Unfortunately I can't get pics of Ratchet from the later since robovision isn't up anymore! Darn! I'll upload them later. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 14:45, 23 February 2011 (EST)
::::::I grabbed a screenshot of The Fallen finally. Man, that game is a memory hog. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 03:38, 25 February 2011 (EST)

== Countdown? ==

Sorry if this isn't the right place to put this, but a while back ago, there was a countdown to ROTF on the Main Page. Perhaps a countdown to DOTM would now be appropriate as it's so close?

Also, I'd appreciate it if someone could tell me how to program/insert/design/<insert verb here> a countdown on a wiki page (it's for another wiki). What template or whatever does that use? I'd be very grateful if someone could tell me.

Again, terribly sorry if this is the wrong place to say this...
 - [[User:Queso|¡Usa El Queso!]] 4:02 PM, 22 February 2011 A.D.
:Dark of the Moon countdown based on Derik's ROTF code: {{#expr: ({{ #time: U |July 1, 2011}} - {{ #time: U }})/86400 round 0}} days until [[Dark of the Moon (film)|TF: Dark of the Moon]]! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:05, 22 February 2011 (EST)

==When to omit "Transformers" from an article title==
So I got a hankering to remove the "Transformers" from [[Transformers: War for Cybertron]] and [[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] and all of their related pages, since unlike [[Transformers Animated (franchise)|Transformers Animated]], there's just no good reason to break policy for them. There are [[Revenge of the Fallen (Xbox 360/PS3/PC)|other video games that we drop the "TF" from]], and if "Prime" is too common a term, then what about "[[Energon (franchise)|Energon]]" or "[[Cybertron (franchise)|Cybertron]]"?

But then I decided to check out [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:Search?ns0=1&search=Transformers&searchx=Search&limit=500 which pages use "Transformers" in their titles,] and holyyyyyyyy crap. I copy-pasted here all the ones I found that I thought could lose the "Transformers" without negating their meaning, destroying a phrase, or otherwise severely damaging the title. (I added an "(etc.)" to each one that represents a series of identically-worded pages):

[[Transformers: War for Cybertron]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Animated (franchise)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Universe (Marvel comic)]] 
[[1-2-3 Transformers]] 
[[Transformers: Mystery of Convoy]] 
[[Hasbro Transformers Collectors' Club (magazine)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Legends]] 
[[Transformers: Beast Wars Transmetals (N64)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers: The Headmasters (video game)]] 
[[The Transformers: Battle to Save the Earth]] 
[[Transformers Armada: The Energon Within]] 
[[The Transformers Collection]] 
[[Transformers Quest]] 
[[Transformers Key Recovery: The Game]] 
[[Transformers Power Up: The Game]] 
[[Transformers Cybertron: Primus Unleashed]] 
[[Transformers PD Type]] 
[[Transformers: The Animated Movie]] 
[[Transformers Generations]] 
[[Transformers: Rise of the Chevy Autobots]] 
[[Transformers Annual 1990]] (etc.) 
[[The Transformers Sticker Book (1986)]] 
[[Beast Wars: Transformers (video game)]] 
[[Transformers: The Junior Novel]] 
[[Look and Find Transformers]] 
[[Transformers Coloring and Activity Book and Crayons]] 
[[Transformers: The Ultimate Guide]] 
[[Transformers: Learn to Count Activity Tablet]] 
[[Transformers The Reusable Sticker Book]] 
[[Transformers: The Movie Storybook]] 
[[Transformers: The Movie Guide]] 
[[Transformers Prime Time]] 
[[Transformers Mix & Match]] 
[[Transformers Comic issue 1]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers The Game (console)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Autobots/Decepticons]] 
[[Transformers History of Music 1984-1990]] 
[[Transformers: Mosaic]] 
[[Transformers Name Generator]] 
[[Transformers Battle Universe]] 
[[The Transformers: Binaltech & TF Collection Complete Guide]] 
[[The Transformers Comic Magazine]] 
[[Transformers Pop-Up Book]] 
[[Transformers Visualworks]] 
[[Transformers Tooth Tunes]] 
[[Transformers Tapestry]] 
[[Transformers Song Universe]] 
[[Transformers G1: Awakening]] 
[[Transformers Armada Annual 2004]] 
[[Transformers: Beginnings]] 
[[Transformers the Movie water]] 
[[Transformers: The Score]] 
[[Transformers: The Thirteen]] 
[[Transformers: War Within Omnibus]] 
[[Transformers: The Ride]] 
[[Beast Wars Transformers Mutating Card Game]] 
[[Beast Wars Transformers Jigsaw Puzzle]] 
[[Transformers: Kōtetsu no Yūki]] 
[[The Transformers Continuum: The Definitive Chronology]] 
[[The Transformers: Bumblebee]] 
[[Transformers Adventures]] (etc.) 
[[Top Trumps: Transformers]] 
[[Transformers Armada: Race for the Mini-Con Robots]] 
[[Transformers Armada: The Battle Begins]] 
[[Transformers Armada: Secret of the Star Saber]] 
[[Transformers Armada: The Autobots Strike Back]] 
[[Transformers Galaxy Force: Sound Pack 1]] 
[[Transformers Galaxy Force: Sound Pack 2]] 
[[Transformers Theme Song Collection]] 
[[The Transformers: Drift]] 
[[Transformers Revenge of the Fallen Annual 2010]] 
[[Transformers CyberToy]] 
[[Transformers Hall of Fame]] 
[[The Transformers: Ironhide]] 
[[Transformers Evo.]] 
[[The Transformers Legends of the Microns: Sound of Evolution Vol. 1]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Music Matrix]] 
[[Transformers Ultimate Guide]] 
[[Transformers Ultimate Guide: Revenge]] 
[[Transformers: Battle for the Matrix]] 
[[Transformers: Coloring and Activity Book and Stickers]] 
[[Transformers: Activity Book and Gel Pen]] 
[[Transformers: Sector 7]] 
[[Transformers: Cybertron Adventures]] 
[[Transformers Cards]] 
[[Transformers RPMs: Devastator's Demise]] 
[[Cadbury's Transformers Card Game]] 
[[Ridiculous Legend Transformers]] 
[[Famicom How-to Manga: Transformers: Mystery of Convoy]] 
[[Transformers Caramel]] 
[[Transformers Comic-Magazin]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Extra Comic-Sonderheft]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Super-Auswahlband]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers: Energon Valentine's cards]] 
[[The Transformers: Infestation issue 1]] 
[[The Transformers: Infestation issue 2]]

For many of them, the choice to keep or drop the "TF" seems intuitive, and many others are in a grey area... but I'll be damned if I can put into words any kind of coherent rationale. I'm seriously thinking that we've outgrown the "drop extraneous 'TF's" rule. Back when we only had a few hundred pages, it made a certain kind of sense: Why bother writing out stuff like "Transformers: Generation 2" when just "Generation 2" is equally meaningful to everyone here? Besides, isn't every page about Transformers by default? But in the past five years, both the wiki and the subject matter have exploded, and with both so many fine-grain, obscure topics being covered and so much not-strictly-TF content we've added, I don't think the policy serves us anymore. It doesn't make things simple; it makes things arbitrary and unpredictable.

So unless someone can sum up our policy in a way that makes a lick of sense, I propose: '''If a topic has an official title, then that should be used in full as the title of the relevant articles.''' Period. So [[Transformers: War for Cybertron]] and [[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] would stay right where they are, and yes, [[Generation 2 (franchise)]] would become "Transformers: Generation 2 (franchise)", [[Revenge of the Fallen (franchise)]] would become "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (franchise)", etc. I don't think we'd need to make that change happen instantly, but we could slowly propagate it as people feel inclined to. I also think we can keep the parenthetical abbreviations and in-sentence references as short as they currently are; this is only about the titles.

Thoughts?

- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 18:43, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:What are these "Transformers"? -[[Special:Contributions/75.185.113.106|75.185.113.106]] 18:58, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::I've always been for having the full name as article titles. (Maybe also drop the "(franchise)" disambigs, because durr, but that's other topic.) Not only do we keep the full name of the subject, it aids us in disambiguation (it's easier to have smaller sets of "Transformers: Cybertron" and "Cybertron" than a large set of just "Cybertron"). [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 19:22, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::I don't have an opinion on adding or removing "Transformers:" from articles (other than that adding it would perhaps make articles and reading unnecessarily longer - right now, I hate having to type out "Transformers Animated" before "The AllSpark Almanac"), but I do oppose removing (franchise). If there's one thing I hate, it's when there's one 'most important' page that goes undisamb'ed (like Spark) and you'll have to go through a lot of trouble to ensure it all is meant to link there. When I cleaned up the Lithone links for planet and species, nearly every single one link directed the wrong way. Same for D-HQ, AllSpark vs Allspark, Junkion, Black Friday, etc. So, keep (franchise). [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 01:49, 23 February 2011 (EST)

:::::I too think "Transformers: " should be kept as well as " (franchise)". --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:46, 23 February 2011 (EST)

::::I don't mind losing Transformers when it the prefix in a title that's the form of Transformers: <subtitle>, as in that case the subtitle itself is more the actual official name and "Transformers" is just tacked on as an extra identifier.

::::But in some of those things, Transformers is, well, a vital part of the thing's actual name. I mean, for instance, the Club's full official name ''is'' "Hasbro Transformers Collectors' Club", so removing "Transformers" from it would be incorrect. --[[Special:Contributions/67.252.49.31|67.252.49.31]] 03:00, 23 February 2011 (EST)

:::::I don't think that distinction is clear enough to be workable anymore. Looking at that list, tons of them I have no idea which side of the divide they'd fall on. For instance, "[[Transformers Legends]]" is the proper title of the book; that's how it would be listed in any store or library, but for ''our'' purposes the "TF" is as extraneous as the one that we omit from [[Energon (comic)]] or [[Dinobots Strike Back]]. The "for our purposes" thing is so often so questionable... like, what would that dictate for [[Transformers: The Ultimate Guide]]? It's definitely a subtitle situation like you described, but there are lots of non-TF "Ultimate Guide"s published by the same company... but we would never cover them, so for our purposes is the "TF" still redundant?
:::::I agree with Geewunling that it would be annoying to have to type out longer titles (though readability should be unchanged, since I think we could still truncate in-sentence references). But right NOW it's annoying that our lack of a coherent policy is making everything increasingly unpredictable. We're seeing a lot of creep in the form of stuff like [[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] and for some reason video games. So I don't even know what should be "corrected" anymore or how to decide the matter when creating a new article.
:::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 13:58, 23 February 2011 (EST)

::::::The annoyance of editors doesn't really enter into my consideration; the wiki is ultimately for the readers, not our convenience. If we have to do some more work for the best presentation, so be it. —Interrobang, not logged in

:I'm OK with moving articles to put Transformers into the title so long as we don't delete the redirects. If we move "Revenge of the Fallen (film)" to "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (film)", there are going to be a whole bunch of sites linking to the old URL, and I don't wanna have a repeat of the "(Shattered Glass)" thing where all the redirects get deleted and a whole lot of other sites are pointing to useless error pages. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:25, 23 February 2011 (EST)

=="(WFC)" vs. "(Prime)"==
There are currently [[Talk:Transformers: War for Cybertron (franchise)#"(WFC)" instead of "(Prime)" for characters that originated in this franchise?|two]] [[Talk:Optimus Prime (Prime)#Move|discussions]] going about whether articles on subjects that originated in ''War for Cybertron''-branded fiction (the [[War for Cybertron games|games]], [[Exodus: The Official History of the War for Cybertron|novel]], and [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (comic)|comic]]) should be titled "(WFC)" rather than "(Prime)". It was suggested that this should be brought up in the Community Portal, so here it is.

For the record, looking at [[War for Cybertron games#Featured Characters|this list]], right now we're using "(Prime)" for all named characters, even those currently exclusive to WfC, and "(WFC)" for all character ''types'' from the games. I'm not sure why that is, but that's the state of things.

- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 17:46, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:I completely agree with Jackpot. It is stupid we have an article called [[Ultra Magnus (Prime)]] stating "Ultra Magnus is an Autobot Wrecker from the WFC portion of the Aligned family continuity". I blame myself for not doing this a lot earlier, treating the WFC navbox as like a subsection of Prime when the novel was so clearly a tie-in to those games. [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 18:48, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::WFC is a tie-in game. As I pointed out, how many Mini-Cons from the PS2 Transformers game use the disambiguator "(Transformers)"? And even then, what of novel-original characters? Do they get "(Exodus)"? And heck, didn't Exodus come out ''before'' WFC? Shouldn't the characters thusly use "(Exodus)" over "(WFC)" or "(Prime)"? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 18:57, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::: The book and game came out on the same day, as I recall. So... yeah. I'm completely against this. We used "Prime" because that was the name we WERE using for the continuity family; frankly, I find this wishy-washy "aligned continuity family" thing pretty lame. The core of the damn family is the Prime cartoon. It is THE central feature, and will be THE major fictional outlet and -almost assuredly- what future non-show fictions will adhere more closely to. I don't see the point in all this subdividing and adding more parantheticals. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 19:19, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::I find it ''extremely'' hard to believe that if Hasbro's "decade" plan goes through, ''Prime'' is the last franchise we're going to see spring from it. Even Aaron Archer thinks "Prime" is a bad name for the overall deal. Given what a fractured start it's already off to, I think separating out the "family" foundation is the only sensible thing to do. So that's why [[Aligned continuity family]] exists.
::::As for the "(WFC)" notion, I'm not as personally attached to that, even though I do think it's the correct thing to do. Mostly I think that WfC needs to be acknowledged as an entity unto itself, not just a subset of ''Prime''. Strictly from a branding point of view, it ISN'T a subset; nothing has been both WfC- and Prime-branded. It's not just the title of a video game; it's in the titles of [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (comic)|a comic]] and [[Exodus: The Official History of the War for Cybertron|a novel]], plus they've made [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (franchise)#Toys|toys from it]] that definitely don't fit the ''Prime'' brand. (True, the toys aren't labeled "WfC", but that's par for the course with ''Generations'' anyway. At the very least, it's a grey area.) Beyond branding, it just has a unique aesthetic and sensibility that's very different from ''Prime''.
::::Based on all that, the best place WfC fits in our schema is as a "franchise", to my judgement. "''Prime'' tie-in" doesn't cut it.
::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:55, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:::WFC is not ''just'' a tie-in game. It has [http://www.hasbro.com/transformers/en_US/play/details.cfm?guid=7fcfb1b5-19b9-f369-10be-e91a2108d9ab online bios] and [http://www.hasbro.com/transformers/en_US/play/details.cfm?guid=7fd5ecd9-19b9-f369-1041-a7635be83172 online timeline]. Hasbro made it its own thing. Franchise-like. Before any Prime show started we learned from the timeline that [[Megatron (Prime)|D-16]] was an Energon mine laborer and rose to prominence in secret gladiatorial combat and took the name "Megatron". So [[Megatron (Prime)]] had a whole history before the show even existed. The non-show characters with the (Prime) disambiguation also shows it doesn't quite fit. I'd go for WFC. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:35, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::AGAIN, Exodus came out the SAME DAY. So why does WFC get prominence? --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 19:56, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::::Because that's the phrase that's used in the names of [[War for Cybertron games|all]] [[Exodus: The Official History of the War for Cybertron|the]] [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (comic)|media]]. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 20:02, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::::I don't see how the subline "The official history of the war for Cybertron" is the exact same as "War For Cybertron: The Vidya Game". --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 20:24, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::I agree. Aside from three (ambiguous) words on the book's front, there's not much that says it's part of the WFC "franchise". Same for Generations. If they wanted to, they could have made figures of every War for Cybertron character and released it in a toyline explicitly called "Transformers: War for Cybertron". But they didn't; they just released five toys based on WFC designs and released them under Generations, so Generations is a WFC toy line as much as it is a G1 one (actually, probably more of G1 considering how very few WFC toys there were). The video games are only different because of hardware limitations, so having multiple games with the same title does not a franchise make. Having a website with bios and everything is a moot point, because almost every video game has that. The comic, I'll give you that one, but I don't think it's a franchise if it's a game and a tie-in comic with a limited release. --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 20:30, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::::::For what it's worth, when you [http://www.hasbro.com/transformers/en_US/discover/movie-news/Transformers-War-for-Cybertron.cfm click on "War For Cybertron"] it brings up all the Generations toys. I also think the WFC timeline ties in Exodus to WFC since the events in the comic and timeline are basically from the book. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 20:48, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::::It also brings up PCC Icepick (item 12 of 12, on page 2). --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 20:52, 28 February 2011 (EST)

::::::::The WfC-branded timeline and comic both cover events in ''Exodus''. Hell, the comic was written by the same dude. I don't understand the logic that says that the "War for Cybertron" in the novel's title doesn't mean the same thing. If there were a novel called "Deuteronomy: The Official History of the Beast Wars" set during the events of the cartoon, I wouldn't be trying to say it was part of the ''Beast Machines'' franchise.
::::::::Let me put in a slightly different light: Because franchises are branding-based, not continuity-based, I'm not comfortable with the ''Prime'' franchise being stretched to include all this stuff that doesn't have the ''Prime'' label on it. Yes, it's clearly all RELATED, story-wise, but that's what [[Aligned continuity family|continuity pages]] are for. This feels like taking ''Machine Wars'' (which is the opposite kind of sparse: a toyline with virtually no fiction) and rolling it into G2. Sure, they're in the same family, and there are connections between the two, but they're not marketed with the same label, so we don't do it. Before ''Prime'' existed, there were these other forms of media sharing a unique title (that even got the TF-logo lockup treatment!) and covering common ground. Then ''Prime'' showed up, and so far the two labels have not been seen on the same product. To me, that means two franchises.
::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 21:20, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::But... there is no overarching label on the products we have poked into the WFC "Franchise". "Transformers: War for Cybertron" has its own logo which is also on the tie-in comic, and Exodus has its own logo. They're still prequels to TF:Prime. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:33, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::::::::I guess I just see the "War for Cybertron" in the title of ''Exodus'' as having more meaning than you do. Yeah, Hasbro could've been more blatant if they'd wanted to, but it's still clearly telling the reader it's part of the same deal as the WfC games and comic, without making any reference to ''Prime'' (or vice-versa). I can imagine a situation where the ''Prime'' branding might retroactively subsume WfC, like how the "Wreckers" comic was given the ''Universe'' brand (they say there's another game coming out, after all). But that hasn't happened yet, so in the meantime I say WfC doesn't belong under the ''Prime'' franchise.
::::::::::Anyway, at this point if we don't see eye-to-eye, we probably won't, so I'm going to shut up now.
::::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 22:39, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:What about the next thing after ''Prime'' that is in the Modern/Aligned continuity? We would have a new disambiguation, like, "Spike (Next Franchise)." and characters that have never been in Prime, like "Ultra Magnus (Prime)." Kind of confusing. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 21:57, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::No it isn't. The idea that WFC/Exodus are part of a big wad of continuity colloquially known as "Prime", and referred to as "Prime" because the "Prime" cartoon is THE core of the whole shebang, and will liekly BE said core for the near future, is not a hard one. It only gets confusing when you start letting obfuscating pedantry in, at which point you're only making more work for no payoff and making things harder for our readers. A trend which seems to keep coming up over and over again, I've noticed... --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 22:09, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::I'm pretty sure I've had my share of "obfuscating pedantry" moments, but I completely agree with Siph on this one. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 22:18, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::For the record, if people really think that using "(WFC)" would be confounding to readers, that's not a decision I'm very invested in. This discussion has ballooned into bigger issues that I ''do'' feel more strongly about, but the parenthetical itself is very take-it-or-leave-it for me. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 22:39, 28 February 2011 (EST)

I would at the least support migrating characters who have thus far ''only'' appeared in WFC to the appropriate parenthetical.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:55, 1 March 2011 (EST)
:And move them back if they appear in Prime? [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 11:03, 1 March 2011 (EST)
::Yes. I think that would make the most sense to people looking for the characters.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 11:24, 4 March 2011 (EST)
:::I am willing to make this compromise for the time being. [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 14:27, 4 March 2011 (EST)

==War For Cybertron==
War for cybertron is a relativley new game, but it is a great one. I am kind of new on this website, but to me, it looks like the War For Cybertron title has gotten mixed up with Transformers: Prime, a completley diffrent universe. also, WFC is G1 Canon. All the WFC pages and articles should be labled on G1, MAJOR cleanup is needed. {{unsigned|Holymoses|06:30, March 3, 2011 (EST)}}
:You clearly ''are'' quite new, because we would advise you to read [[Aligned continuity family|this article]] before you start in on this notion. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 06:33, 3 March 2011 (EST)
:In Hasbro's own words: "The TRANSFORMERS brand team would like to confirm that Transformers War for Cybertron video game, Transformers Exodus novel, and the Transformers Prime television show are in the same aligned continuity. Hasbro is creating a single continuity to tell the bulk of our TRANSFORMERS stories going forward." Here's the [http://www.allspark.com/content/view/8189/20/ link] to the announcement --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 06:45, 3 March 2011 (EST)
::You aren't completely wrong. The game developers were heavily inspired by G1, and were pretty much making a G1 game as far as they knew. It's just that, like Khajidha said, Hasbro says War for Cybertron is part of the same continuity as Prime, so that's what the wiki goes with. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 00:00, 4 March 2011 (EST)

Well that still seems weird, since "Prime" has a completley diffrent story, and "Exodus" doesnt connect the two sagas very well. even if its what Hasbro said, i think we should put all this into consideration, Aaron Archer himself said that War for Cybertron was a game set in the G1 Universe. I think its wrong of Hasbro to try and connect the two diffrent Continuities. {{unsigned|Holymoses|09:12, March 4, 2011 (EST)}}
:First of all, when did Aaron Archer say that? Second, Hasbro gets to define what is in each continuity for the simple reason that it is their intellectual property. It may not be to your liking, but it cannot be wrong as they are the ones who determine what is right. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:35, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::Yeah, gonna need a source on that Archer statement. Especially since he's been amongst the ones saying WFC/Exodus is part of the new continuity. Also, weren't a lot of elements in WFC, like Dark Energon, Hasbro mandates from a story bible they supplied the creators (hereby proving that Hasbro's intent was always for it to be part of the new continuity), or am I imagining things again? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 10:08, 4 March 2011 (EST)
:::From what I read about that production bible, it is a result of guys at Hasbro sitting down and "[http://collider.com/roberto-orci-jeff-kline-interview-transformers-prime/75039/ coalescing all the mythologies] that they had institutionally for years. Actually putting it down to paper." It sounds like they were just collecting and not adding new stuff in. I wouldn't be surprised if Dark Energon were added ''after'' it was in the game. And what about timing? Orci said Hasbro put together the bible after the movies came out (in mid 2009). The video game came out in mid 2010 with a video game lead time of ??? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 11:27, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::::Unless Dark Energon is actually just the new name for Angolmois energy. The name may have been taken from the video game, but the concept could well have been in the production bible before WFC. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 11:37, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::::What a load of supposition and crap. I hereby dub it "crapposition". I can pretty much say that you are completely wrong. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 12:38, 4 March 2011 (EST)
:::::[http://www.joystiq.com/2010/05/05/interview-matt-tieger-of-high-moon-studios-on-transformers/ Matt Tieger said] that High Moon started working on WfC when they shipped their "Bourne" game, which according to the accompanying notes was mid-2008, between the first movie and RotF. [http://www.cheatcc.com/extra/interviewtransformerswarforcybertron2.html This interview] talks up the G1 inspiration and then says the WfC storyline is "a completely original story that we made up at High Moon. We worked closely with Hasbro..." The consistent impression I've gotten from several different interviews is that High Moon started from G1 and then made pitches to Hasbro, which Hasbro would provide feedback on, and eventually there was a game. The only people who I've seen actually talk about the 400-page story-bible are the ''Prime'' creators. And if Orci was being literal when he said the bible was put together "after the movie’s came out", then game development would've indeed started earlier. At the very least, it sounds pretty likely that there was some simultaneous creation.
:::::In the end, the chicken-and-egg question is basically moot because either way, WfC is part of the new deal. It doesn't matter who said the words "Dark Energon" first; it's part of the structure that binds all of the pieces, so that's that. But for nitpicking's sake, Starfield's suppositions aren't off-base from the evidence we have. Siph, if you have additional info that clarifies or contradicts any of that, please share.
:::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:44, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::::::I, similarly, have found it quite plausible when thinking on the subject to believe that High Moon could have created the idea of Dark Energon, and that Hasbro then said to themselves "We can use THAT!" and put it in the bible. It's certainly outside the realm of possibility, unless you know something we don't, Siph. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 05:24, 5 March 2011 (EST)

:Because nothing whatsoever can change in the millions of years between the WFC era and the Prime cartoon era. And yeah, good luck sourcing that Aaron claim. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 11:24, 4 March 2011 (EST)
I think that if they were in the game or in Exodus:The Offical History of the War for Cybertron, they should be labled (WFC),but if they poped into the Prime teley-show or comics, they should be labled (Prime).-[ [User:DinoDigger97|DinoDigger97]] 2:11 3 Apil 2011

== Captured-Prey ads ==

One of the things advertised there appears to be a fan-made Megatron min-figure. Seeing as how everybody was upset that the TFSource ad [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive47#TFsource_ad_buy|featured fansproject stuff]], surely, this isn't right either? [[User:Item42|Item42]] 05:33, 8 March 2011 (EST)
:Check the section back up this page titled [[#Project_Wonderful_ads|Project Wonderful ads]]. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 05:59, 8 March 2011 (EST)

== Revenge of the Fallen video game character articles - [X] Scout 1, [X] Scout 2 pages for the same design ==

With the upcoming DOTM games, I thought I should look at the ROTF game articles that were abandoned in 2009 and see if I could do anything for them. I believe it was Derik who made this decision, but I am now wondering if it is necessary to have say [[Aerialbot Scout 1]] and [[Aerialbot Scout 2]], [[Omnibot Scout 1]] and [[Omnibot Scout 2]] (and so on) considering "Scout 1" and "Scout 2" are just the two different colour schemes for these mass produced generic, nameless characters who only differ in terms of textures. Any completed articles on these will have different images, but exactly the same information. Isn't that redundant? Should we perhaps just stick both of each under Aeriabot Scout, Omnibot Scout, Stunticon Scout? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 07:14, 11 March 2011 (EST)
:According to the articles the two Aerialbot Scouts have different health, primary weapon and secondary weapon ratings. Is that enough for separation? I don't know, but it should be considered before making a decision. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:55, 11 March 2011 (EST)
::I don't even know where those stats came from - I don't believe the person who filled them in originally ever explained. Were they from a website, article or guide book? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 11:42, 11 March 2011 (EST)

== Found some much needed images, but... ==

I found them on [http://transformersiv.mforos.com/1519135/8979801-transformers-g1-aventuras-y-nostalgias-que-nunca-moriran/ this site], and I don't speak the language (I think it's Spanish) to ask for their permission to use them. The images are covers of the [[Marvel Books]] titles [[Battle at Oil Valley]], [[Summertime Coloring Book]], and [[Super Activity Book]]. That's right we don't even have an article for that last one. They also have page scans of these and other Marvel Books titles. I don't feel right just taking them for our use here and was wondering if someone who spoke the lingo would contact them for us. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:21, 12 March 2011 (EST)
:Nevermind, Google Chrome finally remembered that it had translational abilities. The poster is offering them for download to all and sundry, so he/she can hardly care if we borrow them. I'll probably still insert a link to the main site out of courtesy. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 11:22, 12 March 2011 (EST)
::After looking at them, I realized that they were Steve Stonebreaker's scans. I have contacted him and received permission to use them here. I'll be adding more soon. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:55, 16 March 2011 (EDT)

== Hey, I've got a new user talk page template request... ==
[[Image:Rebirth1 Hardhead and Blurr.jpg|right|thumb|300px|TOO MANY QUOTES]]
Can we have one that reminds folks that every new thing in Transformers that even vaguely reminds you of an old thing in Transformers IS NOT A REFERENCE AND THAT IS NOT HOW REFERENCES WORK AND STOP PUTTING THEM IN THE "TRANSFORMERS REFERENCES" SECTION. Ahem. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 23:18, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
:You mean like [[Template:notareference|this]]? --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 23:22, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
::Hooray! --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 23:30, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
:::Brilliant. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 02:39, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::That's an oldie, but a goodie. Personally, I'm wondering if there's any template that can be set up for the people that just drown episode articles in quotes... --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:42, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::I think we'd first need a consensus on how many quotes are appropriate. [[User:JW|JW]] 07:41, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::It's a conversation that needs to be had, I think. You have to take length of the story into account - there are more quotes in a two hour movie than in a twenty five minute episode. I'd put the early cutoff at around five for episodes, though. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 08:00, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::I like the idera of a mximum of 5 per 30 minutes (or part thereof) for Episodes & movies, but what would be a good size for comics? I'd say around 3 per issue, but it breaks down with short issues and back up stories (i.e.e most of the Marvel UK exclusive stuff...) [[User:G1MarvelBlaster|G1MarvelBlaster]] 10:19, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::I'd set a "soft" limit higher for 30-minute episodes {{m-}} around 10 quotes {{m-}} and I'd allow more than that if the episode was particularly well-written or quotable. I don't think there's any need for a low, hard limit, as I don't think lots of quotes hurt the wiki until we get into "quoting the whole darn episode" territory. Heck, in fact, I might favor a policy of ''judging each quote for itself.'' I.e., if a quote is good/noteworthy/illustrative/funny/wadeva, it can be kept, even if there are two dozen other quotes already. Each must stand on its merits, but there would be no hard cap. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:31, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::Yeah, some episodes happen to have a lot of funny/significant/memorable lines, others don't. If we set a hard cap, we might be damning ourselves to a lot of pointless fights over which quotes deserve to be included under the arbitrary limit. I'm more in favor of making a list of criteria that we can point to when we weed lame quotes out.
:::::::::Oh, and I support making a template. ''Prime'' Soundwave is the best character I can think of to use, but Movie Bumblebee or G1 Wreck-Gar would also be appropriate. Or a shot of G1 Soundwave with a tape inside of him? Can't think of a good header, though...
:::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 11:49, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::I mainly suggested it as a starting point because if it comes down to putting each quote in place based on "which one we like more" the talk pages are going to be absolutely horrible. HOW CAN YOU LEAVE OUT MY FAVORITE QUOTE IT IS SO FUNNY AND RELEVANT. The "5 per 30 minutes" is just a suggestion - obviously an episode that's really funny or poignant can get more. Comics issues we could maybe use pagecount as a starting point. But basically, combine the two ideas. A list of criteria is a good idea, but we also need to avoid having like, thirty quotes for a given story, twelve of which are totally shitty. If we get over five-six quotes, it's time to think about trimming, just because seriously, 90% of TF fiction isn't that goddamned quotable - or there are better places for the quotes. "I don't rock and roll - I burn!" belongs on Inferno's page, not on the episode it appeared in. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 11:51, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::Fair enough. Just so long as the number is sufficiently "soft" that we don't forget that our goal is high quality, not an arbitrarily low quantity. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 12:17, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::Exactly. Like I said, I think we can also judiciously use key ''character'' quotes on the ''characters''' pages. Some quotes are very episode/story specific, while others provide insight into a character's personality or mindset. I think that's a good way to winnow the chaff, you know? -hx at work not logged in gotta run
::::::::::::::The 5-6 quotes before we start trimming sounds good, especially if some more individual character based quotes can be moved to the character pages. The big problem I keep seeing with quotes is that too many people want to quote an entire scene. If it goes beyond 3 lines it's probably not what we mean by quote here. And even 3 lines is pushing it. These should really be a single line quip or a two line set up and pay off. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 14:22, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::::5 to 6 sounds like a good starting point to me as well. Khajidha makes a good point about the definition of quote. That, along with Hooks' point about using key character quotes on that character's article, should be pointed out on [[Help:Example episode article]], once it exists. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:32, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
What about block quotes? The page for Transformers (2007) is full of them. I think there should be a limit on how long the quote can be.--[[User:Megatron Prime|Megatron Prime]] 16:48, 19 May 2011 (EDT)
== Maybe a silly question, can we? ==

Ok, exposing my ignorance here, but isthere a way to search the wiki by alt-mode? If I wanted to know every TF that turns into a Helicopter say? There's not a "helicopter" catagory, so howwould I find them all? Thanks for any help.--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206|76.28.76.206]] 19:59, 19 March 2011 (EDT)
:[[Popular Earth vehicle alternate modes]] covers some characters. There's been a few vague proposals to create a new hierarchy of categories for altmodes, but it would be a lot of work, and it's generally shouted down. [[User:JW|JW]] 20:08, 19 March 2011 (EDT)
:I think the current best option if you want to do something like this is TFU.info's Identify section. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] 11:00, 30 March 2011 (EDT)

==Grimlock letter==
[[Image:Grimlock letter.jpg|thumb|right]]
I recently acquired this and thought it's exactly the sort of thing we should be covering. I had no idea it even existed until a friend sent it to me and on that thought, should we add letters from Soundwave, Ratchet(?), Dreadwind and Blaster to the Holy Grails? Was there a similar response from the US comic, and do Titan still send these letters out today from Starscream? Enquiring minds want to know. Incidentally, he said he got Tailgate as his free mini-toy. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 15:31, 29 March 2011 (EDT)
:Good find. A letter from Grimlock is pretty awesome. That should go somewhere. The Letters Page page? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:58, 29 March 2011 (EDT)
::I've added a link from there; I'll type it up verbatim if we think it's justified? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 18:09, 29 March 2011 (EDT)

== Voice actors by series ==

We have a bunch of categories for voice actors by language, but I was wondering if we should have categories for voice actors by series? Would categories like "Beast Wars voice actors" and "Victory voice actors" be useful? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:27, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

:That could be useful. It'd be better than looking up cast lists and opening up every character page, at least. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 06:30, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

::Sound like a nice idea to me. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 10:01, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

== "Just Stop" Notice? ==

Do we think there's a role for the following proposed user notice template, for users like Eagc7?

{{messagebox|image_name=War_War_Stop_It.jpg|image_width=225px|width=90%|header=Just Stop|message_text=Please stop editing this wiki. While you haven't done anything ban-worthy (yet), you are not a productive contributor. (The reasons ''why'' are above this notice on your talk page.) So, please, '''just stop.'''}}

Opinions? [[User:JW|JW]] 14:39, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:If one is created, I love this image for it! --[[User:MistaTee|MistaTee]] 15:35, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::It seems a bit rude, but the image would be ''perfect'' if this is made. --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 15:45, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:::If this gets phrased differently, I'd support it. Right now, the text's too rude. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 15:52, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::::I think it is meant to be rude and probably should be rude. This tag is designed to be placed on the talk pages of people who have seemingly ignored the multiple instances of other tags. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 15:57, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

I'm a little iffy on this proposal. I admit that Eagc7 has a very poor grasp of the English language, but I'm a little uncomfortable with telling a person to leave a site just because of that. If you look over his fiction edits (the ones you can read) the posts he has made are accurate, just...occasionally unreadable. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 16:02, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
:I'm with SFH. Eagc7's English seems to be all over the place, but there are times when he gets it more or less correctly and only needs minor typo fixes. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 16:21, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
Whether a person's edits are bad enough (and bad enough all the time enough) to ask them to never post again seems like something that shouldn't be in the hands of, well, everybody. Putting a template up that says you're a bad speller or that you're not using Preview enough... that's pretty straight forward. But I dunno if I'm comfortable with giving us all a tool to shame each other off the wiki entirely. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:49, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:In addition, if someone's edits are so bad (and so consistently bad) that they're more of a nuisance than they are helpful, then that person should probably just be gotten rid of, instead of getting the Middle Finger Personified In A Template. As Detour said, yeah, Eagc7's English could use some work, but he does enough good here that I don't think he's completely poison or anything. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:51, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
I could maybe get behind the idea of a "Stop editing until you've read the complaints on your user page" template for the blissfully unaware people constantly making edits that are being undone as soon as they make them whilst ignoring comments on their user page telling them what they're doing wrong. But a template like THIS, and this sort of behavior in general, is how we end up with trolls that come by and vandalize the wiki on a daily basis for years and years. We could avoid that sort of future headache by just not being all-out douchebags to people even if they're stupid and/or their contributions are annoying. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 17:15, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:I suppose the only problem with making a "read your talk page" template is that they'll never read it. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 18:24, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::: I like this idea, too. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:01, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::Got me there. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 18:36, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:This will not go well. If someone's a real pest here, ban them. If they're being a pest but not quite that bad yet, notify them on their talkpage with whichever templates are already needed, and then if they don't clean up, ban them. We shouldn't be creating--publicly--an underclass of users. If you're allowed to have an account here, you're allowed to post--otherwise we look scummy. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 19:17, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::This is basically every stereotype of this wiki and its userbase given textbox form. I love it. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 20:33, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

The consensus seems to be against it, and the arguments are all good ones. (Kind of a pity, since the image was so perfect, but...) I withdraw the suggestion. Thanks all for weighing in! [[User:JW|JW]] 20:25, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:It is a good template despite the rudeness, but it is potentially necessary for extreme conditions as a last resort. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:01, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Is it possible that we could reuse that image for another template? Perhaps a Final Warning template, letting users know that if they don't cut their shit out, they're gonna get banned. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 21:42, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
: Clearly it should be used for a "stop edit/revert warring" template. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:32, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

== Our Blogger blog? ==

To me it appears that our blog doesn't have much use. Our twitter sends out links to occasional pages and our facebook is an easy place to congregate and talk about TFs and not take up our talk pages, but the blog hasn't been used in over half a year.

I'm thinking using it to keep track of current trends and such. We could highlight pages that are being worked on, point out users who have been creating/adding a lot to pages (i.e. Geewunling creating minor GI Joe pages, Chris McFeely going crazy with the Japanese food tie-ins). This way an editor or lurker who happens to miss a few days can easily catch up rather than having to sift through the new pages and new files (and even then if a page has just had an entirely new writeup from a stub, it wouldn't show up there).

Any thoughts on this? --[[User:Bluestreak7|Bluestreak7]] 14:21, 28 April 2011 (EDT)

:I think it would be a good way to draw attention to obscure and/or new stuff on the Wiki. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 07:46, 2 May 2011 (EDT)
::I think so, too, but there are questions left unanswered if we want to go ahead with this. Who would be given control over the posts? Should it be extra mod duties or instead given to some other veteran editors? If so, how many? Would we want weekly updates or something with less frequency? Overall, who is in the current position to grant other users the power to add posts. I can see this as a useful too, but like many things on this wiki, we need to come up with some sort of procedure before it comes to fruition. --[[User:Bluestreak7|Bluestreak7]] 11:33, 3 May 2011 (EDT)

==TFwiki in the past week==
Could someone tell me why the TFwiki has been down/inaccessible for most of the time in the past week? [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 02:04, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

:I would wager "massive spikes in traffic, as DotM stuff hits," which has happened before.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:20, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

::I thought traffic wouldn't be a likely cause since the third movie is still over a month away. Guess I was wrong. Thanks! [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 02:27, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

:::There's at least some clamor now that the toys are out there.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:46, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

::::Technical explanation or non-technical? Traffic HAS picked up a bit, the wiki hardware (such as it is) is slightly overtaxed, and we need to start doing some math on what we can separate into other servers, and how much it'll cost to do so.--[[User:McFly|McFly]] 16:15, 13 May 2011 (EDT)

:::::Cowboy time. We've moved the application server and cache to another box, and synced over the contents. If anything's missing, we can try to sync it over from the old webserver, but it wouldn't be off by more than a few minutes, so here's hoping that we're back in business!--[[User:McFly|McFly]] 15:43, 17 May 2011 (EDT)

::::::No wonder the connection becomes smooth again recently. Nice Works!! --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 22:45, 17 May 2011 (EDT)

:::::::Yeah, I'd noticed that the site was back to normal. Thanks for the hard work. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 22:52, 17 May 2011 (EDT)

::::::Thanks for fixing our wiki! [[User:JW|JW]] 07:15, 18 May 2011 (EDT)

== Eagc7's movie comic section edits ==

Lately Eagc7 has been editing the somewhat neglected movie prequel comic sections in character articles, which is good. However, Eagc7 has been editing the somewhat neglected movie prequel comic sections in character articles, which is bad. I know he tries, but whenever he does this sort of thing, he just ends up creating work for somebody else to clean up, and frankly, it's easier to write stuff from scratch than it is to fix somebody's spelling & grammar, as well as trying to make the text fit the tone and style of the paragraphs surrounding it (which is important considering the Foundation comics take place during the other Movie prequel comics). I haven't read Foundation and Rising Storm, [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:Contributions/Eagc7 so I can't fix all of this myself], but that seems like a fair bit of work to fix at a time when the wiki was experiencing random downtime and BotCon is rapidly approaching (meaning a good chunk of our regular editors will not be able to edit much, and in any case would be updating stuff about/from BotCon). Like I said, I know he's trying, and he's getting much better than he used to be, but... maybe he should leave fiction edits to the professionals. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 16:27, 18 May 2011 (EDT)
:Take it up with him via his Talk Page or the E-mail a User link. If there's really a stylistic problem, then we need a Style Guide for new users to reference.--[[User:McFly|McFly]] 11:04, 19 May 2011 (EDT)

==Page views==
Where have they gone? I believe that they have disappeared from down the pages since the move a few weeks ago. Can they be put back? [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 16:09, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
: I don't recall pageviews... What in specific are you talking about? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:12, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
::I guess [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:Popularpages popular pages]? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:20, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
:::Yeah those, how often a page has been visited. I kinda liked keeping tabs on relative popularity in pages (like how Mayumi and Shinichi ''never'' lost their 2:1 view ratio). [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 16:24, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
::::The broken popular pages has apparently been a thing lately, as I noticed Abates was removing and re-adding the link to [[MediaWiki:Recentchangestext]] earlier this month. Maybe he knows more about it? --[[User:Apoc|Apoc]] 18:41, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
:::::No more than anyone else. I noticed it was gone and removed it from the template, but then it came back when we did the move so I readded it. I guess it got removed again, possibly for performance reasons? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:58, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
::::::If I had to make a poorly-educated guess, the pageview thing sounds exactly like one of the many things I had to remove from Shortpacked.com to keep it from lagging so so badly. Lots of neat little things like page tracking and stuff like that used to be on there, but they were more trouble, resources-wise, than they were worth. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:20, 29 May 2011 (EDT)

== Why is Melissa from Kiss Players on the same Page as Marissa Faireborn from G1? ==

I know they are some how connected ,but i see the two as different as G1 Starscream is to Animated Starscream ,maybe the same history ,but a little different.--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Michael Alex Kawa]] 10:43, 30 May 2011 (EDT)
:They are related in the same way that Orion Pax is related to G1 Optimus Prime. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] 10:51, 30 May 2011 (EDT)
: Marissa = Marissa. Same continuity and everything. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:02, 30 May 2011 (EDT)

== I don't know if this was what you are looking for when you asked for Kiss Players radio play translations ,but i hope this helps . ==

I found this on Youtube cause I LOVE Melissa and noticed in that Holy Grail thingy that you guys needed Kiss Players radio play translations .I hope this helps ,even if it doesn't it is still pretty cool and CUTE .I did not make it so that is noted .Here is the link so you guys can go and look to see if it what is needed ,it is the only one i can find ,if it helps i will try to find more .[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZvUg2c649Y]
--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] 18:25, 2 June 2011 (EDT)

I also found this site ,it gives a brief description of the radio play ,again i hope this helps .[http://www.toyvey.com/kisskiss/radioplay/index.html]--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] 14:32, 3 June 2011 (EDT)

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2011-06-03T18:32:07Z

Michael Alex Kawa:

__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]]
 <div class="list-header">'''New Ad Policy:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki:Ads|Ads]]
 <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]]
 <div class="list-header">'''Server Move:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving2|Arriving Take 2]]
 <div class="list-header">'''Relicensing:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Relicensing|Relicensing]]
 <div class="list-header">'''Dealing With Vandalism:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Vandalism|Vandalism]]
 <div class="list-header">'''GoBots Sister Wiki:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/GoBots|Discussion on the place of GoBots in this wiki]]
}} 

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


==Didn't we have a Transformers Appearances/References in Other Media page?==
I could have sworn we did, mentioning stuff like Family guy etc. If we don't have such a page, would it be allowed to be created? [[User:Drmick|Drmick]] 11:53, 18 December 2010 (EST)
:Unless it's officially sanctioned by Hasbro, no, we do not mention Transformer appearances in other media. --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 11:54, 18 December 2010 (EST)
:: If it ever existed, it would have been destroyed with fire in about 30 seconds. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 12:46, 18 December 2010 (EST)
::: Of course, if we did have such a page, we could use it as a lighting rod, keep anons from adding something to Soundwave's page every time Seth Green says the word "transformers." -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 16:28, 18 December 2010 (EST)
::::Of course, NO. Discussion over. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 16:45, 18 December 2010 (EST)
::::Discussion not quite over. If the unofficial nature of the topic is the reason why it is not allowed, then there are several articles that already exist that are pushing boundaries on the wiki. I would have thought that the biggest problem would be it's size.[[User:Drmick|Drmick]] 09:26, 20 December 2010 (EST)
:::::Yeah, that'd be the other big reason. There's so many such references it would be impossible to keep track of them all. It would also involve making sure what's added there is actually a TF reference. And given all the Toms, Dicks and Harrys that'll come out of the woodwork to add such stuff, that's going to be more trouble than not having a page. Best not to get a larger headache for the sake of reducing a smaller one. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 12:44, 20 December 2010 (EST)

=="Knockoff warning" for toy sections?==
Just something that occurred to me... as I skimmed this page http://www.highendtfs.com/?q=node/17 and looked at alllllll the "could be mistaken for real and paid stupid money for" knockoffs... is there any objection to some form of link to this in the relevant toy sections? Sadly, the page lacks a "jump to" feature of any kind, but alerting people to the potential danger of dropping several hundred on what they think is a genuine Defensor box set... --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 02:50, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:I think it skirts the line with our "we don't really discuss knockoffs" policy, but on the other hand, yeah, it's a useful bit of information, almost to the point where we could stand to have a special page about ''these specific knockoffs''. I am not opposed to adding a link to that site, no, as long as it's got a massive and specific caveat attached to it (maybe even with a special template box thing ("A Prime Problem"-themed perhaps?)). Hell, maybe the highendtfs people would be willing to throw up navigation in exchange for the inevitable deluge of hits - anyone got contact info for the owner? [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 09:11, 19 December 2010 (EST)

::It's worth noting that there are some very well-done Henkei seekers knockoffs now, too. The really expensive ones even, like Thundercracker. Their sections could use warnings as well. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 17:56, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:::Are they in knockoff PACKAGING that is meant to look like the real thing? That's the really tricky part. G1 MIB shit is much, much more expensive. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 20:27, 19 December 2010 (EST)
::::Yes, they are: http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/news/buyer-beware-update-on-ko-henkei-seekers/20380/ -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 23:03, 19 December 2010 (EST)

::I am not sure I want to attach more template boxes to pages as is. Especially over something like knockoffs. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 20:55, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:::I'd ''thought'' about a template, but... ehn. I think a simple link under the TFU.info (or whatever), perhaps with a bolded "'''Knockoff alert'''" text. Like...

::::*''[http://www.highendtfs.com/?q=node/17 '''Knockoff alert''': More information on packaged imitations of this toy at HighendTFs.com]''

:::Thoughts? This would ONLY cover stuff that is in packaging meant to deceive you by looking as real as they can get it. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 21:05, 19 December 2010 (EST)

::::I could agree with that. This is a step beyond your standard knock off crap, some notice might be appropriate.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 21:44, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:::::I think it is a good idea to have it, since it is useful. This is different from putting info of some KO or unlicensed products on the page. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:49, 19 December 2010 (EST)

== Extension:Oversight ==

Quite a few times I've seen admins delete and undelete pages to clean out bad revisions. Why they do this I have no idea, since we have [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Oversight the Oversight extension] installed.

Perhaps we should look into granting some people "oversighter" access? --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 05:09, 25 December 2010 (EST)
:I've just noticed that deleting and then restoring pages in the manner mentioned above has the side effect of resetting a page's page views stats, so that's another point in favour of the Oversight extension. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:40, 11 January 2011 (EST)

== Wikipedia, revisited ==

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#The_.22Campaign_of_Deletion.22_against_the_Transformers_Wiki_Project_by_NotARealWord_and_TFWiki.net]

Just in case anyone's interested. --[[Special:Contributions/84.193.193.10|84.193.193.10]] 10:54, 5 January 2011 (EST) (-Blackout-, can't be bothered to log back in)
:NEWSFLASH: Nobody cares. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 16:21, 5 January 2011 (EST)

== Captcha to prevent spambots? ==

Is there any way we could implement captcha to account creation to prevent the spambot problem we're having now? I've seen other wikis use that measure. Maybe also disable new page creation by anons? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 12:56, 6 January 2011 (EST)
:We already have CAPTCHA implemented on the account creation service. --[[Special:Contributions/84.193.193.10|84.193.193.10]] 13:09, 6 January 2011 (EST) (-Blackout-, can't be bothered to log in)
::Never mind, then! [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 13:30, 6 January 2011 (EST)

== Real world events by day Category ==

These of course comprise every date of the year. However, I notice recently people have been adding fictional events to these dates. That basically invalidates the Category, since it's no longer comprised of only real-world events. The fictional events should be moved out into another section, or the category name should be changed to "Events by day". Thoughts? --[[User:MistaTee|MistaTee]] 22:01, 9 January 2011 (EST)
:I agree with changing to "Events by day". I would also support having separate fictional and real world sections on the pages. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 22:38, 9 January 2011 (EST)

== Project Wonderful ads ==

Um, guys, I found there [http://www.projectwonderful.com/img/uploads/pics/53018-1293943633.gif Non-official products] in the ads of CapturedPrey. I know the small ads are showing up randomly (and may not be controllable since we can't regulate them), but I think it is still need to be reported here. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 01:04, 16 January 2011 (EST)
: I don't mind them in the non-permanent ads. TFSource used them all the time in their ads before we made them permanent sponsors. It was only when we made them a permanent sponsor did we ask to make them free of third-party product. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:57, 16 January 2011 (EST)

== Games <strike>fiction</strike> ==

Okay, now that [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] has flooded the character pages with stubs for 30 years worth of crappy Transformers games, can we reconsider how the Games sections are treated? I really don't think in-universe fiction descriptions are the way to handle it. [[War for Cybertron]] may've had a plot, but the majority of TF games are more in the vein of "hit things until they stop coming". A fiction section makes even less sense for games where the character selection is variable. ''"[[Hardhead (G1)#Transformers:_The_Headmasters|Hardhead]] may (or may not) have been present at this battle. Or this one. Or this..."'' Ditto for generic drone soldiers. Isn't there a way to address the games without trying to craft a sensical fiction for them? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 08:46, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:I agree. The games should appear as merchandise on all relevant characters pages, but there is no need for a fiction write up for most games on those same pages. A generic write up on the game page should suffice. Something like "An Autobot warrior participated in a battle...", with a character box listing all potential "Autobot warriors" (aka playable characters). --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:21, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::Moving games to merchandise sounds awful. It would result in amazing amounts of lost information. I have no idea what doing that would solve. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 09:44, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::I think it depends on the game - for example in the ROTF console game, while you CAN play as multiple characters, the game provides a suggested one for you. IMO, that's who "actually" did the stuff depicted in the game (and the opposing side's campaign generally suggests it as well). When you can just pick from a half-dozen dudes and it doesn't matter, then maybe a brief summary of the game's plot and a note. "Jerkwagon was one of many Autobots involved in blah blah plot synopsis bluh. NOTE: Such-and-such game allowed players to choose multiple protagonists, including Jerkwagon." [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 13:19, 25 January 2011 (EST)
I agree that Games should be their own section -- there's certainly enough of them, and they should be treated differently than keychains and what-not. But I think an out-of-universe description of the games would be better in most cases. Instead of having to write vague text like ''"As Ultra Magnus searched for the truth behind Optimus Prime's death, he battled Trypticon in a game of death and suffering."'', which is about all the plot I could wrangle out of [[Transformers: Mystery of Convoy|Convoy no Nazo]] and tells you virtually nothing, we could write something more informative, like ''"Trypticon is the boss of Stage 10."'', and describe what actually happens in the game instead of trying to make it sound like believable fiction. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 11:29, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:::My personal view on the matter is, from a character's page, I should be able to find EVERY place that character has appeared. And when we do list guys having an appearance when they're most likely an animation error in the far-background of an episode, I don't think there's any excuse to NOT list an appearance of a character wherever he might appear, including board and video games. Is that a lot of work? Yeah. But beneath all the jokes that make this place so great, this is still an encyclopedia, and purposely leaving out information out of an encyclopedia is wrong. Though I think Hooper X has the right idea... I doesn't have to be the most super-extensive write up. Heck, I was even going to suggest just having a link saying "See Return of Convoy article" or something like that. Also: I apologize if I had started getting very sloppy last night, but looking back, it was like 5 in the morning by the time I finished up. Yikes. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 14:10, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::::I totally agree that the games should be dealt with on the character pages. I'm just looking for an option other than a completely in-fiction description. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 15:14, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::::: The first idea that comes to mind is having a subsection called "Gameplay" or something like that for each game write-up, something that would be similar to a note? Though really, my main solution for stuff like that has been, up to this point, to just stick a couple of notes in the game write-up, like on [[Cheetor (BW)|Cheetor]]'s page. I'll keep on trying to think up other solutions though... --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 15:26, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::::Storylinks already serve as that, so what's the point of another link? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 15:47, 25 January 2011 (EST)

== Fiction order guide? ==

I've been over the Style guides a few times trying to find if a page like this already exists, but it doesn't look like it. I'll be the first to admit that when adding in new fiction/game subsections to a character's article, I sometimes confuse and probably put them out of order. So I've been wondering if a page that lists every fictional work and game in the proper order of each other would be a good idea? On one hand, it seems like an ABSURD amount of work for a style guide, one that would have to be CONSTANTLY updated as new things come out. On the other hand, it would be very handy to have a list to reference for character pages. Especially because it can get VERY frustrating trying to hunt down which book/cartoon/whatever came first in the same year. For those who don't understand what I'm talking about, here's an example I quickly put together, using the [[Cheetor (BW)]] and [[Optimus Prime (G1)]] pages as reference.

When listing a character's media appearances, use this sorting order:
*Fiction
**Generation 1 Marvel Comics continuity
**Generation 1 S.T.A.R.S. pack-in flyers
**Generation 1 cartoon continuity
**Generation 1 Kid Stuff Talking Story Books
**Generation 1 Big Looker Story Books
**Generation 1 Ladybird Books continuity
**''Transformers in 3-D''
**''Transformers PD Type'' comic
**''Comic Bom Bom G-2'' comic
**Beast Wars First wave toy bios
**Beast Wars Cartoon continuity
***Dawn of Future's Past
***''Beast Wars'' cartoon
***Fast Action Battlers toyline
***3H ''Tales from the Beast Wars'' comics
***IDW ''Beast Wars'' comics
***''Transformers Legends'' anthology
***''Beast Machines'' cartoon
***''Beast Machines'' toy bio
***''Universe'' comic
***''Beast Wars Metals'' comic
***Beast Wars ''Henkei! Henkei!'' pack-in comic
**Generation 1 Dreamwave comics continuity
**''G.I. Joe vs. the Transformers''
**''Transformers/G.I. Joe''
**Generation 1 IDW comics continuity
**''Hearts of Steel''
**''Music Label''
**''Henkei! Henkei!'' (pack-in comic)
**''Henkei! Henkei!'' Bun Bun manga
**Alternity
**''Robot Heroes'' comic
**''Universe'' cartoon
**Wings of Honor

Is this a good idea? Would anyone actually like to see this kind of thing, or would I just be putting a whole bunch of work into something we don't need? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:28, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:We do need standardization of section names. The section order, however, depends on order in which the character appeared in those continuities in the real world. Then the subsections are ordered by the fictional chronology. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:35, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::No wonder I get confused by this fiction order thing. @_@ I guess I might just be one of those people that will never get the hang of some of these things. And yeah, the section names was definitely something else I wanted to tackle, since I've seen at times no less than four different ways to refer to a certain media. I sometimes have to check the storylinks at the end to be sure it's all part of the same story! --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:45, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::Note that, within a continuity, flashbacks and time travel can mean that experiential fictional chronology for one character requires a different order of headings than for another. [[User:JW|JW]] 20:16, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:::In regards to standardization, I have an idea. What if we create a list of headers (kept on this page perhaps) used on Optimus Prime (G1)'s page (probably has the greatest number of different headers), use that as our initial standards list, then update it as we find other headers or decide to change the existing standards? Once we think we've covered the majority of possibilities, we could move it to a help page and make it official policy. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:49, 6 February 2011 (EST)
::::I put together [[User:Jackpot/Sandbox/Sections|a sandbox along these lines]] a couple of years ago. It hasn't been updated in quite a while, and I'm not sure it was ever actually complete, and it was the subject of [[User_talk:Jackpot/Sandbox/Sections|a bit of debate]]... but there it is, for what it's worth. (Also, I support standardization of headers, but I've run into [[Talk:Ricochet_(Headmasters)#Header|some]] [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive22#Section_naming_conventions|opposition]] over the nitty-gritty before, so best of luck.) - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 06:11, 8 February 2011 (EST)

== Foreign name reorganization ==

Is there any chance we could consider moving the foreign names somewhere else in the article other than at the top? We've already established a new standard for episodes, but characters could stand to have their names moved to their own dedicated section, likely under "Notes". There, we could add things like kana and Cyrillic forms of names not different from the English version. Opinions? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 15:56, 4 February 2011 (EST)
:I'm in favor of it. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 16:33, 4 February 2011 (EST)

::All things considered, since this is (mostly) an english-centric wiki when it comes to stuff, the foreign names do come off as being interesting trivia more than anything else. I'm in favour of this too. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:37, 4 February 2011 (EST)

:I'm fine with where they are now, personally. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 16:39, 4 February 2011 (EST)

:I can see the logic in them being moved down to notes. You've got an in-universe profile, then a bunch of out-of-universe names, then the in-universe fiction section. The only argument I have against it is that I'm used to seeing the foreign names at the top. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:05, 4 February 2011 (EST)

::If it can be moved downward (to the first entry of the notes section or a new section after the notes section) instead of being on the top, MOVE it. Originally, I'm fine withe where they are {{m-}} but that would be a character with fewer foreign names. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 19:55, 4 February 2011 (EST)
Any further opinions on this? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 00:36, 21 February 2011 (EST)
:What about cases where some of the extra names at the top are English, e.g. Omni Productions names, or preliminary or nicknames? Would they remain at the top or become notes too? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 01:29, 21 February 2011 (EST)
::The Malay dub still technically counts as foreign in my mind. Nicknames should be integrated in the introduction (or notes section), and preliminary names should have been in notes in the first place, since they aren't the characters' "real names" in any sense. Further elaboration of the preliminary names better suits the notes section, anyway. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:43, 21 February 2011 (EST)
Japanese names are often for a character in a slightly different continuity. Like "Fire Convoy" is a Car Robots character and "Optimus Prime" is an RID character, but they share the same page. Or "Flame Convoy" is a Galaxy Force character but "Scourge" is a Cybertron character. In that case they should have the Japanese name up top. The names that are just different language versions of the English character can go on bottom. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 13:18, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:... no. ''Cybertron'' and ''Galaxy Force'' are NOT different stories (Takara officially put GF back in the same timeline as the prior two series), and the ''RID/CR'' split is a unique case. In neither case should the names go up top. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 13:44, 23 February 2011 (EST)
::They are slightly different continuities. Galaxy Force doesn't have the [[Omega Frequency]] for example. And the Grand Black Hole is different. And the [[Japanese Generation 1 cartoon continuity]] is different. [[Blaster (G1)|Broadcast]] never became Twincast in English. I think Japanese names are a special case and deserve to be on top since Japanese toyline & fiction continuity is always slightly separate. But I can hit the "end" key on the keyboard easy enough. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:56, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::Every single foreign language version of something is technically a slightly different continuity, strictly due to the nature of translation. This is not a arena in which Galaxy Force is unique. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:01, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== Commercial Appearances section ==

Alright, so I plan later on to start going through characters' pages and add in a "Commercial Appearances" section where it applies (sorry, I can't this weekend... homework to do!). Several characters already have this section and a lot of these commercials have nice short animations or other interesting characterizations and tidbits that I think they bear to be included in the characters' pages. Although, much like the Games sections, I'll only be able to marginally help by adding in the section itself to let people know that there's work to be done on a character's page... MY computer is so incredibly shitty that I can't even play videos off youtube. D:

But anyways, the reason I'm bringing this up here is because before I get started, I'd like to discuss what kind of format we want for this section, so it can be done right the first time around. Obviously, where it applies, stuff like indicating who the voice actor for the character makes sense, but should the write-up be in-universe or not? Since commercials fluctuate between using a short animation telling a mini-story and just being a straight-up commercial saying "buy this toy!" should a combination of both in-universe and out-of-universe description be used? And should we count the parts where the kids brandish their action figures and talk for the character as dialog spoken by the character? That's all the questions on the subject I can really think of for now... --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 15:12, 6 February 2011 (EST)
:I would write up the animation segments in-universe so long as they're unique to the commercial (i.e. not just recycled footage from one of the cartoons). Anything else that's notable enough could qualify for an out of universe note. But I wouldn't bother with recycled animation or the kids talking for the figures. That doesn't qualify as fiction to me.
:In regards to your inability to view the commercials, would it help if you could download them in some fashion and then watch them offline? Maybe burn the videos to a DVD disc? --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:43, 6 February 2011 (EST)
::Yeah, any clips taken from pre-existing mediums would be redundant from those scenes being already covered in other sections on that character's page. Personally though, I'm still on the fence about the kids talking for the figures... I find it comparable to botcon script readings in a way... People just talking out loud for a character without any accompanying animation... I'm prone to be swayed either way. As for me viewing the commercials themselves, my spring break is a week from now. I might have access to a better computer then, but otherwise I'll just be putting in information already available on the wiki to the appropriate pages throughout the week, I guess. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 17:53, 6 February 2011 (EST)

==How to resolve monster debates?==
[[User:-Blackout-]]'s recent meltdown over being prevented from editing [[Goldbug (IDW)]] has made me think again about how policy/content discussions tend to go on this wiki. It's a big part of why I haven't been around since last summer: I found myself perpetuating these miles-long debates that few cared to read, everyone was irritated by, and most importantly ''were impossible to resolve.''

That Goldbug article is a sterling example. Right now, people are talking about it as if the [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive1|giant]] [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive2|debate]] had resolved in favor of the current setup, so changing the article at this point is taboo because it "was dealt with already." But that's not how it went at all. Blackout's dickishly unilateral edit-war was definitely the Wrong Way to reopen this, but it's also wrong to pretend that we had achieved consensus or closure on the issue.

At [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive2#Breaking down the problem|the end of the debate]], I had restated the case for [[User:Jackpot/Sandbox/Goldbug (G1)|my "Goldbug (G1)" sandbox]], which is definitely different from the current setup, and 6 other people declared support for it while 2 objected at length. But the objectors were also against the current setup: Jeysie wanted the toy gone, and Derik wanted... something inscrutable and Deriky. Combining those numbers with the [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive1#Vote Tally|premature vote]] that had been taken earlier (and adjusting for the voters who changed their minds by the end), I count:

Sandbox: 8 
Sandbox with modifications: 3 
Current page: 7 
Current page without the toy: 2

That's not consensus. That's deadlock. In fact, there were fewer votes to keep the page as-is than there were to change it in some fashion. The current setup didn't win out in terms of votes, logic, precedent, or any other measure: It won out because it was what happened to be there when the debate died of exhaustion.

So we're stuck with an awkward page that most people want to be different, encased in concrete forevermore. I don't see any way out of this situation, and I've watched the same principle play out with other debates too many times. At the very least, I wonder if it would be helpful to have a Template:Deadlock that we could slap on inconclusive debates (with a picture of [[Drift (G1)|Deadlock]], natch) so people know the true state of things.

Taking that idea further, maybe it could come with a period of enforced moratorium – say, two weeks – followed by a revote and/or a formalized "final statements" opportunity? The most extreme option I can think of is to create a "council of elders" that has the community-bestowed power to resolve intractable debates and declare relevant policy principles. Basically, a Supreme Court. I do worry that creating an authoritative heirarchy might produce even more problems, but I figured I'd throw it out there.

Thoughts? Other ideas?

- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 18:20, 9 February 2011 (EST)
: This whole argument goes to the heart of what we mean when we say two characters are "the same". The Bumblebee toy was produced and fiction was made to promote that toy, thus all of those fictions (which differ from each other) are about "the same" character. The Goldbug toy was produced with a tech spec that stated that it was "the same" character as Bumblebee. Fiction was produced to promote that toy, thus all those varying depictions of Goldbug are "the same" character as Bumblebee. The same argument applies to the differing backstories of Optimus Prime; Orion Pax and Optronix are "the same" character because they both are earlier forms of the character that was used to promote the sale of the Optimus Prime toy. The problem comes in with later stories that are not produced to promote those original toys. How do we decide what is the same? When is a character "the same character under different circumstances/in a different universe" and when is it simply an homage character? I really can't see how others see the IDW Goldbug as "the same" character as the original toy and not (as I see him) as a simple homage character. Under their viewpoint the toy belongs, under mine it doesn't. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:15, 10 February 2011 (EST)

: I NOMINATE MYSELF AS FINAL ARBITER AND SUPREME OVERLORD. all decisions will be made based on what amuses me the most. (seriously, we probably ought to have some kind of "no consensus" tag for articles like that.) [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 12:58, 10 February 2011 (EST)

Mmm...probably best not to restart the Goldbug debate itself here, Khajidha -- that would quickly distract from what Jackpot's actually asking here, which is how debates should be resolved ''in general''.

Some of the basic rules we already follow should remain. No "edit-warring"...leave it up to the Talk Pages to hash out the problem. I don't think a mere two weeks is enough to give people time to change their minds, though, especially in this crowd. One thing I notice is that despite dozens of regular contributors and hundreds overall, most Talk Page or Community Portal votes I've seen have less than 20 votes at the end. Many of these debates fly right under the radar. I'm relatively active here, but the Goldbug (IDW) chaos completely passed me by.

What about, when a Talk Page debate has clearly reached an impasse between <strike>obstinant</strike> strong-willed parties, a Vote is taken on the ''Main Page''? Some sort of easy-to-see box temporarily added to the Main Page, "above the fold" so that its visible to all visitors when they enter? It would be more noticeable than if the vote is hidden away on a single Talk Page people may or may not see. Something like ''"A [[Deadlock]] has arisen! Choose from the following choices: Should [[Goldbug (IDW)]] have the G1 toy on his page? Yes or No? (See the Goldbug (IDW) Talk Page for the full debate.)"''

I realize many debates won't be as simple as Yes or No, but if the debating parties agree in advance how to phrase the Voting Box, it could be a useful tool. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 13:07, 10 February 2011 (EST)

:Yeah, wasn't really trying to restart that debate. Was bringing up questions about general character debates, as they seem to occur quite often. But other debates also bog down, so I recognize that my questions don't apply to those debates.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 13:35, 10 February 2011 (EST)

:I like the idea of keeping a debate in the regulars' faces until a decision has been reached by enough people (at least 20? 25?). Many debates I keep away from because I think they'll disappear anyway and my vote doesn't really matter <s>and I also can't deal all that well with the aggressive nature of most debates, making it actively a lose-only situation if I'd enter</s>. I'm not sure if others feel that way, but I imagine this would be a boost for all to participate. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 13:23, 10 February 2011 (EST)
::I absolutely disagree with the premise that people who don't care enough to read the argument should have it shoved in their face until they vote. AT MOST, we should mention it somewhere prominent, like the community portal. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] 18:53, 10 February 2011 (EST)
:::I agree that essentially putting a ballot on the front page is asking for trouble. You might get the dozens of votes you're looking for, but they'll all be uninformed gut reactions. One of the reasons these debates happen is that issues can be much more complicated and subtle than they seem at first glance. Plus one would hope that the reasoning behind the winning option would help develop our policies, but if the decisions are made by the majority of an explicitly uninformed mob, it's hard to glean any substantial precedent out of that.
:::But I think an approach like that ''could'' be combined with my "final statements" suggestion. Thinking out loud here: After a cooling-off period has been declared and a set amount of time has passed, anyone who wants to present a case can write up a defense of his or her preferred option. Those are all submitted to a neutral volunteer, who then posts them simultaneously on the relevant Talk page, and those become the voting choices. No replies are allowed, only votes. We put a notice up at least on the Community Portal, possibly on the Main Page, for another set time period, then close voting and go with the majority.
:::How does that sound? Like I said, thinking out loud, so suggestions are more than welcome.
:::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:18, 10 February 2011 (EST)
::::Sounds pretty good to me. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:19, 11 February 2011 (EST)

==How featured articles are chosen==
On a side note, would a box like that also be useful to start a voting system for featured pages? Because I'm fine with Drift and Wreck-Gar and all others before, but I am absolutely clueless as to who chose them to become featured for what reasons. I'd like to see a better system for that. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 13:23, 10 February 2011 (EST)
: If there was a recently-completed article that's of respectable length, I choose it. The pool for featured articles is pretty damn small. Not many articles are finished, and the ones that are finished have usually already been Featured Articles already. Finished articles don't happen very frequently, so sometimes we find one that's close to completion near the end of a month and then push to finish it before the month is over. Sometimes we think a subject or a character is timely (like around BotCon, or before an episode or movie premiere) and push for that. If you want a heads up, Chris McFeely's [[Matrix of Leadership]] article is so totally March's. (I think Chris has the record for number of articles he's completed which have become featured.) --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:31, 10 February 2011 (EST)
: Long story short, if you want an article to be featured, finish it. That means photos for every toy and known merchandise, and storylinks (with summaries) to every piece of fiction they've appeared in. Behind the scenes information helps. The longer and more involved the article, the more appealing it is. Meaning, finishing an article for a Mini-Con who showed up in the background somewhere, or finishing an article for someone who doesn't have any illutrated appearances... these are probably not going to be featured. But people like Perceptor (G1) or Side Burn (RID) or High Wire (Armada) have enough about them to say to make an interesting featured article. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:36, 10 February 2011 (EST)
: "Long story short," my ass. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:37, 10 February 2011 (EST)
:: Have we done any episodes as Featured yet? I know the over-arching "Target 2006" article was chosen once. You'd think we could get, say [[Code of Hero]] up to that standard pretty quickly. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 07:42, 11 February 2011 (EST)
:::I really think we need to get [[BotCon]] up to that standard. We're pretty close! --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 15:22, 11 February 2011 (EST)
:::[[B.O.T. (episode)|B.O.T.]] is a Featured article about an episode. [[User:Excise|Excise]] 00:00, 16 February 2011 (EST)

== Letterers ==
On images of comic pages, do we credit the ''letterers'' by placing the image in an "Image by Letterer Name" category? We've got a few contradictory examples around. [[User:JW|JW]] 15:32, 12 February 2011 (EST)
:Okay, three options: For images currently in categories like "Images by Mike Scott" (where Mike Scott is a letterer), we can:
:# Create the category and treat letterers just like artists, inkers, and colorists.
:# Instead place them in a "Images ''lettered'' by Mike Scott" category.
:# Remove the category, and not attempt to categorize images by letterer.
:I'm probably going to go with option 3 barring dissent. [[User:JW|JW]] 17:25, 16 February 2011 (EST)
::I added galleries to a few of the pages for letterers (eg [[Bill Oakley]], [[Peri Godbold]]) on the basis that lettering can make or [[:Image:Cryotekmrrghmraghmrugghagh.jpg|break]] a comic. As well as adding the text, the letterer has to pick where the balloons will go and place, them, so they do have a large degree of control over how the comic turns out. That said, I don't know that we need to categorise images by letterer. The original intention was [[:Category talk:Images by artist|not to]], but it looks like we ended up doing it anyway, and at least one template is set up to put images into category by letterer. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:44, 16 February 2011 (EST)

:I'd vote for option 3 as well.--[[User:MistaTee|MistaTee]] 22:02, 16 February 2011 (EST)
::I'm leaning towards option 3 myself. My reasoning is that even though letterers can have a large effect on a comic, I don't see too many people wanting to find every image lettered by a given letterer. The galleries, on the other hand, are useful for demonstrating the quality of an individual's work. So those should be used. While the obsessive in me thinks we should categorize images by every applicable characteristic, it's not realistic. I don't think it benefits us enough to go through all that work for categories that only a few people might find useful. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 01:09, 17 February 2011 (EST)
'Kay, I'm going to go with option 3. This may involve editing a template or two. [[User:JW|JW]] 10:35, 17 February 2011 (EST)

== Categories by toy size class? ==
Do we ''want'' the following categories?
 Leader class toy images
 Deluxe class toy images
 Voyager class toy images
 Scout class toy images
 They currently have a very few things in them (and could obviously have many more), but the cat' pages themselves have not been created. [[User:JW|JW]] 15:43, 12 February 2011 (EST)

:No. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 16:13, 12 February 2011 (EST)

::No. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:06, 15 February 2011 (EST)

:::As long as it's only the images and not the articles, I couldn't care less. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 21:09, 15 February 2011 (EST)

:There's also a "Legends class toy images" category which has 90 images in it. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:21, 15 February 2011 (EST)

::Legends are kind of an exception because they're a different scale/play pattern, as evidenced by the upcoming Cyberverse stuff. Scouts-on-up are ''generally'' meant to intermingle, Legends aren't. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 07:41, 16 February 2011 (EST)

:I could go either way on this one. It's a lot of work to fill these categories out, but the ability to find all the Deluxe figures easily intrigues me. If we did institute this I would also think that this would be the proper place to put the "exclusive figure" categories and such. Basically, any category that pertains to a particular toy and not to the character could be tagged to the image of that toy. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 23:08, 15 February 2011 (EST)

:I've been doing them because I saw other people do them. I don't mind either way. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 05:51, 16 February 2011 (EST)
So, counting me as "no", that's three "no"s, an "I don't care", an "I don't mind either way", and an "either way/intrigues me". I think we're leaning toward "no". Final comments? [[User:JW|JW]] 07:08, 16 February 2011 (EST)

::I guess it's "no" or at least "not the time"? (Though I'm "I'm not sure".) --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 11:21, 16 February 2011 (EST)
:::I've gone with "no", and added a note to that effect to [[Transformers_Wiki:Images]]. [[User:JW|JW]] 14:27, 16 February 2011 (EST)

Ha ha, none of the no's have actually said why they've said no. Such super debating skills that. [[Special:Contributions/213.105.226.130|213.105.226.130]] 17:44, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== Undo Redone? ==

I just undid an edit, but instead of getting the automatic "Reverting edit ##### by User1 to last version by User2" summary, that box was blank. In addition, above the edit window were the captions "Current revision" and "Your text", side by side, as if there's meant to be one editable text window under each. Instead, there was only one such text window beneath them, stretching across under both captions. The page is protected so only registered users can edit it, so that MIGHT have something to do with the problem, though I doubt it.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:28, 19 February 2011 (EST)
:It doesn't automatically create an edit summary if you're doing an undo on multiple revisions, so that might be it. Not sure about the other part - it's always shown me a diff at the top of the screen when I've done an undo. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:54, 19 February 2011 (EST)
::Okay, blank edit summary's explained, because it was indeed a group of 3-4 edits being undone all at once. Still inexplicable is the fact that I just checked the page history; it didn't even accept my Undo! LoneGamer78 ended up doing it instead. I've noticed some sluggish response from the site over the past fifteen minutes or so, perhaps whatever caused that was a factor? It may never be known...--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 21:02, 19 February 2011 (EST)
:::Is it possible she just beat you to it by a few moments and thus there was an edit conflict? I've had that happen sometimes, and so there's no diff shown because now the page already matches what you were going to change it to. (Uh, does that make sense?) --[[Special:Contributions/67.252.49.31|67.252.49.31]] 22:17, 19 February 2011 (EST)
::::Can't rule it out entirely, but edit conflicts usually announce themselves as such, and they DO have two distinct editable text windows: one showing the text as it stands after someone edited while you were typing, the other as it would have been if you'd edited without interference.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 22:24, 19 February 2011 (EST)
:::::A few times I've "undone" an edit, but someone else beat me to it. It doesn't seem to show an edit conflict if that happens, probably because the change is identical to the previous one. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:06, 19 February 2011 (EST)

== Banner ad question. ==
The small side box ad (the one that's still a free-floater) currently has an ad for some webcomic. Which is fine, but one of the panels has GIANT ERECT LADY NIPPLES ALL OVER THE PLACE. I'm not offended by it, but it's, uh, something. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 06:39, 21 February 2011 (EST)
:Ah, yeah. That'd be because it's an NSFW comic called DarkBrain which is read aloud by "adult film star Tabitha Stevens." -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 16:50, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:: If people don't like it, I can yank it. I didn't think its THO was that objectionable, apparently, when I okayed it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:27, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== help ==

I cant find the latest talk please help([[User:Manmcmanman|Manmcmanman]] 15:44, 21 February 2011 (EST))
:What do you mean by the latest talk? -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 15:54, 21 February 2011 (EST)

== Revenge of the Fallen Online Games ==

So, I figured I might as well finish up the online game write-ups for Revenge of the Fallen online games, in case they go offline once Dark of the Moon comes out. But, hot damn, do I ever suck. Which means I'm not very likely to get pics of later levels in some of these games. I'll be trying to add in whatever I can to these sections, but some help would be much appreciated! --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 14:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:I can have a go at getting some screencaps tonight if no one else does. Which games in particular? I noticed some of them are already gone a couple of weeks ago, as Hasbro has redirected most of the monkeybar site they were on to the Hub site, which doesn't have them. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:58, 22 February 2011 (EST)
::Well, personally I'm having difficulty getting pics of every character's sprite from Battle for the Matrix. I'm currently working on The RPMs Devastator game. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 18:41, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:::I got caps of everyone except the Fallen, haven't uploaded them yet though. I couldn't get the [[flying drone]]s to transform either. They just seem to fly around wildly in robot mode. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:56, 23 February 2011 (EST)
::::Dang! The Fallen is the only one I can't get to either! And yeah, the flying drones are near-impossible to get a screencap of. I got a couple mid-transformation, but that's it. If any of your pics are better than mine, feel free to replace them. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 13:55, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::::I went and got pics from Flight of the Bumblebee and Allspark Highway. Unfortunately I can't get pics of Ratchet from the later since robovision isn't up anymore! Darn! I'll upload them later. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 14:45, 23 February 2011 (EST)
::::::I grabbed a screenshot of The Fallen finally. Man, that game is a memory hog. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 03:38, 25 February 2011 (EST)

== Countdown? ==

Sorry if this isn't the right place to put this, but a while back ago, there was a countdown to ROTF on the Main Page. Perhaps a countdown to DOTM would now be appropriate as it's so close?

Also, I'd appreciate it if someone could tell me how to program/insert/design/<insert verb here> a countdown on a wiki page (it's for another wiki). What template or whatever does that use? I'd be very grateful if someone could tell me.

Again, terribly sorry if this is the wrong place to say this...
 - [[User:Queso|¡Usa El Queso!]] 4:02 PM, 22 February 2011 A.D.
:Dark of the Moon countdown based on Derik's ROTF code: {{#expr: ({{ #time: U |July 1, 2011}} - {{ #time: U }})/86400 round 0}} days until [[Dark of the Moon (film)|TF: Dark of the Moon]]! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:05, 22 February 2011 (EST)

==When to omit "Transformers" from an article title==
So I got a hankering to remove the "Transformers" from [[Transformers: War for Cybertron]] and [[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] and all of their related pages, since unlike [[Transformers Animated (franchise)|Transformers Animated]], there's just no good reason to break policy for them. There are [[Revenge of the Fallen (Xbox 360/PS3/PC)|other video games that we drop the "TF" from]], and if "Prime" is too common a term, then what about "[[Energon (franchise)|Energon]]" or "[[Cybertron (franchise)|Cybertron]]"?

But then I decided to check out [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:Search?ns0=1&search=Transformers&searchx=Search&limit=500 which pages use "Transformers" in their titles,] and holyyyyyyyy crap. I copy-pasted here all the ones I found that I thought could lose the "Transformers" without negating their meaning, destroying a phrase, or otherwise severely damaging the title. (I added an "(etc.)" to each one that represents a series of identically-worded pages):

[[Transformers: War for Cybertron]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Animated (franchise)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Universe (Marvel comic)]] 
[[1-2-3 Transformers]] 
[[Transformers: Mystery of Convoy]] 
[[Hasbro Transformers Collectors' Club (magazine)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Legends]] 
[[Transformers: Beast Wars Transmetals (N64)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers: The Headmasters (video game)]] 
[[The Transformers: Battle to Save the Earth]] 
[[Transformers Armada: The Energon Within]] 
[[The Transformers Collection]] 
[[Transformers Quest]] 
[[Transformers Key Recovery: The Game]] 
[[Transformers Power Up: The Game]] 
[[Transformers Cybertron: Primus Unleashed]] 
[[Transformers PD Type]] 
[[Transformers: The Animated Movie]] 
[[Transformers Generations]] 
[[Transformers: Rise of the Chevy Autobots]] 
[[Transformers Annual 1990]] (etc.) 
[[The Transformers Sticker Book (1986)]] 
[[Beast Wars: Transformers (video game)]] 
[[Transformers: The Junior Novel]] 
[[Look and Find Transformers]] 
[[Transformers Coloring and Activity Book and Crayons]] 
[[Transformers: The Ultimate Guide]] 
[[Transformers: Learn to Count Activity Tablet]] 
[[Transformers The Reusable Sticker Book]] 
[[Transformers: The Movie Storybook]] 
[[Transformers: The Movie Guide]] 
[[Transformers Prime Time]] 
[[Transformers Mix & Match]] 
[[Transformers Comic issue 1]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers The Game (console)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Autobots/Decepticons]] 
[[Transformers History of Music 1984-1990]] 
[[Transformers: Mosaic]] 
[[Transformers Name Generator]] 
[[Transformers Battle Universe]] 
[[The Transformers: Binaltech & TF Collection Complete Guide]] 
[[The Transformers Comic Magazine]] 
[[Transformers Pop-Up Book]] 
[[Transformers Visualworks]] 
[[Transformers Tooth Tunes]] 
[[Transformers Tapestry]] 
[[Transformers Song Universe]] 
[[Transformers G1: Awakening]] 
[[Transformers Armada Annual 2004]] 
[[Transformers: Beginnings]] 
[[Transformers the Movie water]] 
[[Transformers: The Score]] 
[[Transformers: The Thirteen]] 
[[Transformers: War Within Omnibus]] 
[[Transformers: The Ride]] 
[[Beast Wars Transformers Mutating Card Game]] 
[[Beast Wars Transformers Jigsaw Puzzle]] 
[[Transformers: Kōtetsu no Yūki]] 
[[The Transformers Continuum: The Definitive Chronology]] 
[[The Transformers: Bumblebee]] 
[[Transformers Adventures]] (etc.) 
[[Top Trumps: Transformers]] 
[[Transformers Armada: Race for the Mini-Con Robots]] 
[[Transformers Armada: The Battle Begins]] 
[[Transformers Armada: Secret of the Star Saber]] 
[[Transformers Armada: The Autobots Strike Back]] 
[[Transformers Galaxy Force: Sound Pack 1]] 
[[Transformers Galaxy Force: Sound Pack 2]] 
[[Transformers Theme Song Collection]] 
[[The Transformers: Drift]] 
[[Transformers Revenge of the Fallen Annual 2010]] 
[[Transformers CyberToy]] 
[[Transformers Hall of Fame]] 
[[The Transformers: Ironhide]] 
[[Transformers Evo.]] 
[[The Transformers Legends of the Microns: Sound of Evolution Vol. 1]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Music Matrix]] 
[[Transformers Ultimate Guide]] 
[[Transformers Ultimate Guide: Revenge]] 
[[Transformers: Battle for the Matrix]] 
[[Transformers: Coloring and Activity Book and Stickers]] 
[[Transformers: Activity Book and Gel Pen]] 
[[Transformers: Sector 7]] 
[[Transformers: Cybertron Adventures]] 
[[Transformers Cards]] 
[[Transformers RPMs: Devastator's Demise]] 
[[Cadbury's Transformers Card Game]] 
[[Ridiculous Legend Transformers]] 
[[Famicom How-to Manga: Transformers: Mystery of Convoy]] 
[[Transformers Caramel]] 
[[Transformers Comic-Magazin]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Extra Comic-Sonderheft]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Super-Auswahlband]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers: Energon Valentine's cards]] 
[[The Transformers: Infestation issue 1]] 
[[The Transformers: Infestation issue 2]]

For many of them, the choice to keep or drop the "TF" seems intuitive, and many others are in a grey area... but I'll be damned if I can put into words any kind of coherent rationale. I'm seriously thinking that we've outgrown the "drop extraneous 'TF's" rule. Back when we only had a few hundred pages, it made a certain kind of sense: Why bother writing out stuff like "Transformers: Generation 2" when just "Generation 2" is equally meaningful to everyone here? Besides, isn't every page about Transformers by default? But in the past five years, both the wiki and the subject matter have exploded, and with both so many fine-grain, obscure topics being covered and so much not-strictly-TF content we've added, I don't think the policy serves us anymore. It doesn't make things simple; it makes things arbitrary and unpredictable.

So unless someone can sum up our policy in a way that makes a lick of sense, I propose: '''If a topic has an official title, then that should be used in full as the title of the relevant articles.''' Period. So [[Transformers: War for Cybertron]] and [[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] would stay right where they are, and yes, [[Generation 2 (franchise)]] would become "Transformers: Generation 2 (franchise)", [[Revenge of the Fallen (franchise)]] would become "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (franchise)", etc. I don't think we'd need to make that change happen instantly, but we could slowly propagate it as people feel inclined to. I also think we can keep the parenthetical abbreviations and in-sentence references as short as they currently are; this is only about the titles.

Thoughts?

- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 18:43, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:What are these "Transformers"? -[[Special:Contributions/75.185.113.106|75.185.113.106]] 18:58, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::I've always been for having the full name as article titles. (Maybe also drop the "(franchise)" disambigs, because durr, but that's other topic.) Not only do we keep the full name of the subject, it aids us in disambiguation (it's easier to have smaller sets of "Transformers: Cybertron" and "Cybertron" than a large set of just "Cybertron"). [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 19:22, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::I don't have an opinion on adding or removing "Transformers:" from articles (other than that adding it would perhaps make articles and reading unnecessarily longer - right now, I hate having to type out "Transformers Animated" before "The AllSpark Almanac"), but I do oppose removing (franchise). If there's one thing I hate, it's when there's one 'most important' page that goes undisamb'ed (like Spark) and you'll have to go through a lot of trouble to ensure it all is meant to link there. When I cleaned up the Lithone links for planet and species, nearly every single one link directed the wrong way. Same for D-HQ, AllSpark vs Allspark, Junkion, Black Friday, etc. So, keep (franchise). [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 01:49, 23 February 2011 (EST)

:::::I too think "Transformers: " should be kept as well as " (franchise)". --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:46, 23 February 2011 (EST)

::::I don't mind losing Transformers when it the prefix in a title that's the form of Transformers: <subtitle>, as in that case the subtitle itself is more the actual official name and "Transformers" is just tacked on as an extra identifier.

::::But in some of those things, Transformers is, well, a vital part of the thing's actual name. I mean, for instance, the Club's full official name ''is'' "Hasbro Transformers Collectors' Club", so removing "Transformers" from it would be incorrect. --[[Special:Contributions/67.252.49.31|67.252.49.31]] 03:00, 23 February 2011 (EST)

:::::I don't think that distinction is clear enough to be workable anymore. Looking at that list, tons of them I have no idea which side of the divide they'd fall on. For instance, "[[Transformers Legends]]" is the proper title of the book; that's how it would be listed in any store or library, but for ''our'' purposes the "TF" is as extraneous as the one that we omit from [[Energon (comic)]] or [[Dinobots Strike Back]]. The "for our purposes" thing is so often so questionable... like, what would that dictate for [[Transformers: The Ultimate Guide]]? It's definitely a subtitle situation like you described, but there are lots of non-TF "Ultimate Guide"s published by the same company... but we would never cover them, so for our purposes is the "TF" still redundant?
:::::I agree with Geewunling that it would be annoying to have to type out longer titles (though readability should be unchanged, since I think we could still truncate in-sentence references). But right NOW it's annoying that our lack of a coherent policy is making everything increasingly unpredictable. We're seeing a lot of creep in the form of stuff like [[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] and for some reason video games. So I don't even know what should be "corrected" anymore or how to decide the matter when creating a new article.
:::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 13:58, 23 February 2011 (EST)

::::::The annoyance of editors doesn't really enter into my consideration; the wiki is ultimately for the readers, not our convenience. If we have to do some more work for the best presentation, so be it. —Interrobang, not logged in

:I'm OK with moving articles to put Transformers into the title so long as we don't delete the redirects. If we move "Revenge of the Fallen (film)" to "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (film)", there are going to be a whole bunch of sites linking to the old URL, and I don't wanna have a repeat of the "(Shattered Glass)" thing where all the redirects get deleted and a whole lot of other sites are pointing to useless error pages. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:25, 23 February 2011 (EST)

=="(WFC)" vs. "(Prime)"==
There are currently [[Talk:Transformers: War for Cybertron (franchise)#"(WFC)" instead of "(Prime)" for characters that originated in this franchise?|two]] [[Talk:Optimus Prime (Prime)#Move|discussions]] going about whether articles on subjects that originated in ''War for Cybertron''-branded fiction (the [[War for Cybertron games|games]], [[Exodus: The Official History of the War for Cybertron|novel]], and [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (comic)|comic]]) should be titled "(WFC)" rather than "(Prime)". It was suggested that this should be brought up in the Community Portal, so here it is.

For the record, looking at [[War for Cybertron games#Featured Characters|this list]], right now we're using "(Prime)" for all named characters, even those currently exclusive to WfC, and "(WFC)" for all character ''types'' from the games. I'm not sure why that is, but that's the state of things.

- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 17:46, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:I completely agree with Jackpot. It is stupid we have an article called [[Ultra Magnus (Prime)]] stating "Ultra Magnus is an Autobot Wrecker from the WFC portion of the Aligned family continuity". I blame myself for not doing this a lot earlier, treating the WFC navbox as like a subsection of Prime when the novel was so clearly a tie-in to those games. [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 18:48, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::WFC is a tie-in game. As I pointed out, how many Mini-Cons from the PS2 Transformers game use the disambiguator "(Transformers)"? And even then, what of novel-original characters? Do they get "(Exodus)"? And heck, didn't Exodus come out ''before'' WFC? Shouldn't the characters thusly use "(Exodus)" over "(WFC)" or "(Prime)"? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 18:57, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::: The book and game came out on the same day, as I recall. So... yeah. I'm completely against this. We used "Prime" because that was the name we WERE using for the continuity family; frankly, I find this wishy-washy "aligned continuity family" thing pretty lame. The core of the damn family is the Prime cartoon. It is THE central feature, and will be THE major fictional outlet and -almost assuredly- what future non-show fictions will adhere more closely to. I don't see the point in all this subdividing and adding more parantheticals. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 19:19, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::I find it ''extremely'' hard to believe that if Hasbro's "decade" plan goes through, ''Prime'' is the last franchise we're going to see spring from it. Even Aaron Archer thinks "Prime" is a bad name for the overall deal. Given what a fractured start it's already off to, I think separating out the "family" foundation is the only sensible thing to do. So that's why [[Aligned continuity family]] exists.
::::As for the "(WFC)" notion, I'm not as personally attached to that, even though I do think it's the correct thing to do. Mostly I think that WfC needs to be acknowledged as an entity unto itself, not just a subset of ''Prime''. Strictly from a branding point of view, it ISN'T a subset; nothing has been both WfC- and Prime-branded. It's not just the title of a video game; it's in the titles of [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (comic)|a comic]] and [[Exodus: The Official History of the War for Cybertron|a novel]], plus they've made [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (franchise)#Toys|toys from it]] that definitely don't fit the ''Prime'' brand. (True, the toys aren't labeled "WfC", but that's par for the course with ''Generations'' anyway. At the very least, it's a grey area.) Beyond branding, it just has a unique aesthetic and sensibility that's very different from ''Prime''.
::::Based on all that, the best place WfC fits in our schema is as a "franchise", to my judgement. "''Prime'' tie-in" doesn't cut it.
::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:55, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:::WFC is not ''just'' a tie-in game. It has [http://www.hasbro.com/transformers/en_US/play/details.cfm?guid=7fcfb1b5-19b9-f369-10be-e91a2108d9ab online bios] and [http://www.hasbro.com/transformers/en_US/play/details.cfm?guid=7fd5ecd9-19b9-f369-1041-a7635be83172 online timeline]. Hasbro made it its own thing. Franchise-like. Before any Prime show started we learned from the timeline that [[Megatron (Prime)|D-16]] was an Energon mine laborer and rose to prominence in secret gladiatorial combat and took the name "Megatron". So [[Megatron (Prime)]] had a whole history before the show even existed. The non-show characters with the (Prime) disambiguation also shows it doesn't quite fit. I'd go for WFC. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:35, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::AGAIN, Exodus came out the SAME DAY. So why does WFC get prominence? --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 19:56, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::::Because that's the phrase that's used in the names of [[War for Cybertron games|all]] [[Exodus: The Official History of the War for Cybertron|the]] [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (comic)|media]]. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 20:02, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::::I don't see how the subline "The official history of the war for Cybertron" is the exact same as "War For Cybertron: The Vidya Game". --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 20:24, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::I agree. Aside from three (ambiguous) words on the book's front, there's not much that says it's part of the WFC "franchise". Same for Generations. If they wanted to, they could have made figures of every War for Cybertron character and released it in a toyline explicitly called "Transformers: War for Cybertron". But they didn't; they just released five toys based on WFC designs and released them under Generations, so Generations is a WFC toy line as much as it is a G1 one (actually, probably more of G1 considering how very few WFC toys there were). The video games are only different because of hardware limitations, so having multiple games with the same title does not a franchise make. Having a website with bios and everything is a moot point, because almost every video game has that. The comic, I'll give you that one, but I don't think it's a franchise if it's a game and a tie-in comic with a limited release. --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 20:30, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::::::For what it's worth, when you [http://www.hasbro.com/transformers/en_US/discover/movie-news/Transformers-War-for-Cybertron.cfm click on "War For Cybertron"] it brings up all the Generations toys. I also think the WFC timeline ties in Exodus to WFC since the events in the comic and timeline are basically from the book. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 20:48, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::::It also brings up PCC Icepick (item 12 of 12, on page 2). --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 20:52, 28 February 2011 (EST)

::::::::The WfC-branded timeline and comic both cover events in ''Exodus''. Hell, the comic was written by the same dude. I don't understand the logic that says that the "War for Cybertron" in the novel's title doesn't mean the same thing. If there were a novel called "Deuteronomy: The Official History of the Beast Wars" set during the events of the cartoon, I wouldn't be trying to say it was part of the ''Beast Machines'' franchise.
::::::::Let me put in a slightly different light: Because franchises are branding-based, not continuity-based, I'm not comfortable with the ''Prime'' franchise being stretched to include all this stuff that doesn't have the ''Prime'' label on it. Yes, it's clearly all RELATED, story-wise, but that's what [[Aligned continuity family|continuity pages]] are for. This feels like taking ''Machine Wars'' (which is the opposite kind of sparse: a toyline with virtually no fiction) and rolling it into G2. Sure, they're in the same family, and there are connections between the two, but they're not marketed with the same label, so we don't do it. Before ''Prime'' existed, there were these other forms of media sharing a unique title (that even got the TF-logo lockup treatment!) and covering common ground. Then ''Prime'' showed up, and so far the two labels have not been seen on the same product. To me, that means two franchises.
::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 21:20, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::But... there is no overarching label on the products we have poked into the WFC "Franchise". "Transformers: War for Cybertron" has its own logo which is also on the tie-in comic, and Exodus has its own logo. They're still prequels to TF:Prime. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:33, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::::::::I guess I just see the "War for Cybertron" in the title of ''Exodus'' as having more meaning than you do. Yeah, Hasbro could've been more blatant if they'd wanted to, but it's still clearly telling the reader it's part of the same deal as the WfC games and comic, without making any reference to ''Prime'' (or vice-versa). I can imagine a situation where the ''Prime'' branding might retroactively subsume WfC, like how the "Wreckers" comic was given the ''Universe'' brand (they say there's another game coming out, after all). But that hasn't happened yet, so in the meantime I say WfC doesn't belong under the ''Prime'' franchise.
::::::::::Anyway, at this point if we don't see eye-to-eye, we probably won't, so I'm going to shut up now.
::::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 22:39, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:What about the next thing after ''Prime'' that is in the Modern/Aligned continuity? We would have a new disambiguation, like, "Spike (Next Franchise)." and characters that have never been in Prime, like "Ultra Magnus (Prime)." Kind of confusing. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 21:57, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::No it isn't. The idea that WFC/Exodus are part of a big wad of continuity colloquially known as "Prime", and referred to as "Prime" because the "Prime" cartoon is THE core of the whole shebang, and will liekly BE said core for the near future, is not a hard one. It only gets confusing when you start letting obfuscating pedantry in, at which point you're only making more work for no payoff and making things harder for our readers. A trend which seems to keep coming up over and over again, I've noticed... --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 22:09, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::I'm pretty sure I've had my share of "obfuscating pedantry" moments, but I completely agree with Siph on this one. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 22:18, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::For the record, if people really think that using "(WFC)" would be confounding to readers, that's not a decision I'm very invested in. This discussion has ballooned into bigger issues that I ''do'' feel more strongly about, but the parenthetical itself is very take-it-or-leave-it for me. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 22:39, 28 February 2011 (EST)

I would at the least support migrating characters who have thus far ''only'' appeared in WFC to the appropriate parenthetical.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:55, 1 March 2011 (EST)
:And move them back if they appear in Prime? [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 11:03, 1 March 2011 (EST)
::Yes. I think that would make the most sense to people looking for the characters.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 11:24, 4 March 2011 (EST)
:::I am willing to make this compromise for the time being. [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 14:27, 4 March 2011 (EST)

==War For Cybertron==
War for cybertron is a relativley new game, but it is a great one. I am kind of new on this website, but to me, it looks like the War For Cybertron title has gotten mixed up with Transformers: Prime, a completley diffrent universe. also, WFC is G1 Canon. All the WFC pages and articles should be labled on G1, MAJOR cleanup is needed. {{unsigned|Holymoses|06:30, March 3, 2011 (EST)}}
:You clearly ''are'' quite new, because we would advise you to read [[Aligned continuity family|this article]] before you start in on this notion. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 06:33, 3 March 2011 (EST)
:In Hasbro's own words: "The TRANSFORMERS brand team would like to confirm that Transformers War for Cybertron video game, Transformers Exodus novel, and the Transformers Prime television show are in the same aligned continuity. Hasbro is creating a single continuity to tell the bulk of our TRANSFORMERS stories going forward." Here's the [http://www.allspark.com/content/view/8189/20/ link] to the announcement --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 06:45, 3 March 2011 (EST)
::You aren't completely wrong. The game developers were heavily inspired by G1, and were pretty much making a G1 game as far as they knew. It's just that, like Khajidha said, Hasbro says War for Cybertron is part of the same continuity as Prime, so that's what the wiki goes with. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 00:00, 4 March 2011 (EST)

Well that still seems weird, since "Prime" has a completley diffrent story, and "Exodus" doesnt connect the two sagas very well. even if its what Hasbro said, i think we should put all this into consideration, Aaron Archer himself said that War for Cybertron was a game set in the G1 Universe. I think its wrong of Hasbro to try and connect the two diffrent Continuities. {{unsigned|Holymoses|09:12, March 4, 2011 (EST)}}
:First of all, when did Aaron Archer say that? Second, Hasbro gets to define what is in each continuity for the simple reason that it is their intellectual property. It may not be to your liking, but it cannot be wrong as they are the ones who determine what is right. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:35, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::Yeah, gonna need a source on that Archer statement. Especially since he's been amongst the ones saying WFC/Exodus is part of the new continuity. Also, weren't a lot of elements in WFC, like Dark Energon, Hasbro mandates from a story bible they supplied the creators (hereby proving that Hasbro's intent was always for it to be part of the new continuity), or am I imagining things again? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 10:08, 4 March 2011 (EST)
:::From what I read about that production bible, it is a result of guys at Hasbro sitting down and "[http://collider.com/roberto-orci-jeff-kline-interview-transformers-prime/75039/ coalescing all the mythologies] that they had institutionally for years. Actually putting it down to paper." It sounds like they were just collecting and not adding new stuff in. I wouldn't be surprised if Dark Energon were added ''after'' it was in the game. And what about timing? Orci said Hasbro put together the bible after the movies came out (in mid 2009). The video game came out in mid 2010 with a video game lead time of ??? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 11:27, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::::Unless Dark Energon is actually just the new name for Angolmois energy. The name may have been taken from the video game, but the concept could well have been in the production bible before WFC. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 11:37, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::::What a load of supposition and crap. I hereby dub it "crapposition". I can pretty much say that you are completely wrong. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 12:38, 4 March 2011 (EST)
:::::[http://www.joystiq.com/2010/05/05/interview-matt-tieger-of-high-moon-studios-on-transformers/ Matt Tieger said] that High Moon started working on WfC when they shipped their "Bourne" game, which according to the accompanying notes was mid-2008, between the first movie and RotF. [http://www.cheatcc.com/extra/interviewtransformerswarforcybertron2.html This interview] talks up the G1 inspiration and then says the WfC storyline is "a completely original story that we made up at High Moon. We worked closely with Hasbro..." The consistent impression I've gotten from several different interviews is that High Moon started from G1 and then made pitches to Hasbro, which Hasbro would provide feedback on, and eventually there was a game. The only people who I've seen actually talk about the 400-page story-bible are the ''Prime'' creators. And if Orci was being literal when he said the bible was put together "after the movie’s came out", then game development would've indeed started earlier. At the very least, it sounds pretty likely that there was some simultaneous creation.
:::::In the end, the chicken-and-egg question is basically moot because either way, WfC is part of the new deal. It doesn't matter who said the words "Dark Energon" first; it's part of the structure that binds all of the pieces, so that's that. But for nitpicking's sake, Starfield's suppositions aren't off-base from the evidence we have. Siph, if you have additional info that clarifies or contradicts any of that, please share.
:::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:44, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::::::I, similarly, have found it quite plausible when thinking on the subject to believe that High Moon could have created the idea of Dark Energon, and that Hasbro then said to themselves "We can use THAT!" and put it in the bible. It's certainly outside the realm of possibility, unless you know something we don't, Siph. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 05:24, 5 March 2011 (EST)

:Because nothing whatsoever can change in the millions of years between the WFC era and the Prime cartoon era. And yeah, good luck sourcing that Aaron claim. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 11:24, 4 March 2011 (EST)
I think that if they were in the game or in Exodus:The Offical History of the War for Cybertron, they should be labled (WFC),but if they poped into the Prime teley-show or comics, they should be labled (Prime).-[ [User:DinoDigger97|DinoDigger97]] 2:11 3 Apil 2011

== Captured-Prey ads ==

One of the things advertised there appears to be a fan-made Megatron min-figure. Seeing as how everybody was upset that the TFSource ad [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive47#TFsource_ad_buy|featured fansproject stuff]], surely, this isn't right either? [[User:Item42|Item42]] 05:33, 8 March 2011 (EST)
:Check the section back up this page titled [[#Project_Wonderful_ads|Project Wonderful ads]]. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 05:59, 8 March 2011 (EST)

== Revenge of the Fallen video game character articles - [X] Scout 1, [X] Scout 2 pages for the same design ==

With the upcoming DOTM games, I thought I should look at the ROTF game articles that were abandoned in 2009 and see if I could do anything for them. I believe it was Derik who made this decision, but I am now wondering if it is necessary to have say [[Aerialbot Scout 1]] and [[Aerialbot Scout 2]], [[Omnibot Scout 1]] and [[Omnibot Scout 2]] (and so on) considering "Scout 1" and "Scout 2" are just the two different colour schemes for these mass produced generic, nameless characters who only differ in terms of textures. Any completed articles on these will have different images, but exactly the same information. Isn't that redundant? Should we perhaps just stick both of each under Aeriabot Scout, Omnibot Scout, Stunticon Scout? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 07:14, 11 March 2011 (EST)
:According to the articles the two Aerialbot Scouts have different health, primary weapon and secondary weapon ratings. Is that enough for separation? I don't know, but it should be considered before making a decision. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:55, 11 March 2011 (EST)
::I don't even know where those stats came from - I don't believe the person who filled them in originally ever explained. Were they from a website, article or guide book? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 11:42, 11 March 2011 (EST)

== Found some much needed images, but... ==

I found them on [http://transformersiv.mforos.com/1519135/8979801-transformers-g1-aventuras-y-nostalgias-que-nunca-moriran/ this site], and I don't speak the language (I think it's Spanish) to ask for their permission to use them. The images are covers of the [[Marvel Books]] titles [[Battle at Oil Valley]], [[Summertime Coloring Book]], and [[Super Activity Book]]. That's right we don't even have an article for that last one. They also have page scans of these and other Marvel Books titles. I don't feel right just taking them for our use here and was wondering if someone who spoke the lingo would contact them for us. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:21, 12 March 2011 (EST)
:Nevermind, Google Chrome finally remembered that it had translational abilities. The poster is offering them for download to all and sundry, so he/she can hardly care if we borrow them. I'll probably still insert a link to the main site out of courtesy. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 11:22, 12 March 2011 (EST)
::After looking at them, I realized that they were Steve Stonebreaker's scans. I have contacted him and received permission to use them here. I'll be adding more soon. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:55, 16 March 2011 (EDT)

== Hey, I've got a new user talk page template request... ==
[[Image:Rebirth1 Hardhead and Blurr.jpg|right|thumb|300px|TOO MANY QUOTES]]
Can we have one that reminds folks that every new thing in Transformers that even vaguely reminds you of an old thing in Transformers IS NOT A REFERENCE AND THAT IS NOT HOW REFERENCES WORK AND STOP PUTTING THEM IN THE "TRANSFORMERS REFERENCES" SECTION. Ahem. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 23:18, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
:You mean like [[Template:notareference|this]]? --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 23:22, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
::Hooray! --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 23:30, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
:::Brilliant. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 02:39, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::That's an oldie, but a goodie. Personally, I'm wondering if there's any template that can be set up for the people that just drown episode articles in quotes... --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:42, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::I think we'd first need a consensus on how many quotes are appropriate. [[User:JW|JW]] 07:41, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::It's a conversation that needs to be had, I think. You have to take length of the story into account - there are more quotes in a two hour movie than in a twenty five minute episode. I'd put the early cutoff at around five for episodes, though. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 08:00, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::I like the idera of a mximum of 5 per 30 minutes (or part thereof) for Episodes & movies, but what would be a good size for comics? I'd say around 3 per issue, but it breaks down with short issues and back up stories (i.e.e most of the Marvel UK exclusive stuff...) [[User:G1MarvelBlaster|G1MarvelBlaster]] 10:19, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::I'd set a "soft" limit higher for 30-minute episodes {{m-}} around 10 quotes {{m-}} and I'd allow more than that if the episode was particularly well-written or quotable. I don't think there's any need for a low, hard limit, as I don't think lots of quotes hurt the wiki until we get into "quoting the whole darn episode" territory. Heck, in fact, I might favor a policy of ''judging each quote for itself.'' I.e., if a quote is good/noteworthy/illustrative/funny/wadeva, it can be kept, even if there are two dozen other quotes already. Each must stand on its merits, but there would be no hard cap. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:31, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::Yeah, some episodes happen to have a lot of funny/significant/memorable lines, others don't. If we set a hard cap, we might be damning ourselves to a lot of pointless fights over which quotes deserve to be included under the arbitrary limit. I'm more in favor of making a list of criteria that we can point to when we weed lame quotes out.
:::::::::Oh, and I support making a template. ''Prime'' Soundwave is the best character I can think of to use, but Movie Bumblebee or G1 Wreck-Gar would also be appropriate. Or a shot of G1 Soundwave with a tape inside of him? Can't think of a good header, though...
:::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 11:49, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::I mainly suggested it as a starting point because if it comes down to putting each quote in place based on "which one we like more" the talk pages are going to be absolutely horrible. HOW CAN YOU LEAVE OUT MY FAVORITE QUOTE IT IS SO FUNNY AND RELEVANT. The "5 per 30 minutes" is just a suggestion - obviously an episode that's really funny or poignant can get more. Comics issues we could maybe use pagecount as a starting point. But basically, combine the two ideas. A list of criteria is a good idea, but we also need to avoid having like, thirty quotes for a given story, twelve of which are totally shitty. If we get over five-six quotes, it's time to think about trimming, just because seriously, 90% of TF fiction isn't that goddamned quotable - or there are better places for the quotes. "I don't rock and roll - I burn!" belongs on Inferno's page, not on the episode it appeared in. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 11:51, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::Fair enough. Just so long as the number is sufficiently "soft" that we don't forget that our goal is high quality, not an arbitrarily low quantity. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 12:17, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::Exactly. Like I said, I think we can also judiciously use key ''character'' quotes on the ''characters''' pages. Some quotes are very episode/story specific, while others provide insight into a character's personality or mindset. I think that's a good way to winnow the chaff, you know? -hx at work not logged in gotta run
::::::::::::::The 5-6 quotes before we start trimming sounds good, especially if some more individual character based quotes can be moved to the character pages. The big problem I keep seeing with quotes is that too many people want to quote an entire scene. If it goes beyond 3 lines it's probably not what we mean by quote here. And even 3 lines is pushing it. These should really be a single line quip or a two line set up and pay off. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 14:22, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::::5 to 6 sounds like a good starting point to me as well. Khajidha makes a good point about the definition of quote. That, along with Hooks' point about using key character quotes on that character's article, should be pointed out on [[Help:Example episode article]], once it exists. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:32, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
What about block quotes? The page for Transformers (2007) is full of them. I think there should be a limit on how long the quote can be.--[[User:Megatron Prime|Megatron Prime]] 16:48, 19 May 2011 (EDT)
== Maybe a silly question, can we? ==

Ok, exposing my ignorance here, but isthere a way to search the wiki by alt-mode? If I wanted to know every TF that turns into a Helicopter say? There's not a "helicopter" catagory, so howwould I find them all? Thanks for any help.--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206|76.28.76.206]] 19:59, 19 March 2011 (EDT)
:[[Popular Earth vehicle alternate modes]] covers some characters. There's been a few vague proposals to create a new hierarchy of categories for altmodes, but it would be a lot of work, and it's generally shouted down. [[User:JW|JW]] 20:08, 19 March 2011 (EDT)
:I think the current best option if you want to do something like this is TFU.info's Identify section. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] 11:00, 30 March 2011 (EDT)

==Grimlock letter==
[[Image:Grimlock letter.jpg|thumb|right]]
I recently acquired this and thought it's exactly the sort of thing we should be covering. I had no idea it even existed until a friend sent it to me and on that thought, should we add letters from Soundwave, Ratchet(?), Dreadwind and Blaster to the Holy Grails? Was there a similar response from the US comic, and do Titan still send these letters out today from Starscream? Enquiring minds want to know. Incidentally, he said he got Tailgate as his free mini-toy. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 15:31, 29 March 2011 (EDT)
:Good find. A letter from Grimlock is pretty awesome. That should go somewhere. The Letters Page page? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:58, 29 March 2011 (EDT)
::I've added a link from there; I'll type it up verbatim if we think it's justified? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 18:09, 29 March 2011 (EDT)

== Voice actors by series ==

We have a bunch of categories for voice actors by language, but I was wondering if we should have categories for voice actors by series? Would categories like "Beast Wars voice actors" and "Victory voice actors" be useful? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:27, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

:That could be useful. It'd be better than looking up cast lists and opening up every character page, at least. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 06:30, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

::Sound like a nice idea to me. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 10:01, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

== "Just Stop" Notice? ==

Do we think there's a role for the following proposed user notice template, for users like Eagc7?

{{messagebox|image_name=War_War_Stop_It.jpg|image_width=225px|width=90%|header=Just Stop|message_text=Please stop editing this wiki. While you haven't done anything ban-worthy (yet), you are not a productive contributor. (The reasons ''why'' are above this notice on your talk page.) So, please, '''just stop.'''}}

Opinions? [[User:JW|JW]] 14:39, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:If one is created, I love this image for it! --[[User:MistaTee|MistaTee]] 15:35, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::It seems a bit rude, but the image would be ''perfect'' if this is made. --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 15:45, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:::If this gets phrased differently, I'd support it. Right now, the text's too rude. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 15:52, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::::I think it is meant to be rude and probably should be rude. This tag is designed to be placed on the talk pages of people who have seemingly ignored the multiple instances of other tags. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 15:57, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

I'm a little iffy on this proposal. I admit that Eagc7 has a very poor grasp of the English language, but I'm a little uncomfortable with telling a person to leave a site just because of that. If you look over his fiction edits (the ones you can read) the posts he has made are accurate, just...occasionally unreadable. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 16:02, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
:I'm with SFH. Eagc7's English seems to be all over the place, but there are times when he gets it more or less correctly and only needs minor typo fixes. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 16:21, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
Whether a person's edits are bad enough (and bad enough all the time enough) to ask them to never post again seems like something that shouldn't be in the hands of, well, everybody. Putting a template up that says you're a bad speller or that you're not using Preview enough... that's pretty straight forward. But I dunno if I'm comfortable with giving us all a tool to shame each other off the wiki entirely. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:49, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:In addition, if someone's edits are so bad (and so consistently bad) that they're more of a nuisance than they are helpful, then that person should probably just be gotten rid of, instead of getting the Middle Finger Personified In A Template. As Detour said, yeah, Eagc7's English could use some work, but he does enough good here that I don't think he's completely poison or anything. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:51, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
I could maybe get behind the idea of a "Stop editing until you've read the complaints on your user page" template for the blissfully unaware people constantly making edits that are being undone as soon as they make them whilst ignoring comments on their user page telling them what they're doing wrong. But a template like THIS, and this sort of behavior in general, is how we end up with trolls that come by and vandalize the wiki on a daily basis for years and years. We could avoid that sort of future headache by just not being all-out douchebags to people even if they're stupid and/or their contributions are annoying. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 17:15, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:I suppose the only problem with making a "read your talk page" template is that they'll never read it. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 18:24, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::: I like this idea, too. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:01, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::Got me there. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 18:36, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:This will not go well. If someone's a real pest here, ban them. If they're being a pest but not quite that bad yet, notify them on their talkpage with whichever templates are already needed, and then if they don't clean up, ban them. We shouldn't be creating--publicly--an underclass of users. If you're allowed to have an account here, you're allowed to post--otherwise we look scummy. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 19:17, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::This is basically every stereotype of this wiki and its userbase given textbox form. I love it. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 20:33, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

The consensus seems to be against it, and the arguments are all good ones. (Kind of a pity, since the image was so perfect, but...) I withdraw the suggestion. Thanks all for weighing in! [[User:JW|JW]] 20:25, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:It is a good template despite the rudeness, but it is potentially necessary for extreme conditions as a last resort. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:01, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Is it possible that we could reuse that image for another template? Perhaps a Final Warning template, letting users know that if they don't cut their shit out, they're gonna get banned. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 21:42, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
: Clearly it should be used for a "stop edit/revert warring" template. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:32, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

== Our Blogger blog? ==

To me it appears that our blog doesn't have much use. Our twitter sends out links to occasional pages and our facebook is an easy place to congregate and talk about TFs and not take up our talk pages, but the blog hasn't been used in over half a year.

I'm thinking using it to keep track of current trends and such. We could highlight pages that are being worked on, point out users who have been creating/adding a lot to pages (i.e. Geewunling creating minor GI Joe pages, Chris McFeely going crazy with the Japanese food tie-ins). This way an editor or lurker who happens to miss a few days can easily catch up rather than having to sift through the new pages and new files (and even then if a page has just had an entirely new writeup from a stub, it wouldn't show up there).

Any thoughts on this? --[[User:Bluestreak7|Bluestreak7]] 14:21, 28 April 2011 (EDT)

:I think it would be a good way to draw attention to obscure and/or new stuff on the Wiki. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 07:46, 2 May 2011 (EDT)
::I think so, too, but there are questions left unanswered if we want to go ahead with this. Who would be given control over the posts? Should it be extra mod duties or instead given to some other veteran editors? If so, how many? Would we want weekly updates or something with less frequency? Overall, who is in the current position to grant other users the power to add posts. I can see this as a useful too, but like many things on this wiki, we need to come up with some sort of procedure before it comes to fruition. --[[User:Bluestreak7|Bluestreak7]] 11:33, 3 May 2011 (EDT)

==TFwiki in the past week==
Could someone tell me why the TFwiki has been down/inaccessible for most of the time in the past week? [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 02:04, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

:I would wager "massive spikes in traffic, as DotM stuff hits," which has happened before.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:20, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

::I thought traffic wouldn't be a likely cause since the third movie is still over a month away. Guess I was wrong. Thanks! [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 02:27, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

:::There's at least some clamor now that the toys are out there.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:46, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

::::Technical explanation or non-technical? Traffic HAS picked up a bit, the wiki hardware (such as it is) is slightly overtaxed, and we need to start doing some math on what we can separate into other servers, and how much it'll cost to do so.--[[User:McFly|McFly]] 16:15, 13 May 2011 (EDT)

:::::Cowboy time. We've moved the application server and cache to another box, and synced over the contents. If anything's missing, we can try to sync it over from the old webserver, but it wouldn't be off by more than a few minutes, so here's hoping that we're back in business!--[[User:McFly|McFly]] 15:43, 17 May 2011 (EDT)

::::::No wonder the connection becomes smooth again recently. Nice Works!! --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 22:45, 17 May 2011 (EDT)

:::::::Yeah, I'd noticed that the site was back to normal. Thanks for the hard work. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 22:52, 17 May 2011 (EDT)

::::::Thanks for fixing our wiki! [[User:JW|JW]] 07:15, 18 May 2011 (EDT)

== Eagc7's movie comic section edits ==

Lately Eagc7 has been editing the somewhat neglected movie prequel comic sections in character articles, which is good. However, Eagc7 has been editing the somewhat neglected movie prequel comic sections in character articles, which is bad. I know he tries, but whenever he does this sort of thing, he just ends up creating work for somebody else to clean up, and frankly, it's easier to write stuff from scratch than it is to fix somebody's spelling & grammar, as well as trying to make the text fit the tone and style of the paragraphs surrounding it (which is important considering the Foundation comics take place during the other Movie prequel comics). I haven't read Foundation and Rising Storm, [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:Contributions/Eagc7 so I can't fix all of this myself], but that seems like a fair bit of work to fix at a time when the wiki was experiencing random downtime and BotCon is rapidly approaching (meaning a good chunk of our regular editors will not be able to edit much, and in any case would be updating stuff about/from BotCon). Like I said, I know he's trying, and he's getting much better than he used to be, but... maybe he should leave fiction edits to the professionals. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 16:27, 18 May 2011 (EDT)
:Take it up with him via his Talk Page or the E-mail a User link. If there's really a stylistic problem, then we need a Style Guide for new users to reference.--[[User:McFly|McFly]] 11:04, 19 May 2011 (EDT)

==Page views==
Where have they gone? I believe that they have disappeared from down the pages since the move a few weeks ago. Can they be put back? [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 16:09, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
: I don't recall pageviews... What in specific are you talking about? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:12, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
::I guess [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:Popularpages popular pages]? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:20, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
:::Yeah those, how often a page has been visited. I kinda liked keeping tabs on relative popularity in pages (like how Mayumi and Shinichi ''never'' lost their 2:1 view ratio). [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 16:24, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
::::The broken popular pages has apparently been a thing lately, as I noticed Abates was removing and re-adding the link to [[MediaWiki:Recentchangestext]] earlier this month. Maybe he knows more about it? --[[User:Apoc|Apoc]] 18:41, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
:::::No more than anyone else. I noticed it was gone and removed it from the template, but then it came back when we did the move so I readded it. I guess it got removed again, possibly for performance reasons? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:58, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
::::::If I had to make a poorly-educated guess, the pageview thing sounds exactly like one of the many things I had to remove from Shortpacked.com to keep it from lagging so so badly. Lots of neat little things like page tracking and stuff like that used to be on there, but they were more trouble, resources-wise, than they were worth. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:20, 29 May 2011 (EDT)

== Why is Melissa from Kiss Players on the same Page as Marissa Faireborn from G1? ==

I know they are some how connected ,but i see the two as different as G1 Starscream is to Animated Starscream ,maybe the same history ,but a little different.--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Michael Alex Kawa]] 10:43, 30 May 2011 (EDT)
:They are related in the same way that Orion Pax is related to G1 Optimus Prime. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] 10:51, 30 May 2011 (EDT)
: Marissa = Marissa. Same continuity and everything. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:02, 30 May 2011 (EDT)

== I don't know if this was what you are looking for when you asked for Kiss Players radio play translations ,but i hope this helps . ==

I found this on Youtube cause I LOVE Melissa and noticed in that Holy Grail thingy that you guys needed Kiss Players radio play translations .I hope this helps ,even if it doesn't it is still pretty cool and CUTE .I did not make it so that is noted .Here is the link so you guys can go and look to see if it what is needed ,it is the only one i can find ,if it helps i will try to find more .[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZvUg2c649Y]
--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] 18:25, 2 June 2011 (EDT)
I also found this site ,it gives a brief description of the radio play ,again i hope this helps .[http://www.toyvey.com/kisskiss/radioplay/index.html]--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] 14:30, 3 June 2011 (EDT)

I also found this site ,it gives a brief description of the radio play ,again i hope this helps .[http://www.toyvey.com/kisskiss/radioplay/index.html]--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] 14:32, 3 June 2011 (EDT)

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2011-06-03T18:30:26Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* I don't know if this was what you are looking for when you asked for Kiss Players radio play translations ,but i hope this helps . */

__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]]
 <div class="list-header">'''New Ad Policy:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki:Ads|Ads]]
 <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]]
 <div class="list-header">'''Server Move:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving2|Arriving Take 2]]
 <div class="list-header">'''Relicensing:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Relicensing|Relicensing]]
 <div class="list-header">'''Dealing With Vandalism:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Vandalism|Vandalism]]
 <div class="list-header">'''GoBots Sister Wiki:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/GoBots|Discussion on the place of GoBots in this wiki]]
}} 

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


==Didn't we have a Transformers Appearances/References in Other Media page?==
I could have sworn we did, mentioning stuff like Family guy etc. If we don't have such a page, would it be allowed to be created? [[User:Drmick|Drmick]] 11:53, 18 December 2010 (EST)
:Unless it's officially sanctioned by Hasbro, no, we do not mention Transformer appearances in other media. --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 11:54, 18 December 2010 (EST)
:: If it ever existed, it would have been destroyed with fire in about 30 seconds. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 12:46, 18 December 2010 (EST)
::: Of course, if we did have such a page, we could use it as a lighting rod, keep anons from adding something to Soundwave's page every time Seth Green says the word "transformers." -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 16:28, 18 December 2010 (EST)
::::Of course, NO. Discussion over. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 16:45, 18 December 2010 (EST)
::::Discussion not quite over. If the unofficial nature of the topic is the reason why it is not allowed, then there are several articles that already exist that are pushing boundaries on the wiki. I would have thought that the biggest problem would be it's size.[[User:Drmick|Drmick]] 09:26, 20 December 2010 (EST)
:::::Yeah, that'd be the other big reason. There's so many such references it would be impossible to keep track of them all. It would also involve making sure what's added there is actually a TF reference. And given all the Toms, Dicks and Harrys that'll come out of the woodwork to add such stuff, that's going to be more trouble than not having a page. Best not to get a larger headache for the sake of reducing a smaller one. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 12:44, 20 December 2010 (EST)

=="Knockoff warning" for toy sections?==
Just something that occurred to me... as I skimmed this page http://www.highendtfs.com/?q=node/17 and looked at alllllll the "could be mistaken for real and paid stupid money for" knockoffs... is there any objection to some form of link to this in the relevant toy sections? Sadly, the page lacks a "jump to" feature of any kind, but alerting people to the potential danger of dropping several hundred on what they think is a genuine Defensor box set... --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 02:50, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:I think it skirts the line with our "we don't really discuss knockoffs" policy, but on the other hand, yeah, it's a useful bit of information, almost to the point where we could stand to have a special page about ''these specific knockoffs''. I am not opposed to adding a link to that site, no, as long as it's got a massive and specific caveat attached to it (maybe even with a special template box thing ("A Prime Problem"-themed perhaps?)). Hell, maybe the highendtfs people would be willing to throw up navigation in exchange for the inevitable deluge of hits - anyone got contact info for the owner? [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 09:11, 19 December 2010 (EST)

::It's worth noting that there are some very well-done Henkei seekers knockoffs now, too. The really expensive ones even, like Thundercracker. Their sections could use warnings as well. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 17:56, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:::Are they in knockoff PACKAGING that is meant to look like the real thing? That's the really tricky part. G1 MIB shit is much, much more expensive. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 20:27, 19 December 2010 (EST)
::::Yes, they are: http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/news/buyer-beware-update-on-ko-henkei-seekers/20380/ -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 23:03, 19 December 2010 (EST)

::I am not sure I want to attach more template boxes to pages as is. Especially over something like knockoffs. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 20:55, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:::I'd ''thought'' about a template, but... ehn. I think a simple link under the TFU.info (or whatever), perhaps with a bolded "'''Knockoff alert'''" text. Like...

::::*''[http://www.highendtfs.com/?q=node/17 '''Knockoff alert''': More information on packaged imitations of this toy at HighendTFs.com]''

:::Thoughts? This would ONLY cover stuff that is in packaging meant to deceive you by looking as real as they can get it. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 21:05, 19 December 2010 (EST)

::::I could agree with that. This is a step beyond your standard knock off crap, some notice might be appropriate.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 21:44, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:::::I think it is a good idea to have it, since it is useful. This is different from putting info of some KO or unlicensed products on the page. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:49, 19 December 2010 (EST)

== Extension:Oversight ==

Quite a few times I've seen admins delete and undelete pages to clean out bad revisions. Why they do this I have no idea, since we have [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Oversight the Oversight extension] installed.

Perhaps we should look into granting some people "oversighter" access? --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 05:09, 25 December 2010 (EST)
:I've just noticed that deleting and then restoring pages in the manner mentioned above has the side effect of resetting a page's page views stats, so that's another point in favour of the Oversight extension. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:40, 11 January 2011 (EST)

== Wikipedia, revisited ==

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#The_.22Campaign_of_Deletion.22_against_the_Transformers_Wiki_Project_by_NotARealWord_and_TFWiki.net]

Just in case anyone's interested. --[[Special:Contributions/84.193.193.10|84.193.193.10]] 10:54, 5 January 2011 (EST) (-Blackout-, can't be bothered to log back in)
:NEWSFLASH: Nobody cares. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 16:21, 5 January 2011 (EST)

== Captcha to prevent spambots? ==

Is there any way we could implement captcha to account creation to prevent the spambot problem we're having now? I've seen other wikis use that measure. Maybe also disable new page creation by anons? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 12:56, 6 January 2011 (EST)
:We already have CAPTCHA implemented on the account creation service. --[[Special:Contributions/84.193.193.10|84.193.193.10]] 13:09, 6 January 2011 (EST) (-Blackout-, can't be bothered to log in)
::Never mind, then! [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 13:30, 6 January 2011 (EST)

== Real world events by day Category ==

These of course comprise every date of the year. However, I notice recently people have been adding fictional events to these dates. That basically invalidates the Category, since it's no longer comprised of only real-world events. The fictional events should be moved out into another section, or the category name should be changed to "Events by day". Thoughts? --[[User:MistaTee|MistaTee]] 22:01, 9 January 2011 (EST)
:I agree with changing to "Events by day". I would also support having separate fictional and real world sections on the pages. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 22:38, 9 January 2011 (EST)

== Project Wonderful ads ==

Um, guys, I found there [http://www.projectwonderful.com/img/uploads/pics/53018-1293943633.gif Non-official products] in the ads of CapturedPrey. I know the small ads are showing up randomly (and may not be controllable since we can't regulate them), but I think it is still need to be reported here. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 01:04, 16 January 2011 (EST)
: I don't mind them in the non-permanent ads. TFSource used them all the time in their ads before we made them permanent sponsors. It was only when we made them a permanent sponsor did we ask to make them free of third-party product. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:57, 16 January 2011 (EST)

== Games <strike>fiction</strike> ==

Okay, now that [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] has flooded the character pages with stubs for 30 years worth of crappy Transformers games, can we reconsider how the Games sections are treated? I really don't think in-universe fiction descriptions are the way to handle it. [[War for Cybertron]] may've had a plot, but the majority of TF games are more in the vein of "hit things until they stop coming". A fiction section makes even less sense for games where the character selection is variable. ''"[[Hardhead (G1)#Transformers:_The_Headmasters|Hardhead]] may (or may not) have been present at this battle. Or this one. Or this..."'' Ditto for generic drone soldiers. Isn't there a way to address the games without trying to craft a sensical fiction for them? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 08:46, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:I agree. The games should appear as merchandise on all relevant characters pages, but there is no need for a fiction write up for most games on those same pages. A generic write up on the game page should suffice. Something like "An Autobot warrior participated in a battle...", with a character box listing all potential "Autobot warriors" (aka playable characters). --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:21, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::Moving games to merchandise sounds awful. It would result in amazing amounts of lost information. I have no idea what doing that would solve. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 09:44, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::I think it depends on the game - for example in the ROTF console game, while you CAN play as multiple characters, the game provides a suggested one for you. IMO, that's who "actually" did the stuff depicted in the game (and the opposing side's campaign generally suggests it as well). When you can just pick from a half-dozen dudes and it doesn't matter, then maybe a brief summary of the game's plot and a note. "Jerkwagon was one of many Autobots involved in blah blah plot synopsis bluh. NOTE: Such-and-such game allowed players to choose multiple protagonists, including Jerkwagon." [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 13:19, 25 January 2011 (EST)
I agree that Games should be their own section -- there's certainly enough of them, and they should be treated differently than keychains and what-not. But I think an out-of-universe description of the games would be better in most cases. Instead of having to write vague text like ''"As Ultra Magnus searched for the truth behind Optimus Prime's death, he battled Trypticon in a game of death and suffering."'', which is about all the plot I could wrangle out of [[Transformers: Mystery of Convoy|Convoy no Nazo]] and tells you virtually nothing, we could write something more informative, like ''"Trypticon is the boss of Stage 10."'', and describe what actually happens in the game instead of trying to make it sound like believable fiction. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 11:29, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:::My personal view on the matter is, from a character's page, I should be able to find EVERY place that character has appeared. And when we do list guys having an appearance when they're most likely an animation error in the far-background of an episode, I don't think there's any excuse to NOT list an appearance of a character wherever he might appear, including board and video games. Is that a lot of work? Yeah. But beneath all the jokes that make this place so great, this is still an encyclopedia, and purposely leaving out information out of an encyclopedia is wrong. Though I think Hooper X has the right idea... I doesn't have to be the most super-extensive write up. Heck, I was even going to suggest just having a link saying "See Return of Convoy article" or something like that. Also: I apologize if I had started getting very sloppy last night, but looking back, it was like 5 in the morning by the time I finished up. Yikes. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 14:10, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::::I totally agree that the games should be dealt with on the character pages. I'm just looking for an option other than a completely in-fiction description. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 15:14, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::::: The first idea that comes to mind is having a subsection called "Gameplay" or something like that for each game write-up, something that would be similar to a note? Though really, my main solution for stuff like that has been, up to this point, to just stick a couple of notes in the game write-up, like on [[Cheetor (BW)|Cheetor]]'s page. I'll keep on trying to think up other solutions though... --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 15:26, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::::Storylinks already serve as that, so what's the point of another link? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 15:47, 25 January 2011 (EST)

== Fiction order guide? ==

I've been over the Style guides a few times trying to find if a page like this already exists, but it doesn't look like it. I'll be the first to admit that when adding in new fiction/game subsections to a character's article, I sometimes confuse and probably put them out of order. So I've been wondering if a page that lists every fictional work and game in the proper order of each other would be a good idea? On one hand, it seems like an ABSURD amount of work for a style guide, one that would have to be CONSTANTLY updated as new things come out. On the other hand, it would be very handy to have a list to reference for character pages. Especially because it can get VERY frustrating trying to hunt down which book/cartoon/whatever came first in the same year. For those who don't understand what I'm talking about, here's an example I quickly put together, using the [[Cheetor (BW)]] and [[Optimus Prime (G1)]] pages as reference.

When listing a character's media appearances, use this sorting order:
*Fiction
**Generation 1 Marvel Comics continuity
**Generation 1 S.T.A.R.S. pack-in flyers
**Generation 1 cartoon continuity
**Generation 1 Kid Stuff Talking Story Books
**Generation 1 Big Looker Story Books
**Generation 1 Ladybird Books continuity
**''Transformers in 3-D''
**''Transformers PD Type'' comic
**''Comic Bom Bom G-2'' comic
**Beast Wars First wave toy bios
**Beast Wars Cartoon continuity
***Dawn of Future's Past
***''Beast Wars'' cartoon
***Fast Action Battlers toyline
***3H ''Tales from the Beast Wars'' comics
***IDW ''Beast Wars'' comics
***''Transformers Legends'' anthology
***''Beast Machines'' cartoon
***''Beast Machines'' toy bio
***''Universe'' comic
***''Beast Wars Metals'' comic
***Beast Wars ''Henkei! Henkei!'' pack-in comic
**Generation 1 Dreamwave comics continuity
**''G.I. Joe vs. the Transformers''
**''Transformers/G.I. Joe''
**Generation 1 IDW comics continuity
**''Hearts of Steel''
**''Music Label''
**''Henkei! Henkei!'' (pack-in comic)
**''Henkei! Henkei!'' Bun Bun manga
**Alternity
**''Robot Heroes'' comic
**''Universe'' cartoon
**Wings of Honor

Is this a good idea? Would anyone actually like to see this kind of thing, or would I just be putting a whole bunch of work into something we don't need? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:28, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:We do need standardization of section names. The section order, however, depends on order in which the character appeared in those continuities in the real world. Then the subsections are ordered by the fictional chronology. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:35, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::No wonder I get confused by this fiction order thing. @_@ I guess I might just be one of those people that will never get the hang of some of these things. And yeah, the section names was definitely something else I wanted to tackle, since I've seen at times no less than four different ways to refer to a certain media. I sometimes have to check the storylinks at the end to be sure it's all part of the same story! --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:45, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::Note that, within a continuity, flashbacks and time travel can mean that experiential fictional chronology for one character requires a different order of headings than for another. [[User:JW|JW]] 20:16, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:::In regards to standardization, I have an idea. What if we create a list of headers (kept on this page perhaps) used on Optimus Prime (G1)'s page (probably has the greatest number of different headers), use that as our initial standards list, then update it as we find other headers or decide to change the existing standards? Once we think we've covered the majority of possibilities, we could move it to a help page and make it official policy. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:49, 6 February 2011 (EST)
::::I put together [[User:Jackpot/Sandbox/Sections|a sandbox along these lines]] a couple of years ago. It hasn't been updated in quite a while, and I'm not sure it was ever actually complete, and it was the subject of [[User_talk:Jackpot/Sandbox/Sections|a bit of debate]]... but there it is, for what it's worth. (Also, I support standardization of headers, but I've run into [[Talk:Ricochet_(Headmasters)#Header|some]] [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive22#Section_naming_conventions|opposition]] over the nitty-gritty before, so best of luck.) - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 06:11, 8 February 2011 (EST)

== Foreign name reorganization ==

Is there any chance we could consider moving the foreign names somewhere else in the article other than at the top? We've already established a new standard for episodes, but characters could stand to have their names moved to their own dedicated section, likely under "Notes". There, we could add things like kana and Cyrillic forms of names not different from the English version. Opinions? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 15:56, 4 February 2011 (EST)
:I'm in favor of it. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 16:33, 4 February 2011 (EST)

::All things considered, since this is (mostly) an english-centric wiki when it comes to stuff, the foreign names do come off as being interesting trivia more than anything else. I'm in favour of this too. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:37, 4 February 2011 (EST)

:I'm fine with where they are now, personally. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 16:39, 4 February 2011 (EST)

:I can see the logic in them being moved down to notes. You've got an in-universe profile, then a bunch of out-of-universe names, then the in-universe fiction section. The only argument I have against it is that I'm used to seeing the foreign names at the top. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:05, 4 February 2011 (EST)

::If it can be moved downward (to the first entry of the notes section or a new section after the notes section) instead of being on the top, MOVE it. Originally, I'm fine withe where they are {{m-}} but that would be a character with fewer foreign names. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 19:55, 4 February 2011 (EST)
Any further opinions on this? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 00:36, 21 February 2011 (EST)
:What about cases where some of the extra names at the top are English, e.g. Omni Productions names, or preliminary or nicknames? Would they remain at the top or become notes too? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 01:29, 21 February 2011 (EST)
::The Malay dub still technically counts as foreign in my mind. Nicknames should be integrated in the introduction (or notes section), and preliminary names should have been in notes in the first place, since they aren't the characters' "real names" in any sense. Further elaboration of the preliminary names better suits the notes section, anyway. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:43, 21 February 2011 (EST)
Japanese names are often for a character in a slightly different continuity. Like "Fire Convoy" is a Car Robots character and "Optimus Prime" is an RID character, but they share the same page. Or "Flame Convoy" is a Galaxy Force character but "Scourge" is a Cybertron character. In that case they should have the Japanese name up top. The names that are just different language versions of the English character can go on bottom. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 13:18, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:... no. ''Cybertron'' and ''Galaxy Force'' are NOT different stories (Takara officially put GF back in the same timeline as the prior two series), and the ''RID/CR'' split is a unique case. In neither case should the names go up top. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 13:44, 23 February 2011 (EST)
::They are slightly different continuities. Galaxy Force doesn't have the [[Omega Frequency]] for example. And the Grand Black Hole is different. And the [[Japanese Generation 1 cartoon continuity]] is different. [[Blaster (G1)|Broadcast]] never became Twincast in English. I think Japanese names are a special case and deserve to be on top since Japanese toyline & fiction continuity is always slightly separate. But I can hit the "end" key on the keyboard easy enough. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:56, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::Every single foreign language version of something is technically a slightly different continuity, strictly due to the nature of translation. This is not a arena in which Galaxy Force is unique. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:01, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== Commercial Appearances section ==

Alright, so I plan later on to start going through characters' pages and add in a "Commercial Appearances" section where it applies (sorry, I can't this weekend... homework to do!). Several characters already have this section and a lot of these commercials have nice short animations or other interesting characterizations and tidbits that I think they bear to be included in the characters' pages. Although, much like the Games sections, I'll only be able to marginally help by adding in the section itself to let people know that there's work to be done on a character's page... MY computer is so incredibly shitty that I can't even play videos off youtube. D:

But anyways, the reason I'm bringing this up here is because before I get started, I'd like to discuss what kind of format we want for this section, so it can be done right the first time around. Obviously, where it applies, stuff like indicating who the voice actor for the character makes sense, but should the write-up be in-universe or not? Since commercials fluctuate between using a short animation telling a mini-story and just being a straight-up commercial saying "buy this toy!" should a combination of both in-universe and out-of-universe description be used? And should we count the parts where the kids brandish their action figures and talk for the character as dialog spoken by the character? That's all the questions on the subject I can really think of for now... --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 15:12, 6 February 2011 (EST)
:I would write up the animation segments in-universe so long as they're unique to the commercial (i.e. not just recycled footage from one of the cartoons). Anything else that's notable enough could qualify for an out of universe note. But I wouldn't bother with recycled animation or the kids talking for the figures. That doesn't qualify as fiction to me.
:In regards to your inability to view the commercials, would it help if you could download them in some fashion and then watch them offline? Maybe burn the videos to a DVD disc? --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:43, 6 February 2011 (EST)
::Yeah, any clips taken from pre-existing mediums would be redundant from those scenes being already covered in other sections on that character's page. Personally though, I'm still on the fence about the kids talking for the figures... I find it comparable to botcon script readings in a way... People just talking out loud for a character without any accompanying animation... I'm prone to be swayed either way. As for me viewing the commercials themselves, my spring break is a week from now. I might have access to a better computer then, but otherwise I'll just be putting in information already available on the wiki to the appropriate pages throughout the week, I guess. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 17:53, 6 February 2011 (EST)

==How to resolve monster debates?==
[[User:-Blackout-]]'s recent meltdown over being prevented from editing [[Goldbug (IDW)]] has made me think again about how policy/content discussions tend to go on this wiki. It's a big part of why I haven't been around since last summer: I found myself perpetuating these miles-long debates that few cared to read, everyone was irritated by, and most importantly ''were impossible to resolve.''

That Goldbug article is a sterling example. Right now, people are talking about it as if the [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive1|giant]] [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive2|debate]] had resolved in favor of the current setup, so changing the article at this point is taboo because it "was dealt with already." But that's not how it went at all. Blackout's dickishly unilateral edit-war was definitely the Wrong Way to reopen this, but it's also wrong to pretend that we had achieved consensus or closure on the issue.

At [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive2#Breaking down the problem|the end of the debate]], I had restated the case for [[User:Jackpot/Sandbox/Goldbug (G1)|my "Goldbug (G1)" sandbox]], which is definitely different from the current setup, and 6 other people declared support for it while 2 objected at length. But the objectors were also against the current setup: Jeysie wanted the toy gone, and Derik wanted... something inscrutable and Deriky. Combining those numbers with the [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive1#Vote Tally|premature vote]] that had been taken earlier (and adjusting for the voters who changed their minds by the end), I count:

Sandbox: 8 
Sandbox with modifications: 3 
Current page: 7 
Current page without the toy: 2

That's not consensus. That's deadlock. In fact, there were fewer votes to keep the page as-is than there were to change it in some fashion. The current setup didn't win out in terms of votes, logic, precedent, or any other measure: It won out because it was what happened to be there when the debate died of exhaustion.

So we're stuck with an awkward page that most people want to be different, encased in concrete forevermore. I don't see any way out of this situation, and I've watched the same principle play out with other debates too many times. At the very least, I wonder if it would be helpful to have a Template:Deadlock that we could slap on inconclusive debates (with a picture of [[Drift (G1)|Deadlock]], natch) so people know the true state of things.

Taking that idea further, maybe it could come with a period of enforced moratorium – say, two weeks – followed by a revote and/or a formalized "final statements" opportunity? The most extreme option I can think of is to create a "council of elders" that has the community-bestowed power to resolve intractable debates and declare relevant policy principles. Basically, a Supreme Court. I do worry that creating an authoritative heirarchy might produce even more problems, but I figured I'd throw it out there.

Thoughts? Other ideas?

- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 18:20, 9 February 2011 (EST)
: This whole argument goes to the heart of what we mean when we say two characters are "the same". The Bumblebee toy was produced and fiction was made to promote that toy, thus all of those fictions (which differ from each other) are about "the same" character. The Goldbug toy was produced with a tech spec that stated that it was "the same" character as Bumblebee. Fiction was produced to promote that toy, thus all those varying depictions of Goldbug are "the same" character as Bumblebee. The same argument applies to the differing backstories of Optimus Prime; Orion Pax and Optronix are "the same" character because they both are earlier forms of the character that was used to promote the sale of the Optimus Prime toy. The problem comes in with later stories that are not produced to promote those original toys. How do we decide what is the same? When is a character "the same character under different circumstances/in a different universe" and when is it simply an homage character? I really can't see how others see the IDW Goldbug as "the same" character as the original toy and not (as I see him) as a simple homage character. Under their viewpoint the toy belongs, under mine it doesn't. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:15, 10 February 2011 (EST)

: I NOMINATE MYSELF AS FINAL ARBITER AND SUPREME OVERLORD. all decisions will be made based on what amuses me the most. (seriously, we probably ought to have some kind of "no consensus" tag for articles like that.) [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 12:58, 10 February 2011 (EST)

Mmm...probably best not to restart the Goldbug debate itself here, Khajidha -- that would quickly distract from what Jackpot's actually asking here, which is how debates should be resolved ''in general''.

Some of the basic rules we already follow should remain. No "edit-warring"...leave it up to the Talk Pages to hash out the problem. I don't think a mere two weeks is enough to give people time to change their minds, though, especially in this crowd. One thing I notice is that despite dozens of regular contributors and hundreds overall, most Talk Page or Community Portal votes I've seen have less than 20 votes at the end. Many of these debates fly right under the radar. I'm relatively active here, but the Goldbug (IDW) chaos completely passed me by.

What about, when a Talk Page debate has clearly reached an impasse between <strike>obstinant</strike> strong-willed parties, a Vote is taken on the ''Main Page''? Some sort of easy-to-see box temporarily added to the Main Page, "above the fold" so that its visible to all visitors when they enter? It would be more noticeable than if the vote is hidden away on a single Talk Page people may or may not see. Something like ''"A [[Deadlock]] has arisen! Choose from the following choices: Should [[Goldbug (IDW)]] have the G1 toy on his page? Yes or No? (See the Goldbug (IDW) Talk Page for the full debate.)"''

I realize many debates won't be as simple as Yes or No, but if the debating parties agree in advance how to phrase the Voting Box, it could be a useful tool. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 13:07, 10 February 2011 (EST)

:Yeah, wasn't really trying to restart that debate. Was bringing up questions about general character debates, as they seem to occur quite often. But other debates also bog down, so I recognize that my questions don't apply to those debates.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 13:35, 10 February 2011 (EST)

:I like the idea of keeping a debate in the regulars' faces until a decision has been reached by enough people (at least 20? 25?). Many debates I keep away from because I think they'll disappear anyway and my vote doesn't really matter <s>and I also can't deal all that well with the aggressive nature of most debates, making it actively a lose-only situation if I'd enter</s>. I'm not sure if others feel that way, but I imagine this would be a boost for all to participate. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 13:23, 10 February 2011 (EST)
::I absolutely disagree with the premise that people who don't care enough to read the argument should have it shoved in their face until they vote. AT MOST, we should mention it somewhere prominent, like the community portal. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] 18:53, 10 February 2011 (EST)
:::I agree that essentially putting a ballot on the front page is asking for trouble. You might get the dozens of votes you're looking for, but they'll all be uninformed gut reactions. One of the reasons these debates happen is that issues can be much more complicated and subtle than they seem at first glance. Plus one would hope that the reasoning behind the winning option would help develop our policies, but if the decisions are made by the majority of an explicitly uninformed mob, it's hard to glean any substantial precedent out of that.
:::But I think an approach like that ''could'' be combined with my "final statements" suggestion. Thinking out loud here: After a cooling-off period has been declared and a set amount of time has passed, anyone who wants to present a case can write up a defense of his or her preferred option. Those are all submitted to a neutral volunteer, who then posts them simultaneously on the relevant Talk page, and those become the voting choices. No replies are allowed, only votes. We put a notice up at least on the Community Portal, possibly on the Main Page, for another set time period, then close voting and go with the majority.
:::How does that sound? Like I said, thinking out loud, so suggestions are more than welcome.
:::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:18, 10 February 2011 (EST)
::::Sounds pretty good to me. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:19, 11 February 2011 (EST)

==How featured articles are chosen==
On a side note, would a box like that also be useful to start a voting system for featured pages? Because I'm fine with Drift and Wreck-Gar and all others before, but I am absolutely clueless as to who chose them to become featured for what reasons. I'd like to see a better system for that. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 13:23, 10 February 2011 (EST)
: If there was a recently-completed article that's of respectable length, I choose it. The pool for featured articles is pretty damn small. Not many articles are finished, and the ones that are finished have usually already been Featured Articles already. Finished articles don't happen very frequently, so sometimes we find one that's close to completion near the end of a month and then push to finish it before the month is over. Sometimes we think a subject or a character is timely (like around BotCon, or before an episode or movie premiere) and push for that. If you want a heads up, Chris McFeely's [[Matrix of Leadership]] article is so totally March's. (I think Chris has the record for number of articles he's completed which have become featured.) --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:31, 10 February 2011 (EST)
: Long story short, if you want an article to be featured, finish it. That means photos for every toy and known merchandise, and storylinks (with summaries) to every piece of fiction they've appeared in. Behind the scenes information helps. The longer and more involved the article, the more appealing it is. Meaning, finishing an article for a Mini-Con who showed up in the background somewhere, or finishing an article for someone who doesn't have any illutrated appearances... these are probably not going to be featured. But people like Perceptor (G1) or Side Burn (RID) or High Wire (Armada) have enough about them to say to make an interesting featured article. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:36, 10 February 2011 (EST)
: "Long story short," my ass. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:37, 10 February 2011 (EST)
:: Have we done any episodes as Featured yet? I know the over-arching "Target 2006" article was chosen once. You'd think we could get, say [[Code of Hero]] up to that standard pretty quickly. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 07:42, 11 February 2011 (EST)
:::I really think we need to get [[BotCon]] up to that standard. We're pretty close! --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 15:22, 11 February 2011 (EST)
:::[[B.O.T. (episode)|B.O.T.]] is a Featured article about an episode. [[User:Excise|Excise]] 00:00, 16 February 2011 (EST)

== Letterers ==
On images of comic pages, do we credit the ''letterers'' by placing the image in an "Image by Letterer Name" category? We've got a few contradictory examples around. [[User:JW|JW]] 15:32, 12 February 2011 (EST)
:Okay, three options: For images currently in categories like "Images by Mike Scott" (where Mike Scott is a letterer), we can:
:# Create the category and treat letterers just like artists, inkers, and colorists.
:# Instead place them in a "Images ''lettered'' by Mike Scott" category.
:# Remove the category, and not attempt to categorize images by letterer.
:I'm probably going to go with option 3 barring dissent. [[User:JW|JW]] 17:25, 16 February 2011 (EST)
::I added galleries to a few of the pages for letterers (eg [[Bill Oakley]], [[Peri Godbold]]) on the basis that lettering can make or [[:Image:Cryotekmrrghmraghmrugghagh.jpg|break]] a comic. As well as adding the text, the letterer has to pick where the balloons will go and place, them, so they do have a large degree of control over how the comic turns out. That said, I don't know that we need to categorise images by letterer. The original intention was [[:Category talk:Images by artist|not to]], but it looks like we ended up doing it anyway, and at least one template is set up to put images into category by letterer. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:44, 16 February 2011 (EST)

:I'd vote for option 3 as well.--[[User:MistaTee|MistaTee]] 22:02, 16 February 2011 (EST)
::I'm leaning towards option 3 myself. My reasoning is that even though letterers can have a large effect on a comic, I don't see too many people wanting to find every image lettered by a given letterer. The galleries, on the other hand, are useful for demonstrating the quality of an individual's work. So those should be used. While the obsessive in me thinks we should categorize images by every applicable characteristic, it's not realistic. I don't think it benefits us enough to go through all that work for categories that only a few people might find useful. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 01:09, 17 February 2011 (EST)
'Kay, I'm going to go with option 3. This may involve editing a template or two. [[User:JW|JW]] 10:35, 17 February 2011 (EST)

== Categories by toy size class? ==
Do we ''want'' the following categories?
 Leader class toy images
 Deluxe class toy images
 Voyager class toy images
 Scout class toy images
 They currently have a very few things in them (and could obviously have many more), but the cat' pages themselves have not been created. [[User:JW|JW]] 15:43, 12 February 2011 (EST)

:No. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 16:13, 12 February 2011 (EST)

::No. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:06, 15 February 2011 (EST)

:::As long as it's only the images and not the articles, I couldn't care less. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 21:09, 15 February 2011 (EST)

:There's also a "Legends class toy images" category which has 90 images in it. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:21, 15 February 2011 (EST)

::Legends are kind of an exception because they're a different scale/play pattern, as evidenced by the upcoming Cyberverse stuff. Scouts-on-up are ''generally'' meant to intermingle, Legends aren't. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 07:41, 16 February 2011 (EST)

:I could go either way on this one. It's a lot of work to fill these categories out, but the ability to find all the Deluxe figures easily intrigues me. If we did institute this I would also think that this would be the proper place to put the "exclusive figure" categories and such. Basically, any category that pertains to a particular toy and not to the character could be tagged to the image of that toy. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 23:08, 15 February 2011 (EST)

:I've been doing them because I saw other people do them. I don't mind either way. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 05:51, 16 February 2011 (EST)
So, counting me as "no", that's three "no"s, an "I don't care", an "I don't mind either way", and an "either way/intrigues me". I think we're leaning toward "no". Final comments? [[User:JW|JW]] 07:08, 16 February 2011 (EST)

::I guess it's "no" or at least "not the time"? (Though I'm "I'm not sure".) --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 11:21, 16 February 2011 (EST)
:::I've gone with "no", and added a note to that effect to [[Transformers_Wiki:Images]]. [[User:JW|JW]] 14:27, 16 February 2011 (EST)

Ha ha, none of the no's have actually said why they've said no. Such super debating skills that. [[Special:Contributions/213.105.226.130|213.105.226.130]] 17:44, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== Undo Redone? ==

I just undid an edit, but instead of getting the automatic "Reverting edit ##### by User1 to last version by User2" summary, that box was blank. In addition, above the edit window were the captions "Current revision" and "Your text", side by side, as if there's meant to be one editable text window under each. Instead, there was only one such text window beneath them, stretching across under both captions. The page is protected so only registered users can edit it, so that MIGHT have something to do with the problem, though I doubt it.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:28, 19 February 2011 (EST)
:It doesn't automatically create an edit summary if you're doing an undo on multiple revisions, so that might be it. Not sure about the other part - it's always shown me a diff at the top of the screen when I've done an undo. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:54, 19 February 2011 (EST)
::Okay, blank edit summary's explained, because it was indeed a group of 3-4 edits being undone all at once. Still inexplicable is the fact that I just checked the page history; it didn't even accept my Undo! LoneGamer78 ended up doing it instead. I've noticed some sluggish response from the site over the past fifteen minutes or so, perhaps whatever caused that was a factor? It may never be known...--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 21:02, 19 February 2011 (EST)
:::Is it possible she just beat you to it by a few moments and thus there was an edit conflict? I've had that happen sometimes, and so there's no diff shown because now the page already matches what you were going to change it to. (Uh, does that make sense?) --[[Special:Contributions/67.252.49.31|67.252.49.31]] 22:17, 19 February 2011 (EST)
::::Can't rule it out entirely, but edit conflicts usually announce themselves as such, and they DO have two distinct editable text windows: one showing the text as it stands after someone edited while you were typing, the other as it would have been if you'd edited without interference.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 22:24, 19 February 2011 (EST)
:::::A few times I've "undone" an edit, but someone else beat me to it. It doesn't seem to show an edit conflict if that happens, probably because the change is identical to the previous one. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:06, 19 February 2011 (EST)

== Banner ad question. ==
The small side box ad (the one that's still a free-floater) currently has an ad for some webcomic. Which is fine, but one of the panels has GIANT ERECT LADY NIPPLES ALL OVER THE PLACE. I'm not offended by it, but it's, uh, something. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 06:39, 21 February 2011 (EST)
:Ah, yeah. That'd be because it's an NSFW comic called DarkBrain which is read aloud by "adult film star Tabitha Stevens." -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 16:50, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:: If people don't like it, I can yank it. I didn't think its THO was that objectionable, apparently, when I okayed it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:27, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== help ==

I cant find the latest talk please help([[User:Manmcmanman|Manmcmanman]] 15:44, 21 February 2011 (EST))
:What do you mean by the latest talk? -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 15:54, 21 February 2011 (EST)

== Revenge of the Fallen Online Games ==

So, I figured I might as well finish up the online game write-ups for Revenge of the Fallen online games, in case they go offline once Dark of the Moon comes out. But, hot damn, do I ever suck. Which means I'm not very likely to get pics of later levels in some of these games. I'll be trying to add in whatever I can to these sections, but some help would be much appreciated! --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 14:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:I can have a go at getting some screencaps tonight if no one else does. Which games in particular? I noticed some of them are already gone a couple of weeks ago, as Hasbro has redirected most of the monkeybar site they were on to the Hub site, which doesn't have them. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:58, 22 February 2011 (EST)
::Well, personally I'm having difficulty getting pics of every character's sprite from Battle for the Matrix. I'm currently working on The RPMs Devastator game. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 18:41, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:::I got caps of everyone except the Fallen, haven't uploaded them yet though. I couldn't get the [[flying drone]]s to transform either. They just seem to fly around wildly in robot mode. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:56, 23 February 2011 (EST)
::::Dang! The Fallen is the only one I can't get to either! And yeah, the flying drones are near-impossible to get a screencap of. I got a couple mid-transformation, but that's it. If any of your pics are better than mine, feel free to replace them. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 13:55, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::::I went and got pics from Flight of the Bumblebee and Allspark Highway. Unfortunately I can't get pics of Ratchet from the later since robovision isn't up anymore! Darn! I'll upload them later. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 14:45, 23 February 2011 (EST)
::::::I grabbed a screenshot of The Fallen finally. Man, that game is a memory hog. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 03:38, 25 February 2011 (EST)

== Countdown? ==

Sorry if this isn't the right place to put this, but a while back ago, there was a countdown to ROTF on the Main Page. Perhaps a countdown to DOTM would now be appropriate as it's so close?

Also, I'd appreciate it if someone could tell me how to program/insert/design/<insert verb here> a countdown on a wiki page (it's for another wiki). What template or whatever does that use? I'd be very grateful if someone could tell me.

Again, terribly sorry if this is the wrong place to say this...
 - [[User:Queso|¡Usa El Queso!]] 4:02 PM, 22 February 2011 A.D.
:Dark of the Moon countdown based on Derik's ROTF code: {{#expr: ({{ #time: U |July 1, 2011}} - {{ #time: U }})/86400 round 0}} days until [[Dark of the Moon (film)|TF: Dark of the Moon]]! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:05, 22 February 2011 (EST)

==When to omit "Transformers" from an article title==
So I got a hankering to remove the "Transformers" from [[Transformers: War for Cybertron]] and [[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] and all of their related pages, since unlike [[Transformers Animated (franchise)|Transformers Animated]], there's just no good reason to break policy for them. There are [[Revenge of the Fallen (Xbox 360/PS3/PC)|other video games that we drop the "TF" from]], and if "Prime" is too common a term, then what about "[[Energon (franchise)|Energon]]" or "[[Cybertron (franchise)|Cybertron]]"?

But then I decided to check out [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:Search?ns0=1&search=Transformers&searchx=Search&limit=500 which pages use "Transformers" in their titles,] and holyyyyyyyy crap. I copy-pasted here all the ones I found that I thought could lose the "Transformers" without negating their meaning, destroying a phrase, or otherwise severely damaging the title. (I added an "(etc.)" to each one that represents a series of identically-worded pages):

[[Transformers: War for Cybertron]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Animated (franchise)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Universe (Marvel comic)]] 
[[1-2-3 Transformers]] 
[[Transformers: Mystery of Convoy]] 
[[Hasbro Transformers Collectors' Club (magazine)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Legends]] 
[[Transformers: Beast Wars Transmetals (N64)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers: The Headmasters (video game)]] 
[[The Transformers: Battle to Save the Earth]] 
[[Transformers Armada: The Energon Within]] 
[[The Transformers Collection]] 
[[Transformers Quest]] 
[[Transformers Key Recovery: The Game]] 
[[Transformers Power Up: The Game]] 
[[Transformers Cybertron: Primus Unleashed]] 
[[Transformers PD Type]] 
[[Transformers: The Animated Movie]] 
[[Transformers Generations]] 
[[Transformers: Rise of the Chevy Autobots]] 
[[Transformers Annual 1990]] (etc.) 
[[The Transformers Sticker Book (1986)]] 
[[Beast Wars: Transformers (video game)]] 
[[Transformers: The Junior Novel]] 
[[Look and Find Transformers]] 
[[Transformers Coloring and Activity Book and Crayons]] 
[[Transformers: The Ultimate Guide]] 
[[Transformers: Learn to Count Activity Tablet]] 
[[Transformers The Reusable Sticker Book]] 
[[Transformers: The Movie Storybook]] 
[[Transformers: The Movie Guide]] 
[[Transformers Prime Time]] 
[[Transformers Mix & Match]] 
[[Transformers Comic issue 1]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers The Game (console)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Autobots/Decepticons]] 
[[Transformers History of Music 1984-1990]] 
[[Transformers: Mosaic]] 
[[Transformers Name Generator]] 
[[Transformers Battle Universe]] 
[[The Transformers: Binaltech & TF Collection Complete Guide]] 
[[The Transformers Comic Magazine]] 
[[Transformers Pop-Up Book]] 
[[Transformers Visualworks]] 
[[Transformers Tooth Tunes]] 
[[Transformers Tapestry]] 
[[Transformers Song Universe]] 
[[Transformers G1: Awakening]] 
[[Transformers Armada Annual 2004]] 
[[Transformers: Beginnings]] 
[[Transformers the Movie water]] 
[[Transformers: The Score]] 
[[Transformers: The Thirteen]] 
[[Transformers: War Within Omnibus]] 
[[Transformers: The Ride]] 
[[Beast Wars Transformers Mutating Card Game]] 
[[Beast Wars Transformers Jigsaw Puzzle]] 
[[Transformers: Kōtetsu no Yūki]] 
[[The Transformers Continuum: The Definitive Chronology]] 
[[The Transformers: Bumblebee]] 
[[Transformers Adventures]] (etc.) 
[[Top Trumps: Transformers]] 
[[Transformers Armada: Race for the Mini-Con Robots]] 
[[Transformers Armada: The Battle Begins]] 
[[Transformers Armada: Secret of the Star Saber]] 
[[Transformers Armada: The Autobots Strike Back]] 
[[Transformers Galaxy Force: Sound Pack 1]] 
[[Transformers Galaxy Force: Sound Pack 2]] 
[[Transformers Theme Song Collection]] 
[[The Transformers: Drift]] 
[[Transformers Revenge of the Fallen Annual 2010]] 
[[Transformers CyberToy]] 
[[Transformers Hall of Fame]] 
[[The Transformers: Ironhide]] 
[[Transformers Evo.]] 
[[The Transformers Legends of the Microns: Sound of Evolution Vol. 1]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Music Matrix]] 
[[Transformers Ultimate Guide]] 
[[Transformers Ultimate Guide: Revenge]] 
[[Transformers: Battle for the Matrix]] 
[[Transformers: Coloring and Activity Book and Stickers]] 
[[Transformers: Activity Book and Gel Pen]] 
[[Transformers: Sector 7]] 
[[Transformers: Cybertron Adventures]] 
[[Transformers Cards]] 
[[Transformers RPMs: Devastator's Demise]] 
[[Cadbury's Transformers Card Game]] 
[[Ridiculous Legend Transformers]] 
[[Famicom How-to Manga: Transformers: Mystery of Convoy]] 
[[Transformers Caramel]] 
[[Transformers Comic-Magazin]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Extra Comic-Sonderheft]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Super-Auswahlband]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers: Energon Valentine's cards]] 
[[The Transformers: Infestation issue 1]] 
[[The Transformers: Infestation issue 2]]

For many of them, the choice to keep or drop the "TF" seems intuitive, and many others are in a grey area... but I'll be damned if I can put into words any kind of coherent rationale. I'm seriously thinking that we've outgrown the "drop extraneous 'TF's" rule. Back when we only had a few hundred pages, it made a certain kind of sense: Why bother writing out stuff like "Transformers: Generation 2" when just "Generation 2" is equally meaningful to everyone here? Besides, isn't every page about Transformers by default? But in the past five years, both the wiki and the subject matter have exploded, and with both so many fine-grain, obscure topics being covered and so much not-strictly-TF content we've added, I don't think the policy serves us anymore. It doesn't make things simple; it makes things arbitrary and unpredictable.

So unless someone can sum up our policy in a way that makes a lick of sense, I propose: '''If a topic has an official title, then that should be used in full as the title of the relevant articles.''' Period. So [[Transformers: War for Cybertron]] and [[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] would stay right where they are, and yes, [[Generation 2 (franchise)]] would become "Transformers: Generation 2 (franchise)", [[Revenge of the Fallen (franchise)]] would become "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (franchise)", etc. I don't think we'd need to make that change happen instantly, but we could slowly propagate it as people feel inclined to. I also think we can keep the parenthetical abbreviations and in-sentence references as short as they currently are; this is only about the titles.

Thoughts?

- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 18:43, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:What are these "Transformers"? -[[Special:Contributions/75.185.113.106|75.185.113.106]] 18:58, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::I've always been for having the full name as article titles. (Maybe also drop the "(franchise)" disambigs, because durr, but that's other topic.) Not only do we keep the full name of the subject, it aids us in disambiguation (it's easier to have smaller sets of "Transformers: Cybertron" and "Cybertron" than a large set of just "Cybertron"). [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 19:22, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::I don't have an opinion on adding or removing "Transformers:" from articles (other than that adding it would perhaps make articles and reading unnecessarily longer - right now, I hate having to type out "Transformers Animated" before "The AllSpark Almanac"), but I do oppose removing (franchise). If there's one thing I hate, it's when there's one 'most important' page that goes undisamb'ed (like Spark) and you'll have to go through a lot of trouble to ensure it all is meant to link there. When I cleaned up the Lithone links for planet and species, nearly every single one link directed the wrong way. Same for D-HQ, AllSpark vs Allspark, Junkion, Black Friday, etc. So, keep (franchise). [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 01:49, 23 February 2011 (EST)

:::::I too think "Transformers: " should be kept as well as " (franchise)". --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:46, 23 February 2011 (EST)

::::I don't mind losing Transformers when it the prefix in a title that's the form of Transformers: <subtitle>, as in that case the subtitle itself is more the actual official name and "Transformers" is just tacked on as an extra identifier.

::::But in some of those things, Transformers is, well, a vital part of the thing's actual name. I mean, for instance, the Club's full official name ''is'' "Hasbro Transformers Collectors' Club", so removing "Transformers" from it would be incorrect. --[[Special:Contributions/67.252.49.31|67.252.49.31]] 03:00, 23 February 2011 (EST)

:::::I don't think that distinction is clear enough to be workable anymore. Looking at that list, tons of them I have no idea which side of the divide they'd fall on. For instance, "[[Transformers Legends]]" is the proper title of the book; that's how it would be listed in any store or library, but for ''our'' purposes the "TF" is as extraneous as the one that we omit from [[Energon (comic)]] or [[Dinobots Strike Back]]. The "for our purposes" thing is so often so questionable... like, what would that dictate for [[Transformers: The Ultimate Guide]]? It's definitely a subtitle situation like you described, but there are lots of non-TF "Ultimate Guide"s published by the same company... but we would never cover them, so for our purposes is the "TF" still redundant?
:::::I agree with Geewunling that it would be annoying to have to type out longer titles (though readability should be unchanged, since I think we could still truncate in-sentence references). But right NOW it's annoying that our lack of a coherent policy is making everything increasingly unpredictable. We're seeing a lot of creep in the form of stuff like [[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] and for some reason video games. So I don't even know what should be "corrected" anymore or how to decide the matter when creating a new article.
:::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 13:58, 23 February 2011 (EST)

::::::The annoyance of editors doesn't really enter into my consideration; the wiki is ultimately for the readers, not our convenience. If we have to do some more work for the best presentation, so be it. —Interrobang, not logged in

:I'm OK with moving articles to put Transformers into the title so long as we don't delete the redirects. If we move "Revenge of the Fallen (film)" to "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (film)", there are going to be a whole bunch of sites linking to the old URL, and I don't wanna have a repeat of the "(Shattered Glass)" thing where all the redirects get deleted and a whole lot of other sites are pointing to useless error pages. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:25, 23 February 2011 (EST)

=="(WFC)" vs. "(Prime)"==
There are currently [[Talk:Transformers: War for Cybertron (franchise)#"(WFC)" instead of "(Prime)" for characters that originated in this franchise?|two]] [[Talk:Optimus Prime (Prime)#Move|discussions]] going about whether articles on subjects that originated in ''War for Cybertron''-branded fiction (the [[War for Cybertron games|games]], [[Exodus: The Official History of the War for Cybertron|novel]], and [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (comic)|comic]]) should be titled "(WFC)" rather than "(Prime)". It was suggested that this should be brought up in the Community Portal, so here it is.

For the record, looking at [[War for Cybertron games#Featured Characters|this list]], right now we're using "(Prime)" for all named characters, even those currently exclusive to WfC, and "(WFC)" for all character ''types'' from the games. I'm not sure why that is, but that's the state of things.

- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 17:46, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:I completely agree with Jackpot. It is stupid we have an article called [[Ultra Magnus (Prime)]] stating "Ultra Magnus is an Autobot Wrecker from the WFC portion of the Aligned family continuity". I blame myself for not doing this a lot earlier, treating the WFC navbox as like a subsection of Prime when the novel was so clearly a tie-in to those games. [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 18:48, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::WFC is a tie-in game. As I pointed out, how many Mini-Cons from the PS2 Transformers game use the disambiguator "(Transformers)"? And even then, what of novel-original characters? Do they get "(Exodus)"? And heck, didn't Exodus come out ''before'' WFC? Shouldn't the characters thusly use "(Exodus)" over "(WFC)" or "(Prime)"? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 18:57, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::: The book and game came out on the same day, as I recall. So... yeah. I'm completely against this. We used "Prime" because that was the name we WERE using for the continuity family; frankly, I find this wishy-washy "aligned continuity family" thing pretty lame. The core of the damn family is the Prime cartoon. It is THE central feature, and will be THE major fictional outlet and -almost assuredly- what future non-show fictions will adhere more closely to. I don't see the point in all this subdividing and adding more parantheticals. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 19:19, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::I find it ''extremely'' hard to believe that if Hasbro's "decade" plan goes through, ''Prime'' is the last franchise we're going to see spring from it. Even Aaron Archer thinks "Prime" is a bad name for the overall deal. Given what a fractured start it's already off to, I think separating out the "family" foundation is the only sensible thing to do. So that's why [[Aligned continuity family]] exists.
::::As for the "(WFC)" notion, I'm not as personally attached to that, even though I do think it's the correct thing to do. Mostly I think that WfC needs to be acknowledged as an entity unto itself, not just a subset of ''Prime''. Strictly from a branding point of view, it ISN'T a subset; nothing has been both WfC- and Prime-branded. It's not just the title of a video game; it's in the titles of [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (comic)|a comic]] and [[Exodus: The Official History of the War for Cybertron|a novel]], plus they've made [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (franchise)#Toys|toys from it]] that definitely don't fit the ''Prime'' brand. (True, the toys aren't labeled "WfC", but that's par for the course with ''Generations'' anyway. At the very least, it's a grey area.) Beyond branding, it just has a unique aesthetic and sensibility that's very different from ''Prime''.
::::Based on all that, the best place WfC fits in our schema is as a "franchise", to my judgement. "''Prime'' tie-in" doesn't cut it.
::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:55, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:::WFC is not ''just'' a tie-in game. It has [http://www.hasbro.com/transformers/en_US/play/details.cfm?guid=7fcfb1b5-19b9-f369-10be-e91a2108d9ab online bios] and [http://www.hasbro.com/transformers/en_US/play/details.cfm?guid=7fd5ecd9-19b9-f369-1041-a7635be83172 online timeline]. Hasbro made it its own thing. Franchise-like. Before any Prime show started we learned from the timeline that [[Megatron (Prime)|D-16]] was an Energon mine laborer and rose to prominence in secret gladiatorial combat and took the name "Megatron". So [[Megatron (Prime)]] had a whole history before the show even existed. The non-show characters with the (Prime) disambiguation also shows it doesn't quite fit. I'd go for WFC. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:35, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::AGAIN, Exodus came out the SAME DAY. So why does WFC get prominence? --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 19:56, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::::Because that's the phrase that's used in the names of [[War for Cybertron games|all]] [[Exodus: The Official History of the War for Cybertron|the]] [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (comic)|media]]. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 20:02, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::::I don't see how the subline "The official history of the war for Cybertron" is the exact same as "War For Cybertron: The Vidya Game". --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 20:24, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::I agree. Aside from three (ambiguous) words on the book's front, there's not much that says it's part of the WFC "franchise". Same for Generations. If they wanted to, they could have made figures of every War for Cybertron character and released it in a toyline explicitly called "Transformers: War for Cybertron". But they didn't; they just released five toys based on WFC designs and released them under Generations, so Generations is a WFC toy line as much as it is a G1 one (actually, probably more of G1 considering how very few WFC toys there were). The video games are only different because of hardware limitations, so having multiple games with the same title does not a franchise make. Having a website with bios and everything is a moot point, because almost every video game has that. The comic, I'll give you that one, but I don't think it's a franchise if it's a game and a tie-in comic with a limited release. --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 20:30, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::::::For what it's worth, when you [http://www.hasbro.com/transformers/en_US/discover/movie-news/Transformers-War-for-Cybertron.cfm click on "War For Cybertron"] it brings up all the Generations toys. I also think the WFC timeline ties in Exodus to WFC since the events in the comic and timeline are basically from the book. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 20:48, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::::It also brings up PCC Icepick (item 12 of 12, on page 2). --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 20:52, 28 February 2011 (EST)

::::::::The WfC-branded timeline and comic both cover events in ''Exodus''. Hell, the comic was written by the same dude. I don't understand the logic that says that the "War for Cybertron" in the novel's title doesn't mean the same thing. If there were a novel called "Deuteronomy: The Official History of the Beast Wars" set during the events of the cartoon, I wouldn't be trying to say it was part of the ''Beast Machines'' franchise.
::::::::Let me put in a slightly different light: Because franchises are branding-based, not continuity-based, I'm not comfortable with the ''Prime'' franchise being stretched to include all this stuff that doesn't have the ''Prime'' label on it. Yes, it's clearly all RELATED, story-wise, but that's what [[Aligned continuity family|continuity pages]] are for. This feels like taking ''Machine Wars'' (which is the opposite kind of sparse: a toyline with virtually no fiction) and rolling it into G2. Sure, they're in the same family, and there are connections between the two, but they're not marketed with the same label, so we don't do it. Before ''Prime'' existed, there were these other forms of media sharing a unique title (that even got the TF-logo lockup treatment!) and covering common ground. Then ''Prime'' showed up, and so far the two labels have not been seen on the same product. To me, that means two franchises.
::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 21:20, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::But... there is no overarching label on the products we have poked into the WFC "Franchise". "Transformers: War for Cybertron" has its own logo which is also on the tie-in comic, and Exodus has its own logo. They're still prequels to TF:Prime. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:33, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::::::::I guess I just see the "War for Cybertron" in the title of ''Exodus'' as having more meaning than you do. Yeah, Hasbro could've been more blatant if they'd wanted to, but it's still clearly telling the reader it's part of the same deal as the WfC games and comic, without making any reference to ''Prime'' (or vice-versa). I can imagine a situation where the ''Prime'' branding might retroactively subsume WfC, like how the "Wreckers" comic was given the ''Universe'' brand (they say there's another game coming out, after all). But that hasn't happened yet, so in the meantime I say WfC doesn't belong under the ''Prime'' franchise.
::::::::::Anyway, at this point if we don't see eye-to-eye, we probably won't, so I'm going to shut up now.
::::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 22:39, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:What about the next thing after ''Prime'' that is in the Modern/Aligned continuity? We would have a new disambiguation, like, "Spike (Next Franchise)." and characters that have never been in Prime, like "Ultra Magnus (Prime)." Kind of confusing. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 21:57, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::No it isn't. The idea that WFC/Exodus are part of a big wad of continuity colloquially known as "Prime", and referred to as "Prime" because the "Prime" cartoon is THE core of the whole shebang, and will liekly BE said core for the near future, is not a hard one. It only gets confusing when you start letting obfuscating pedantry in, at which point you're only making more work for no payoff and making things harder for our readers. A trend which seems to keep coming up over and over again, I've noticed... --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 22:09, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::I'm pretty sure I've had my share of "obfuscating pedantry" moments, but I completely agree with Siph on this one. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 22:18, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::For the record, if people really think that using "(WFC)" would be confounding to readers, that's not a decision I'm very invested in. This discussion has ballooned into bigger issues that I ''do'' feel more strongly about, but the parenthetical itself is very take-it-or-leave-it for me. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 22:39, 28 February 2011 (EST)

I would at the least support migrating characters who have thus far ''only'' appeared in WFC to the appropriate parenthetical.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:55, 1 March 2011 (EST)
:And move them back if they appear in Prime? [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 11:03, 1 March 2011 (EST)
::Yes. I think that would make the most sense to people looking for the characters.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 11:24, 4 March 2011 (EST)
:::I am willing to make this compromise for the time being. [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 14:27, 4 March 2011 (EST)

==War For Cybertron==
War for cybertron is a relativley new game, but it is a great one. I am kind of new on this website, but to me, it looks like the War For Cybertron title has gotten mixed up with Transformers: Prime, a completley diffrent universe. also, WFC is G1 Canon. All the WFC pages and articles should be labled on G1, MAJOR cleanup is needed. {{unsigned|Holymoses|06:30, March 3, 2011 (EST)}}
:You clearly ''are'' quite new, because we would advise you to read [[Aligned continuity family|this article]] before you start in on this notion. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 06:33, 3 March 2011 (EST)
:In Hasbro's own words: "The TRANSFORMERS brand team would like to confirm that Transformers War for Cybertron video game, Transformers Exodus novel, and the Transformers Prime television show are in the same aligned continuity. Hasbro is creating a single continuity to tell the bulk of our TRANSFORMERS stories going forward." Here's the [http://www.allspark.com/content/view/8189/20/ link] to the announcement --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 06:45, 3 March 2011 (EST)
::You aren't completely wrong. The game developers were heavily inspired by G1, and were pretty much making a G1 game as far as they knew. It's just that, like Khajidha said, Hasbro says War for Cybertron is part of the same continuity as Prime, so that's what the wiki goes with. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 00:00, 4 March 2011 (EST)

Well that still seems weird, since "Prime" has a completley diffrent story, and "Exodus" doesnt connect the two sagas very well. even if its what Hasbro said, i think we should put all this into consideration, Aaron Archer himself said that War for Cybertron was a game set in the G1 Universe. I think its wrong of Hasbro to try and connect the two diffrent Continuities. {{unsigned|Holymoses|09:12, March 4, 2011 (EST)}}
:First of all, when did Aaron Archer say that? Second, Hasbro gets to define what is in each continuity for the simple reason that it is their intellectual property. It may not be to your liking, but it cannot be wrong as they are the ones who determine what is right. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:35, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::Yeah, gonna need a source on that Archer statement. Especially since he's been amongst the ones saying WFC/Exodus is part of the new continuity. Also, weren't a lot of elements in WFC, like Dark Energon, Hasbro mandates from a story bible they supplied the creators (hereby proving that Hasbro's intent was always for it to be part of the new continuity), or am I imagining things again? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 10:08, 4 March 2011 (EST)
:::From what I read about that production bible, it is a result of guys at Hasbro sitting down and "[http://collider.com/roberto-orci-jeff-kline-interview-transformers-prime/75039/ coalescing all the mythologies] that they had institutionally for years. Actually putting it down to paper." It sounds like they were just collecting and not adding new stuff in. I wouldn't be surprised if Dark Energon were added ''after'' it was in the game. And what about timing? Orci said Hasbro put together the bible after the movies came out (in mid 2009). The video game came out in mid 2010 with a video game lead time of ??? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 11:27, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::::Unless Dark Energon is actually just the new name for Angolmois energy. The name may have been taken from the video game, but the concept could well have been in the production bible before WFC. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 11:37, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::::What a load of supposition and crap. I hereby dub it "crapposition". I can pretty much say that you are completely wrong. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 12:38, 4 March 2011 (EST)
:::::[http://www.joystiq.com/2010/05/05/interview-matt-tieger-of-high-moon-studios-on-transformers/ Matt Tieger said] that High Moon started working on WfC when they shipped their "Bourne" game, which according to the accompanying notes was mid-2008, between the first movie and RotF. [http://www.cheatcc.com/extra/interviewtransformerswarforcybertron2.html This interview] talks up the G1 inspiration and then says the WfC storyline is "a completely original story that we made up at High Moon. We worked closely with Hasbro..." The consistent impression I've gotten from several different interviews is that High Moon started from G1 and then made pitches to Hasbro, which Hasbro would provide feedback on, and eventually there was a game. The only people who I've seen actually talk about the 400-page story-bible are the ''Prime'' creators. And if Orci was being literal when he said the bible was put together "after the movie’s came out", then game development would've indeed started earlier. At the very least, it sounds pretty likely that there was some simultaneous creation.
:::::In the end, the chicken-and-egg question is basically moot because either way, WfC is part of the new deal. It doesn't matter who said the words "Dark Energon" first; it's part of the structure that binds all of the pieces, so that's that. But for nitpicking's sake, Starfield's suppositions aren't off-base from the evidence we have. Siph, if you have additional info that clarifies or contradicts any of that, please share.
:::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:44, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::::::I, similarly, have found it quite plausible when thinking on the subject to believe that High Moon could have created the idea of Dark Energon, and that Hasbro then said to themselves "We can use THAT!" and put it in the bible. It's certainly outside the realm of possibility, unless you know something we don't, Siph. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 05:24, 5 March 2011 (EST)

:Because nothing whatsoever can change in the millions of years between the WFC era and the Prime cartoon era. And yeah, good luck sourcing that Aaron claim. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 11:24, 4 March 2011 (EST)
I think that if they were in the game or in Exodus:The Offical History of the War for Cybertron, they should be labled (WFC),but if they poped into the Prime teley-show or comics, they should be labled (Prime).-[ [User:DinoDigger97|DinoDigger97]] 2:11 3 Apil 2011

== Captured-Prey ads ==

One of the things advertised there appears to be a fan-made Megatron min-figure. Seeing as how everybody was upset that the TFSource ad [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive47#TFsource_ad_buy|featured fansproject stuff]], surely, this isn't right either? [[User:Item42|Item42]] 05:33, 8 March 2011 (EST)
:Check the section back up this page titled [[#Project_Wonderful_ads|Project Wonderful ads]]. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 05:59, 8 March 2011 (EST)

== Revenge of the Fallen video game character articles - [X] Scout 1, [X] Scout 2 pages for the same design ==

With the upcoming DOTM games, I thought I should look at the ROTF game articles that were abandoned in 2009 and see if I could do anything for them. I believe it was Derik who made this decision, but I am now wondering if it is necessary to have say [[Aerialbot Scout 1]] and [[Aerialbot Scout 2]], [[Omnibot Scout 1]] and [[Omnibot Scout 2]] (and so on) considering "Scout 1" and "Scout 2" are just the two different colour schemes for these mass produced generic, nameless characters who only differ in terms of textures. Any completed articles on these will have different images, but exactly the same information. Isn't that redundant? Should we perhaps just stick both of each under Aeriabot Scout, Omnibot Scout, Stunticon Scout? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 07:14, 11 March 2011 (EST)
:According to the articles the two Aerialbot Scouts have different health, primary weapon and secondary weapon ratings. Is that enough for separation? I don't know, but it should be considered before making a decision. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:55, 11 March 2011 (EST)
::I don't even know where those stats came from - I don't believe the person who filled them in originally ever explained. Were they from a website, article or guide book? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 11:42, 11 March 2011 (EST)

== Found some much needed images, but... ==

I found them on [http://transformersiv.mforos.com/1519135/8979801-transformers-g1-aventuras-y-nostalgias-que-nunca-moriran/ this site], and I don't speak the language (I think it's Spanish) to ask for their permission to use them. The images are covers of the [[Marvel Books]] titles [[Battle at Oil Valley]], [[Summertime Coloring Book]], and [[Super Activity Book]]. That's right we don't even have an article for that last one. They also have page scans of these and other Marvel Books titles. I don't feel right just taking them for our use here and was wondering if someone who spoke the lingo would contact them for us. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:21, 12 March 2011 (EST)
:Nevermind, Google Chrome finally remembered that it had translational abilities. The poster is offering them for download to all and sundry, so he/she can hardly care if we borrow them. I'll probably still insert a link to the main site out of courtesy. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 11:22, 12 March 2011 (EST)
::After looking at them, I realized that they were Steve Stonebreaker's scans. I have contacted him and received permission to use them here. I'll be adding more soon. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:55, 16 March 2011 (EDT)

== Hey, I've got a new user talk page template request... ==
[[Image:Rebirth1 Hardhead and Blurr.jpg|right|thumb|300px|TOO MANY QUOTES]]
Can we have one that reminds folks that every new thing in Transformers that even vaguely reminds you of an old thing in Transformers IS NOT A REFERENCE AND THAT IS NOT HOW REFERENCES WORK AND STOP PUTTING THEM IN THE "TRANSFORMERS REFERENCES" SECTION. Ahem. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 23:18, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
:You mean like [[Template:notareference|this]]? --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 23:22, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
::Hooray! --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 23:30, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
:::Brilliant. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 02:39, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::That's an oldie, but a goodie. Personally, I'm wondering if there's any template that can be set up for the people that just drown episode articles in quotes... --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:42, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::I think we'd first need a consensus on how many quotes are appropriate. [[User:JW|JW]] 07:41, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::It's a conversation that needs to be had, I think. You have to take length of the story into account - there are more quotes in a two hour movie than in a twenty five minute episode. I'd put the early cutoff at around five for episodes, though. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 08:00, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::I like the idera of a mximum of 5 per 30 minutes (or part thereof) for Episodes & movies, but what would be a good size for comics? I'd say around 3 per issue, but it breaks down with short issues and back up stories (i.e.e most of the Marvel UK exclusive stuff...) [[User:G1MarvelBlaster|G1MarvelBlaster]] 10:19, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::I'd set a "soft" limit higher for 30-minute episodes {{m-}} around 10 quotes {{m-}} and I'd allow more than that if the episode was particularly well-written or quotable. I don't think there's any need for a low, hard limit, as I don't think lots of quotes hurt the wiki until we get into "quoting the whole darn episode" territory. Heck, in fact, I might favor a policy of ''judging each quote for itself.'' I.e., if a quote is good/noteworthy/illustrative/funny/wadeva, it can be kept, even if there are two dozen other quotes already. Each must stand on its merits, but there would be no hard cap. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:31, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::Yeah, some episodes happen to have a lot of funny/significant/memorable lines, others don't. If we set a hard cap, we might be damning ourselves to a lot of pointless fights over which quotes deserve to be included under the arbitrary limit. I'm more in favor of making a list of criteria that we can point to when we weed lame quotes out.
:::::::::Oh, and I support making a template. ''Prime'' Soundwave is the best character I can think of to use, but Movie Bumblebee or G1 Wreck-Gar would also be appropriate. Or a shot of G1 Soundwave with a tape inside of him? Can't think of a good header, though...
:::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 11:49, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::I mainly suggested it as a starting point because if it comes down to putting each quote in place based on "which one we like more" the talk pages are going to be absolutely horrible. HOW CAN YOU LEAVE OUT MY FAVORITE QUOTE IT IS SO FUNNY AND RELEVANT. The "5 per 30 minutes" is just a suggestion - obviously an episode that's really funny or poignant can get more. Comics issues we could maybe use pagecount as a starting point. But basically, combine the two ideas. A list of criteria is a good idea, but we also need to avoid having like, thirty quotes for a given story, twelve of which are totally shitty. If we get over five-six quotes, it's time to think about trimming, just because seriously, 90% of TF fiction isn't that goddamned quotable - or there are better places for the quotes. "I don't rock and roll - I burn!" belongs on Inferno's page, not on the episode it appeared in. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 11:51, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::Fair enough. Just so long as the number is sufficiently "soft" that we don't forget that our goal is high quality, not an arbitrarily low quantity. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 12:17, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::Exactly. Like I said, I think we can also judiciously use key ''character'' quotes on the ''characters''' pages. Some quotes are very episode/story specific, while others provide insight into a character's personality or mindset. I think that's a good way to winnow the chaff, you know? -hx at work not logged in gotta run
::::::::::::::The 5-6 quotes before we start trimming sounds good, especially if some more individual character based quotes can be moved to the character pages. The big problem I keep seeing with quotes is that too many people want to quote an entire scene. If it goes beyond 3 lines it's probably not what we mean by quote here. And even 3 lines is pushing it. These should really be a single line quip or a two line set up and pay off. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 14:22, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::::5 to 6 sounds like a good starting point to me as well. Khajidha makes a good point about the definition of quote. That, along with Hooks' point about using key character quotes on that character's article, should be pointed out on [[Help:Example episode article]], once it exists. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:32, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
What about block quotes? The page for Transformers (2007) is full of them. I think there should be a limit on how long the quote can be.--[[User:Megatron Prime|Megatron Prime]] 16:48, 19 May 2011 (EDT)
== Maybe a silly question, can we? ==

Ok, exposing my ignorance here, but isthere a way to search the wiki by alt-mode? If I wanted to know every TF that turns into a Helicopter say? There's not a "helicopter" catagory, so howwould I find them all? Thanks for any help.--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206|76.28.76.206]] 19:59, 19 March 2011 (EDT)
:[[Popular Earth vehicle alternate modes]] covers some characters. There's been a few vague proposals to create a new hierarchy of categories for altmodes, but it would be a lot of work, and it's generally shouted down. [[User:JW|JW]] 20:08, 19 March 2011 (EDT)
:I think the current best option if you want to do something like this is TFU.info's Identify section. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] 11:00, 30 March 2011 (EDT)

==Grimlock letter==
[[Image:Grimlock letter.jpg|thumb|right]]
I recently acquired this and thought it's exactly the sort of thing we should be covering. I had no idea it even existed until a friend sent it to me and on that thought, should we add letters from Soundwave, Ratchet(?), Dreadwind and Blaster to the Holy Grails? Was there a similar response from the US comic, and do Titan still send these letters out today from Starscream? Enquiring minds want to know. Incidentally, he said he got Tailgate as his free mini-toy. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 15:31, 29 March 2011 (EDT)
:Good find. A letter from Grimlock is pretty awesome. That should go somewhere. The Letters Page page? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:58, 29 March 2011 (EDT)
::I've added a link from there; I'll type it up verbatim if we think it's justified? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 18:09, 29 March 2011 (EDT)

== Voice actors by series ==

We have a bunch of categories for voice actors by language, but I was wondering if we should have categories for voice actors by series? Would categories like "Beast Wars voice actors" and "Victory voice actors" be useful? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:27, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

:That could be useful. It'd be better than looking up cast lists and opening up every character page, at least. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 06:30, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

::Sound like a nice idea to me. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 10:01, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

== "Just Stop" Notice? ==

Do we think there's a role for the following proposed user notice template, for users like Eagc7?

{{messagebox|image_name=War_War_Stop_It.jpg|image_width=225px|width=90%|header=Just Stop|message_text=Please stop editing this wiki. While you haven't done anything ban-worthy (yet), you are not a productive contributor. (The reasons ''why'' are above this notice on your talk page.) So, please, '''just stop.'''}}

Opinions? [[User:JW|JW]] 14:39, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:If one is created, I love this image for it! --[[User:MistaTee|MistaTee]] 15:35, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::It seems a bit rude, but the image would be ''perfect'' if this is made. --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 15:45, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:::If this gets phrased differently, I'd support it. Right now, the text's too rude. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 15:52, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::::I think it is meant to be rude and probably should be rude. This tag is designed to be placed on the talk pages of people who have seemingly ignored the multiple instances of other tags. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 15:57, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

I'm a little iffy on this proposal. I admit that Eagc7 has a very poor grasp of the English language, but I'm a little uncomfortable with telling a person to leave a site just because of that. If you look over his fiction edits (the ones you can read) the posts he has made are accurate, just...occasionally unreadable. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 16:02, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
:I'm with SFH. Eagc7's English seems to be all over the place, but there are times when he gets it more or less correctly and only needs minor typo fixes. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 16:21, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
Whether a person's edits are bad enough (and bad enough all the time enough) to ask them to never post again seems like something that shouldn't be in the hands of, well, everybody. Putting a template up that says you're a bad speller or that you're not using Preview enough... that's pretty straight forward. But I dunno if I'm comfortable with giving us all a tool to shame each other off the wiki entirely. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:49, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:In addition, if someone's edits are so bad (and so consistently bad) that they're more of a nuisance than they are helpful, then that person should probably just be gotten rid of, instead of getting the Middle Finger Personified In A Template. As Detour said, yeah, Eagc7's English could use some work, but he does enough good here that I don't think he's completely poison or anything. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:51, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
I could maybe get behind the idea of a "Stop editing until you've read the complaints on your user page" template for the blissfully unaware people constantly making edits that are being undone as soon as they make them whilst ignoring comments on their user page telling them what they're doing wrong. But a template like THIS, and this sort of behavior in general, is how we end up with trolls that come by and vandalize the wiki on a daily basis for years and years. We could avoid that sort of future headache by just not being all-out douchebags to people even if they're stupid and/or their contributions are annoying. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 17:15, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:I suppose the only problem with making a "read your talk page" template is that they'll never read it. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 18:24, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::: I like this idea, too. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:01, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::Got me there. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 18:36, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:This will not go well. If someone's a real pest here, ban them. If they're being a pest but not quite that bad yet, notify them on their talkpage with whichever templates are already needed, and then if they don't clean up, ban them. We shouldn't be creating--publicly--an underclass of users. If you're allowed to have an account here, you're allowed to post--otherwise we look scummy. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 19:17, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::This is basically every stereotype of this wiki and its userbase given textbox form. I love it. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 20:33, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

The consensus seems to be against it, and the arguments are all good ones. (Kind of a pity, since the image was so perfect, but...) I withdraw the suggestion. Thanks all for weighing in! [[User:JW|JW]] 20:25, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:It is a good template despite the rudeness, but it is potentially necessary for extreme conditions as a last resort. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:01, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Is it possible that we could reuse that image for another template? Perhaps a Final Warning template, letting users know that if they don't cut their shit out, they're gonna get banned. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 21:42, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
: Clearly it should be used for a "stop edit/revert warring" template. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:32, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

== Our Blogger blog? ==

To me it appears that our blog doesn't have much use. Our twitter sends out links to occasional pages and our facebook is an easy place to congregate and talk about TFs and not take up our talk pages, but the blog hasn't been used in over half a year.

I'm thinking using it to keep track of current trends and such. We could highlight pages that are being worked on, point out users who have been creating/adding a lot to pages (i.e. Geewunling creating minor GI Joe pages, Chris McFeely going crazy with the Japanese food tie-ins). This way an editor or lurker who happens to miss a few days can easily catch up rather than having to sift through the new pages and new files (and even then if a page has just had an entirely new writeup from a stub, it wouldn't show up there).

Any thoughts on this? --[[User:Bluestreak7|Bluestreak7]] 14:21, 28 April 2011 (EDT)

:I think it would be a good way to draw attention to obscure and/or new stuff on the Wiki. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 07:46, 2 May 2011 (EDT)
::I think so, too, but there are questions left unanswered if we want to go ahead with this. Who would be given control over the posts? Should it be extra mod duties or instead given to some other veteran editors? If so, how many? Would we want weekly updates or something with less frequency? Overall, who is in the current position to grant other users the power to add posts. I can see this as a useful too, but like many things on this wiki, we need to come up with some sort of procedure before it comes to fruition. --[[User:Bluestreak7|Bluestreak7]] 11:33, 3 May 2011 (EDT)

==TFwiki in the past week==
Could someone tell me why the TFwiki has been down/inaccessible for most of the time in the past week? [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 02:04, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

:I would wager "massive spikes in traffic, as DotM stuff hits," which has happened before.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:20, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

::I thought traffic wouldn't be a likely cause since the third movie is still over a month away. Guess I was wrong. Thanks! [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 02:27, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

:::There's at least some clamor now that the toys are out there.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:46, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

::::Technical explanation or non-technical? Traffic HAS picked up a bit, the wiki hardware (such as it is) is slightly overtaxed, and we need to start doing some math on what we can separate into other servers, and how much it'll cost to do so.--[[User:McFly|McFly]] 16:15, 13 May 2011 (EDT)

:::::Cowboy time. We've moved the application server and cache to another box, and synced over the contents. If anything's missing, we can try to sync it over from the old webserver, but it wouldn't be off by more than a few minutes, so here's hoping that we're back in business!--[[User:McFly|McFly]] 15:43, 17 May 2011 (EDT)

::::::No wonder the connection becomes smooth again recently. Nice Works!! --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 22:45, 17 May 2011 (EDT)

:::::::Yeah, I'd noticed that the site was back to normal. Thanks for the hard work. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 22:52, 17 May 2011 (EDT)

::::::Thanks for fixing our wiki! [[User:JW|JW]] 07:15, 18 May 2011 (EDT)

== Eagc7's movie comic section edits ==

Lately Eagc7 has been editing the somewhat neglected movie prequel comic sections in character articles, which is good. However, Eagc7 has been editing the somewhat neglected movie prequel comic sections in character articles, which is bad. I know he tries, but whenever he does this sort of thing, he just ends up creating work for somebody else to clean up, and frankly, it's easier to write stuff from scratch than it is to fix somebody's spelling & grammar, as well as trying to make the text fit the tone and style of the paragraphs surrounding it (which is important considering the Foundation comics take place during the other Movie prequel comics). I haven't read Foundation and Rising Storm, [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:Contributions/Eagc7 so I can't fix all of this myself], but that seems like a fair bit of work to fix at a time when the wiki was experiencing random downtime and BotCon is rapidly approaching (meaning a good chunk of our regular editors will not be able to edit much, and in any case would be updating stuff about/from BotCon). Like I said, I know he's trying, and he's getting much better than he used to be, but... maybe he should leave fiction edits to the professionals. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 16:27, 18 May 2011 (EDT)
:Take it up with him via his Talk Page or the E-mail a User link. If there's really a stylistic problem, then we need a Style Guide for new users to reference.--[[User:McFly|McFly]] 11:04, 19 May 2011 (EDT)

==Page views==
Where have they gone? I believe that they have disappeared from down the pages since the move a few weeks ago. Can they be put back? [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 16:09, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
: I don't recall pageviews... What in specific are you talking about? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:12, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
::I guess [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:Popularpages popular pages]? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:20, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
:::Yeah those, how often a page has been visited. I kinda liked keeping tabs on relative popularity in pages (like how Mayumi and Shinichi ''never'' lost their 2:1 view ratio). [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 16:24, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
::::The broken popular pages has apparently been a thing lately, as I noticed Abates was removing and re-adding the link to [[MediaWiki:Recentchangestext]] earlier this month. Maybe he knows more about it? --[[User:Apoc|Apoc]] 18:41, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
:::::No more than anyone else. I noticed it was gone and removed it from the template, but then it came back when we did the move so I readded it. I guess it got removed again, possibly for performance reasons? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:58, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
::::::If I had to make a poorly-educated guess, the pageview thing sounds exactly like one of the many things I had to remove from Shortpacked.com to keep it from lagging so so badly. Lots of neat little things like page tracking and stuff like that used to be on there, but they were more trouble, resources-wise, than they were worth. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:20, 29 May 2011 (EDT)

== Why is Melissa from Kiss Players on the same Page as Marissa Faireborn from G1? ==

I know they are some how connected ,but i see the two as different as G1 Starscream is to Animated Starscream ,maybe the same history ,but a little different.--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Michael Alex Kawa]] 10:43, 30 May 2011 (EDT)
:They are related in the same way that Orion Pax is related to G1 Optimus Prime. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] 10:51, 30 May 2011 (EDT)
: Marissa = Marissa. Same continuity and everything. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:02, 30 May 2011 (EDT)

== I don't know if this was what you are looking for when you asked for Kiss Players radio play translations ,but i hope this helps . ==

I found this on Youtube cause I LOVE Melissa and noticed in that Holy Grail thingy that you guys needed Kiss Players radio play translations .I hope this helps ,even if it doesn't it is still pretty cool and CUTE .I did not make it so that is noted .Here is the link so you guys can go and look to see if it what is needed ,it is the only one i can find ,if it helps i will try to find more .[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZvUg2c649Y]
--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] 18:25, 2 June 2011 (EDT)
I also found this site ,it gives a brief description of the radio play ,again i hope this helps .[http://www.toyvey.com/kisskiss/radioplay/index.html]--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] 14:30, 3 June 2011 (EDT)

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2011-06-02T22:25:32Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* I don't know if this was what you are looking for when you asked for Kiss Players radio play translations ,but i hope this helps . */ new section

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2011-06-02T22:23:35Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* Why is Melissa from Kiss Players on the same Page as Marissa Faireborn from G1? */

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2011-06-02T22:21:40Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* I don't know if this was what you are looking for when you asked for Kiss Players radio play translations ,but i hope this helps . */

__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]]
 <div class="list-header">'''New Ad Policy:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki:Ads|Ads]]
 <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]]
 <div class="list-header">'''Server Move:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Arriving2|Arriving Take 2]]
 <div class="list-header">'''Relicensing:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Relicensing|Relicensing]]
 <div class="list-header">'''Dealing With Vandalism:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/Vandalism|Vandalism]]
 <div class="list-header">'''GoBots Sister Wiki:'''</div>
* [[Transformers Wiki talk:Community Portal/GoBots|Discussion on the place of GoBots in this wiki]]
}} 

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


==Didn't we have a Transformers Appearances/References in Other Media page?==
I could have sworn we did, mentioning stuff like Family guy etc. If we don't have such a page, would it be allowed to be created? [[User:Drmick|Drmick]] 11:53, 18 December 2010 (EST)
:Unless it's officially sanctioned by Hasbro, no, we do not mention Transformer appearances in other media. --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 11:54, 18 December 2010 (EST)
:: If it ever existed, it would have been destroyed with fire in about 30 seconds. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 12:46, 18 December 2010 (EST)
::: Of course, if we did have such a page, we could use it as a lighting rod, keep anons from adding something to Soundwave's page every time Seth Green says the word "transformers." -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 16:28, 18 December 2010 (EST)
::::Of course, NO. Discussion over. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 16:45, 18 December 2010 (EST)
::::Discussion not quite over. If the unofficial nature of the topic is the reason why it is not allowed, then there are several articles that already exist that are pushing boundaries on the wiki. I would have thought that the biggest problem would be it's size.[[User:Drmick|Drmick]] 09:26, 20 December 2010 (EST)
:::::Yeah, that'd be the other big reason. There's so many such references it would be impossible to keep track of them all. It would also involve making sure what's added there is actually a TF reference. And given all the Toms, Dicks and Harrys that'll come out of the woodwork to add such stuff, that's going to be more trouble than not having a page. Best not to get a larger headache for the sake of reducing a smaller one. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 12:44, 20 December 2010 (EST)

=="Knockoff warning" for toy sections?==
Just something that occurred to me... as I skimmed this page http://www.highendtfs.com/?q=node/17 and looked at alllllll the "could be mistaken for real and paid stupid money for" knockoffs... is there any objection to some form of link to this in the relevant toy sections? Sadly, the page lacks a "jump to" feature of any kind, but alerting people to the potential danger of dropping several hundred on what they think is a genuine Defensor box set... --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 02:50, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:I think it skirts the line with our "we don't really discuss knockoffs" policy, but on the other hand, yeah, it's a useful bit of information, almost to the point where we could stand to have a special page about ''these specific knockoffs''. I am not opposed to adding a link to that site, no, as long as it's got a massive and specific caveat attached to it (maybe even with a special template box thing ("A Prime Problem"-themed perhaps?)). Hell, maybe the highendtfs people would be willing to throw up navigation in exchange for the inevitable deluge of hits - anyone got contact info for the owner? [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 09:11, 19 December 2010 (EST)

::It's worth noting that there are some very well-done Henkei seekers knockoffs now, too. The really expensive ones even, like Thundercracker. Their sections could use warnings as well. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 17:56, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:::Are they in knockoff PACKAGING that is meant to look like the real thing? That's the really tricky part. G1 MIB shit is much, much more expensive. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 20:27, 19 December 2010 (EST)
::::Yes, they are: http://www.seibertron.com/transformers/news/buyer-beware-update-on-ko-henkei-seekers/20380/ -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 23:03, 19 December 2010 (EST)

::I am not sure I want to attach more template boxes to pages as is. Especially over something like knockoffs. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 20:55, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:::I'd ''thought'' about a template, but... ehn. I think a simple link under the TFU.info (or whatever), perhaps with a bolded "'''Knockoff alert'''" text. Like...

::::*''[http://www.highendtfs.com/?q=node/17 '''Knockoff alert''': More information on packaged imitations of this toy at HighendTFs.com]''

:::Thoughts? This would ONLY cover stuff that is in packaging meant to deceive you by looking as real as they can get it. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 21:05, 19 December 2010 (EST)

::::I could agree with that. This is a step beyond your standard knock off crap, some notice might be appropriate.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 21:44, 19 December 2010 (EST)

:::::I think it is a good idea to have it, since it is useful. This is different from putting info of some KO or unlicensed products on the page. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:49, 19 December 2010 (EST)

== Extension:Oversight ==

Quite a few times I've seen admins delete and undelete pages to clean out bad revisions. Why they do this I have no idea, since we have [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Oversight the Oversight extension] installed.

Perhaps we should look into granting some people "oversighter" access? --[[User:-Blackout-|-Blackout-]] 05:09, 25 December 2010 (EST)
:I've just noticed that deleting and then restoring pages in the manner mentioned above has the side effect of resetting a page's page views stats, so that's another point in favour of the Oversight extension. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:40, 11 January 2011 (EST)

== Wikipedia, revisited ==

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#The_.22Campaign_of_Deletion.22_against_the_Transformers_Wiki_Project_by_NotARealWord_and_TFWiki.net]

Just in case anyone's interested. --[[Special:Contributions/84.193.193.10|84.193.193.10]] 10:54, 5 January 2011 (EST) (-Blackout-, can't be bothered to log back in)
:NEWSFLASH: Nobody cares. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 16:21, 5 January 2011 (EST)

== Captcha to prevent spambots? ==

Is there any way we could implement captcha to account creation to prevent the spambot problem we're having now? I've seen other wikis use that measure. Maybe also disable new page creation by anons? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 12:56, 6 January 2011 (EST)
:We already have CAPTCHA implemented on the account creation service. --[[Special:Contributions/84.193.193.10|84.193.193.10]] 13:09, 6 January 2011 (EST) (-Blackout-, can't be bothered to log in)
::Never mind, then! [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 13:30, 6 January 2011 (EST)

== Real world events by day Category ==

These of course comprise every date of the year. However, I notice recently people have been adding fictional events to these dates. That basically invalidates the Category, since it's no longer comprised of only real-world events. The fictional events should be moved out into another section, or the category name should be changed to "Events by day". Thoughts? --[[User:MistaTee|MistaTee]] 22:01, 9 January 2011 (EST)
:I agree with changing to "Events by day". I would also support having separate fictional and real world sections on the pages. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 22:38, 9 January 2011 (EST)

== Project Wonderful ads ==

Um, guys, I found there [http://www.projectwonderful.com/img/uploads/pics/53018-1293943633.gif Non-official products] in the ads of CapturedPrey. I know the small ads are showing up randomly (and may not be controllable since we can't regulate them), but I think it is still need to be reported here. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 01:04, 16 January 2011 (EST)
: I don't mind them in the non-permanent ads. TFSource used them all the time in their ads before we made them permanent sponsors. It was only when we made them a permanent sponsor did we ask to make them free of third-party product. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 01:57, 16 January 2011 (EST)

== Games <strike>fiction</strike> ==

Okay, now that [[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] has flooded the character pages with stubs for 30 years worth of crappy Transformers games, can we reconsider how the Games sections are treated? I really don't think in-universe fiction descriptions are the way to handle it. [[War for Cybertron]] may've had a plot, but the majority of TF games are more in the vein of "hit things until they stop coming". A fiction section makes even less sense for games where the character selection is variable. ''"[[Hardhead (G1)#Transformers:_The_Headmasters|Hardhead]] may (or may not) have been present at this battle. Or this one. Or this..."'' Ditto for generic drone soldiers. Isn't there a way to address the games without trying to craft a sensical fiction for them? --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 08:46, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:I agree. The games should appear as merchandise on all relevant characters pages, but there is no need for a fiction write up for most games on those same pages. A generic write up on the game page should suffice. Something like "An Autobot warrior participated in a battle...", with a character box listing all potential "Autobot warriors" (aka playable characters). --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:21, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::Moving games to merchandise sounds awful. It would result in amazing amounts of lost information. I have no idea what doing that would solve. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 09:44, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::I think it depends on the game - for example in the ROTF console game, while you CAN play as multiple characters, the game provides a suggested one for you. IMO, that's who "actually" did the stuff depicted in the game (and the opposing side's campaign generally suggests it as well). When you can just pick from a half-dozen dudes and it doesn't matter, then maybe a brief summary of the game's plot and a note. "Jerkwagon was one of many Autobots involved in blah blah plot synopsis bluh. NOTE: Such-and-such game allowed players to choose multiple protagonists, including Jerkwagon." [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 13:19, 25 January 2011 (EST)
I agree that Games should be their own section -- there's certainly enough of them, and they should be treated differently than keychains and what-not. But I think an out-of-universe description of the games would be better in most cases. Instead of having to write vague text like ''"As Ultra Magnus searched for the truth behind Optimus Prime's death, he battled Trypticon in a game of death and suffering."'', which is about all the plot I could wrangle out of [[Transformers: Mystery of Convoy|Convoy no Nazo]] and tells you virtually nothing, we could write something more informative, like ''"Trypticon is the boss of Stage 10."'', and describe what actually happens in the game instead of trying to make it sound like believable fiction. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 11:29, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:::My personal view on the matter is, from a character's page, I should be able to find EVERY place that character has appeared. And when we do list guys having an appearance when they're most likely an animation error in the far-background of an episode, I don't think there's any excuse to NOT list an appearance of a character wherever he might appear, including board and video games. Is that a lot of work? Yeah. But beneath all the jokes that make this place so great, this is still an encyclopedia, and purposely leaving out information out of an encyclopedia is wrong. Though I think Hooper X has the right idea... I doesn't have to be the most super-extensive write up. Heck, I was even going to suggest just having a link saying "See Return of Convoy article" or something like that. Also: I apologize if I had started getting very sloppy last night, but looking back, it was like 5 in the morning by the time I finished up. Yikes. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 14:10, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::::I totally agree that the games should be dealt with on the character pages. I'm just looking for an option other than a completely in-fiction description. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 15:14, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::::: The first idea that comes to mind is having a subsection called "Gameplay" or something like that for each game write-up, something that would be similar to a note? Though really, my main solution for stuff like that has been, up to this point, to just stick a couple of notes in the game write-up, like on [[Cheetor (BW)|Cheetor]]'s page. I'll keep on trying to think up other solutions though... --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 15:26, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::::Storylinks already serve as that, so what's the point of another link? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 15:47, 25 January 2011 (EST)

== Fiction order guide? ==

I've been over the Style guides a few times trying to find if a page like this already exists, but it doesn't look like it. I'll be the first to admit that when adding in new fiction/game subsections to a character's article, I sometimes confuse and probably put them out of order. So I've been wondering if a page that lists every fictional work and game in the proper order of each other would be a good idea? On one hand, it seems like an ABSURD amount of work for a style guide, one that would have to be CONSTANTLY updated as new things come out. On the other hand, it would be very handy to have a list to reference for character pages. Especially because it can get VERY frustrating trying to hunt down which book/cartoon/whatever came first in the same year. For those who don't understand what I'm talking about, here's an example I quickly put together, using the [[Cheetor (BW)]] and [[Optimus Prime (G1)]] pages as reference.

When listing a character's media appearances, use this sorting order:
*Fiction
**Generation 1 Marvel Comics continuity
**Generation 1 S.T.A.R.S. pack-in flyers
**Generation 1 cartoon continuity
**Generation 1 Kid Stuff Talking Story Books
**Generation 1 Big Looker Story Books
**Generation 1 Ladybird Books continuity
**''Transformers in 3-D''
**''Transformers PD Type'' comic
**''Comic Bom Bom G-2'' comic
**Beast Wars First wave toy bios
**Beast Wars Cartoon continuity
***Dawn of Future's Past
***''Beast Wars'' cartoon
***Fast Action Battlers toyline
***3H ''Tales from the Beast Wars'' comics
***IDW ''Beast Wars'' comics
***''Transformers Legends'' anthology
***''Beast Machines'' cartoon
***''Beast Machines'' toy bio
***''Universe'' comic
***''Beast Wars Metals'' comic
***Beast Wars ''Henkei! Henkei!'' pack-in comic
**Generation 1 Dreamwave comics continuity
**''G.I. Joe vs. the Transformers''
**''Transformers/G.I. Joe''
**Generation 1 IDW comics continuity
**''Hearts of Steel''
**''Music Label''
**''Henkei! Henkei!'' (pack-in comic)
**''Henkei! Henkei!'' Bun Bun manga
**Alternity
**''Robot Heroes'' comic
**''Universe'' cartoon
**Wings of Honor

Is this a good idea? Would anyone actually like to see this kind of thing, or would I just be putting a whole bunch of work into something we don't need? --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:28, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:We do need standardization of section names. The section order, however, depends on order in which the character appeared in those continuities in the real world. Then the subsections are ordered by the fictional chronology. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:35, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::No wonder I get confused by this fiction order thing. @_@ I guess I might just be one of those people that will never get the hang of some of these things. And yeah, the section names was definitely something else I wanted to tackle, since I've seen at times no less than four different ways to refer to a certain media. I sometimes have to check the storylinks at the end to be sure it's all part of the same story! --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:45, 25 January 2011 (EST)
::Note that, within a continuity, flashbacks and time travel can mean that experiential fictional chronology for one character requires a different order of headings than for another. [[User:JW|JW]] 20:16, 25 January 2011 (EST)
:::In regards to standardization, I have an idea. What if we create a list of headers (kept on this page perhaps) used on Optimus Prime (G1)'s page (probably has the greatest number of different headers), use that as our initial standards list, then update it as we find other headers or decide to change the existing standards? Once we think we've covered the majority of possibilities, we could move it to a help page and make it official policy. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:49, 6 February 2011 (EST)
::::I put together [[User:Jackpot/Sandbox/Sections|a sandbox along these lines]] a couple of years ago. It hasn't been updated in quite a while, and I'm not sure it was ever actually complete, and it was the subject of [[User_talk:Jackpot/Sandbox/Sections|a bit of debate]]... but there it is, for what it's worth. (Also, I support standardization of headers, but I've run into [[Talk:Ricochet_(Headmasters)#Header|some]] [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive22#Section_naming_conventions|opposition]] over the nitty-gritty before, so best of luck.) - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 06:11, 8 February 2011 (EST)

== Foreign name reorganization ==

Is there any chance we could consider moving the foreign names somewhere else in the article other than at the top? We've already established a new standard for episodes, but characters could stand to have their names moved to their own dedicated section, likely under "Notes". There, we could add things like kana and Cyrillic forms of names not different from the English version. Opinions? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 15:56, 4 February 2011 (EST)
:I'm in favor of it. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 16:33, 4 February 2011 (EST)

::All things considered, since this is (mostly) an english-centric wiki when it comes to stuff, the foreign names do come off as being interesting trivia more than anything else. I'm in favour of this too. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 16:37, 4 February 2011 (EST)

:I'm fine with where they are now, personally. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 16:39, 4 February 2011 (EST)

:I can see the logic in them being moved down to notes. You've got an in-universe profile, then a bunch of out-of-universe names, then the in-universe fiction section. The only argument I have against it is that I'm used to seeing the foreign names at the top. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:05, 4 February 2011 (EST)

::If it can be moved downward (to the first entry of the notes section or a new section after the notes section) instead of being on the top, MOVE it. Originally, I'm fine withe where they are {{m-}} but that would be a character with fewer foreign names. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 19:55, 4 February 2011 (EST)
Any further opinions on this? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 00:36, 21 February 2011 (EST)
:What about cases where some of the extra names at the top are English, e.g. Omni Productions names, or preliminary or nicknames? Would they remain at the top or become notes too? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 01:29, 21 February 2011 (EST)
::The Malay dub still technically counts as foreign in my mind. Nicknames should be integrated in the introduction (or notes section), and preliminary names should have been in notes in the first place, since they aren't the characters' "real names" in any sense. Further elaboration of the preliminary names better suits the notes section, anyway. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 01:43, 21 February 2011 (EST)
Japanese names are often for a character in a slightly different continuity. Like "Fire Convoy" is a Car Robots character and "Optimus Prime" is an RID character, but they share the same page. Or "Flame Convoy" is a Galaxy Force character but "Scourge" is a Cybertron character. In that case they should have the Japanese name up top. The names that are just different language versions of the English character can go on bottom. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 13:18, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:... no. ''Cybertron'' and ''Galaxy Force'' are NOT different stories (Takara officially put GF back in the same timeline as the prior two series), and the ''RID/CR'' split is a unique case. In neither case should the names go up top. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 13:44, 23 February 2011 (EST)
::They are slightly different continuities. Galaxy Force doesn't have the [[Omega Frequency]] for example. And the Grand Black Hole is different. And the [[Japanese Generation 1 cartoon continuity]] is different. [[Blaster (G1)|Broadcast]] never became Twincast in English. I think Japanese names are a special case and deserve to be on top since Japanese toyline & fiction continuity is always slightly separate. But I can hit the "end" key on the keyboard easy enough. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:56, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::Every single foreign language version of something is technically a slightly different continuity, strictly due to the nature of translation. This is not a arena in which Galaxy Force is unique. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:01, 23 February 2011 (EST)

== Commercial Appearances section ==

Alright, so I plan later on to start going through characters' pages and add in a "Commercial Appearances" section where it applies (sorry, I can't this weekend... homework to do!). Several characters already have this section and a lot of these commercials have nice short animations or other interesting characterizations and tidbits that I think they bear to be included in the characters' pages. Although, much like the Games sections, I'll only be able to marginally help by adding in the section itself to let people know that there's work to be done on a character's page... MY computer is so incredibly shitty that I can't even play videos off youtube. D:

But anyways, the reason I'm bringing this up here is because before I get started, I'd like to discuss what kind of format we want for this section, so it can be done right the first time around. Obviously, where it applies, stuff like indicating who the voice actor for the character makes sense, but should the write-up be in-universe or not? Since commercials fluctuate between using a short animation telling a mini-story and just being a straight-up commercial saying "buy this toy!" should a combination of both in-universe and out-of-universe description be used? And should we count the parts where the kids brandish their action figures and talk for the character as dialog spoken by the character? That's all the questions on the subject I can really think of for now... --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 15:12, 6 February 2011 (EST)
:I would write up the animation segments in-universe so long as they're unique to the commercial (i.e. not just recycled footage from one of the cartoons). Anything else that's notable enough could qualify for an out of universe note. But I wouldn't bother with recycled animation or the kids talking for the figures. That doesn't qualify as fiction to me.
:In regards to your inability to view the commercials, would it help if you could download them in some fashion and then watch them offline? Maybe burn the videos to a DVD disc? --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:43, 6 February 2011 (EST)
::Yeah, any clips taken from pre-existing mediums would be redundant from those scenes being already covered in other sections on that character's page. Personally though, I'm still on the fence about the kids talking for the figures... I find it comparable to botcon script readings in a way... People just talking out loud for a character without any accompanying animation... I'm prone to be swayed either way. As for me viewing the commercials themselves, my spring break is a week from now. I might have access to a better computer then, but otherwise I'll just be putting in information already available on the wiki to the appropriate pages throughout the week, I guess. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 17:53, 6 February 2011 (EST)

==How to resolve monster debates?==
[[User:-Blackout-]]'s recent meltdown over being prevented from editing [[Goldbug (IDW)]] has made me think again about how policy/content discussions tend to go on this wiki. It's a big part of why I haven't been around since last summer: I found myself perpetuating these miles-long debates that few cared to read, everyone was irritated by, and most importantly ''were impossible to resolve.''

That Goldbug article is a sterling example. Right now, people are talking about it as if the [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive1|giant]] [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive2|debate]] had resolved in favor of the current setup, so changing the article at this point is taboo because it "was dealt with already." But that's not how it went at all. Blackout's dickishly unilateral edit-war was definitely the Wrong Way to reopen this, but it's also wrong to pretend that we had achieved consensus or closure on the issue.

At [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive2#Breaking down the problem|the end of the debate]], I had restated the case for [[User:Jackpot/Sandbox/Goldbug (G1)|my "Goldbug (G1)" sandbox]], which is definitely different from the current setup, and 6 other people declared support for it while 2 objected at length. But the objectors were also against the current setup: Jeysie wanted the toy gone, and Derik wanted... something inscrutable and Deriky. Combining those numbers with the [[Talk:Goldbug (IDW)/Archive1#Vote Tally|premature vote]] that had been taken earlier (and adjusting for the voters who changed their minds by the end), I count:

Sandbox: 8 
Sandbox with modifications: 3 
Current page: 7 
Current page without the toy: 2

That's not consensus. That's deadlock. In fact, there were fewer votes to keep the page as-is than there were to change it in some fashion. The current setup didn't win out in terms of votes, logic, precedent, or any other measure: It won out because it was what happened to be there when the debate died of exhaustion.

So we're stuck with an awkward page that most people want to be different, encased in concrete forevermore. I don't see any way out of this situation, and I've watched the same principle play out with other debates too many times. At the very least, I wonder if it would be helpful to have a Template:Deadlock that we could slap on inconclusive debates (with a picture of [[Drift (G1)|Deadlock]], natch) so people know the true state of things.

Taking that idea further, maybe it could come with a period of enforced moratorium – say, two weeks – followed by a revote and/or a formalized "final statements" opportunity? The most extreme option I can think of is to create a "council of elders" that has the community-bestowed power to resolve intractable debates and declare relevant policy principles. Basically, a Supreme Court. I do worry that creating an authoritative heirarchy might produce even more problems, but I figured I'd throw it out there.

Thoughts? Other ideas?

- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 18:20, 9 February 2011 (EST)
: This whole argument goes to the heart of what we mean when we say two characters are "the same". The Bumblebee toy was produced and fiction was made to promote that toy, thus all of those fictions (which differ from each other) are about "the same" character. The Goldbug toy was produced with a tech spec that stated that it was "the same" character as Bumblebee. Fiction was produced to promote that toy, thus all those varying depictions of Goldbug are "the same" character as Bumblebee. The same argument applies to the differing backstories of Optimus Prime; Orion Pax and Optronix are "the same" character because they both are earlier forms of the character that was used to promote the sale of the Optimus Prime toy. The problem comes in with later stories that are not produced to promote those original toys. How do we decide what is the same? When is a character "the same character under different circumstances/in a different universe" and when is it simply an homage character? I really can't see how others see the IDW Goldbug as "the same" character as the original toy and not (as I see him) as a simple homage character. Under their viewpoint the toy belongs, under mine it doesn't. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:15, 10 February 2011 (EST)

: I NOMINATE MYSELF AS FINAL ARBITER AND SUPREME OVERLORD. all decisions will be made based on what amuses me the most. (seriously, we probably ought to have some kind of "no consensus" tag for articles like that.) [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 12:58, 10 February 2011 (EST)

Mmm...probably best not to restart the Goldbug debate itself here, Khajidha -- that would quickly distract from what Jackpot's actually asking here, which is how debates should be resolved ''in general''.

Some of the basic rules we already follow should remain. No "edit-warring"...leave it up to the Talk Pages to hash out the problem. I don't think a mere two weeks is enough to give people time to change their minds, though, especially in this crowd. One thing I notice is that despite dozens of regular contributors and hundreds overall, most Talk Page or Community Portal votes I've seen have less than 20 votes at the end. Many of these debates fly right under the radar. I'm relatively active here, but the Goldbug (IDW) chaos completely passed me by.

What about, when a Talk Page debate has clearly reached an impasse between <strike>obstinant</strike> strong-willed parties, a Vote is taken on the ''Main Page''? Some sort of easy-to-see box temporarily added to the Main Page, "above the fold" so that its visible to all visitors when they enter? It would be more noticeable than if the vote is hidden away on a single Talk Page people may or may not see. Something like ''"A [[Deadlock]] has arisen! Choose from the following choices: Should [[Goldbug (IDW)]] have the G1 toy on his page? Yes or No? (See the Goldbug (IDW) Talk Page for the full debate.)"''

I realize many debates won't be as simple as Yes or No, but if the debating parties agree in advance how to phrase the Voting Box, it could be a useful tool. --[[User:Xaaron|Xaaron]] 13:07, 10 February 2011 (EST)

:Yeah, wasn't really trying to restart that debate. Was bringing up questions about general character debates, as they seem to occur quite often. But other debates also bog down, so I recognize that my questions don't apply to those debates.--[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 13:35, 10 February 2011 (EST)

:I like the idea of keeping a debate in the regulars' faces until a decision has been reached by enough people (at least 20? 25?). Many debates I keep away from because I think they'll disappear anyway and my vote doesn't really matter <s>and I also can't deal all that well with the aggressive nature of most debates, making it actively a lose-only situation if I'd enter</s>. I'm not sure if others feel that way, but I imagine this would be a boost for all to participate. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 13:23, 10 February 2011 (EST)
::I absolutely disagree with the premise that people who don't care enough to read the argument should have it shoved in their face until they vote. AT MOST, we should mention it somewhere prominent, like the community portal. --[[User:Jimsorenson|Jimsorenson]] 18:53, 10 February 2011 (EST)
:::I agree that essentially putting a ballot on the front page is asking for trouble. You might get the dozens of votes you're looking for, but they'll all be uninformed gut reactions. One of the reasons these debates happen is that issues can be much more complicated and subtle than they seem at first glance. Plus one would hope that the reasoning behind the winning option would help develop our policies, but if the decisions are made by the majority of an explicitly uninformed mob, it's hard to glean any substantial precedent out of that.
:::But I think an approach like that ''could'' be combined with my "final statements" suggestion. Thinking out loud here: After a cooling-off period has been declared and a set amount of time has passed, anyone who wants to present a case can write up a defense of his or her preferred option. Those are all submitted to a neutral volunteer, who then posts them simultaneously on the relevant Talk page, and those become the voting choices. No replies are allowed, only votes. We put a notice up at least on the Community Portal, possibly on the Main Page, for another set time period, then close voting and go with the majority.
:::How does that sound? Like I said, thinking out loud, so suggestions are more than welcome.
:::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:18, 10 February 2011 (EST)
::::Sounds pretty good to me. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 10:19, 11 February 2011 (EST)

==How featured articles are chosen==
On a side note, would a box like that also be useful to start a voting system for featured pages? Because I'm fine with Drift and Wreck-Gar and all others before, but I am absolutely clueless as to who chose them to become featured for what reasons. I'd like to see a better system for that. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 13:23, 10 February 2011 (EST)
: If there was a recently-completed article that's of respectable length, I choose it. The pool for featured articles is pretty damn small. Not many articles are finished, and the ones that are finished have usually already been Featured Articles already. Finished articles don't happen very frequently, so sometimes we find one that's close to completion near the end of a month and then push to finish it before the month is over. Sometimes we think a subject or a character is timely (like around BotCon, or before an episode or movie premiere) and push for that. If you want a heads up, Chris McFeely's [[Matrix of Leadership]] article is so totally March's. (I think Chris has the record for number of articles he's completed which have become featured.) --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:31, 10 February 2011 (EST)
: Long story short, if you want an article to be featured, finish it. That means photos for every toy and known merchandise, and storylinks (with summaries) to every piece of fiction they've appeared in. Behind the scenes information helps. The longer and more involved the article, the more appealing it is. Meaning, finishing an article for a Mini-Con who showed up in the background somewhere, or finishing an article for someone who doesn't have any illutrated appearances... these are probably not going to be featured. But people like Perceptor (G1) or Side Burn (RID) or High Wire (Armada) have enough about them to say to make an interesting featured article. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:36, 10 February 2011 (EST)
: "Long story short," my ass. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 13:37, 10 February 2011 (EST)
:: Have we done any episodes as Featured yet? I know the over-arching "Target 2006" article was chosen once. You'd think we could get, say [[Code of Hero]] up to that standard pretty quickly. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 07:42, 11 February 2011 (EST)
:::I really think we need to get [[BotCon]] up to that standard. We're pretty close! --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 15:22, 11 February 2011 (EST)
:::[[B.O.T. (episode)|B.O.T.]] is a Featured article about an episode. [[User:Excise|Excise]] 00:00, 16 February 2011 (EST)

== Letterers ==
On images of comic pages, do we credit the ''letterers'' by placing the image in an "Image by Letterer Name" category? We've got a few contradictory examples around. [[User:JW|JW]] 15:32, 12 February 2011 (EST)
:Okay, three options: For images currently in categories like "Images by Mike Scott" (where Mike Scott is a letterer), we can:
:# Create the category and treat letterers just like artists, inkers, and colorists.
:# Instead place them in a "Images ''lettered'' by Mike Scott" category.
:# Remove the category, and not attempt to categorize images by letterer.
:I'm probably going to go with option 3 barring dissent. [[User:JW|JW]] 17:25, 16 February 2011 (EST)
::I added galleries to a few of the pages for letterers (eg [[Bill Oakley]], [[Peri Godbold]]) on the basis that lettering can make or [[:Image:Cryotekmrrghmraghmrugghagh.jpg|break]] a comic. As well as adding the text, the letterer has to pick where the balloons will go and place, them, so they do have a large degree of control over how the comic turns out. That said, I don't know that we need to categorise images by letterer. The original intention was [[:Category talk:Images by artist|not to]], but it looks like we ended up doing it anyway, and at least one template is set up to put images into category by letterer. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:44, 16 February 2011 (EST)

:I'd vote for option 3 as well.--[[User:MistaTee|MistaTee]] 22:02, 16 February 2011 (EST)
::I'm leaning towards option 3 myself. My reasoning is that even though letterers can have a large effect on a comic, I don't see too many people wanting to find every image lettered by a given letterer. The galleries, on the other hand, are useful for demonstrating the quality of an individual's work. So those should be used. While the obsessive in me thinks we should categorize images by every applicable characteristic, it's not realistic. I don't think it benefits us enough to go through all that work for categories that only a few people might find useful. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 01:09, 17 February 2011 (EST)
'Kay, I'm going to go with option 3. This may involve editing a template or two. [[User:JW|JW]] 10:35, 17 February 2011 (EST)

== Categories by toy size class? ==
Do we ''want'' the following categories?
 Leader class toy images
 Deluxe class toy images
 Voyager class toy images
 Scout class toy images
 They currently have a very few things in them (and could obviously have many more), but the cat' pages themselves have not been created. [[User:JW|JW]] 15:43, 12 February 2011 (EST)

:No. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 16:13, 12 February 2011 (EST)

::No. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 21:06, 15 February 2011 (EST)

:::As long as it's only the images and not the articles, I couldn't care less. [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 21:09, 15 February 2011 (EST)

:There's also a "Legends class toy images" category which has 90 images in it. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:21, 15 February 2011 (EST)

::Legends are kind of an exception because they're a different scale/play pattern, as evidenced by the upcoming Cyberverse stuff. Scouts-on-up are ''generally'' meant to intermingle, Legends aren't. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 07:41, 16 February 2011 (EST)

:I could go either way on this one. It's a lot of work to fill these categories out, but the ability to find all the Deluxe figures easily intrigues me. If we did institute this I would also think that this would be the proper place to put the "exclusive figure" categories and such. Basically, any category that pertains to a particular toy and not to the character could be tagged to the image of that toy. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 23:08, 15 February 2011 (EST)

:I've been doing them because I saw other people do them. I don't mind either way. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 05:51, 16 February 2011 (EST)
So, counting me as "no", that's three "no"s, an "I don't care", an "I don't mind either way", and an "either way/intrigues me". I think we're leaning toward "no". Final comments? [[User:JW|JW]] 07:08, 16 February 2011 (EST)

::I guess it's "no" or at least "not the time"? (Though I'm "I'm not sure".) --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 11:21, 16 February 2011 (EST)
:::I've gone with "no", and added a note to that effect to [[Transformers_Wiki:Images]]. [[User:JW|JW]] 14:27, 16 February 2011 (EST)

Ha ha, none of the no's have actually said why they've said no. Such super debating skills that. [[Special:Contributions/213.105.226.130|213.105.226.130]] 17:44, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== Undo Redone? ==

I just undid an edit, but instead of getting the automatic "Reverting edit ##### by User1 to last version by User2" summary, that box was blank. In addition, above the edit window were the captions "Current revision" and "Your text", side by side, as if there's meant to be one editable text window under each. Instead, there was only one such text window beneath them, stretching across under both captions. The page is protected so only registered users can edit it, so that MIGHT have something to do with the problem, though I doubt it.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 20:28, 19 February 2011 (EST)
:It doesn't automatically create an edit summary if you're doing an undo on multiple revisions, so that might be it. Not sure about the other part - it's always shown me a diff at the top of the screen when I've done an undo. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 20:54, 19 February 2011 (EST)
::Okay, blank edit summary's explained, because it was indeed a group of 3-4 edits being undone all at once. Still inexplicable is the fact that I just checked the page history; it didn't even accept my Undo! LoneGamer78 ended up doing it instead. I've noticed some sluggish response from the site over the past fifteen minutes or so, perhaps whatever caused that was a factor? It may never be known...--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 21:02, 19 February 2011 (EST)
:::Is it possible she just beat you to it by a few moments and thus there was an edit conflict? I've had that happen sometimes, and so there's no diff shown because now the page already matches what you were going to change it to. (Uh, does that make sense?) --[[Special:Contributions/67.252.49.31|67.252.49.31]] 22:17, 19 February 2011 (EST)
::::Can't rule it out entirely, but edit conflicts usually announce themselves as such, and they DO have two distinct editable text windows: one showing the text as it stands after someone edited while you were typing, the other as it would have been if you'd edited without interference.--[[User:Apcog|Apcog]] 22:24, 19 February 2011 (EST)
:::::A few times I've "undone" an edit, but someone else beat me to it. It doesn't seem to show an edit conflict if that happens, probably because the change is identical to the previous one. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 23:06, 19 February 2011 (EST)

== Banner ad question. ==
The small side box ad (the one that's still a free-floater) currently has an ad for some webcomic. Which is fine, but one of the panels has GIANT ERECT LADY NIPPLES ALL OVER THE PLACE. I'm not offended by it, but it's, uh, something. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 06:39, 21 February 2011 (EST)
:Ah, yeah. That'd be because it's an NSFW comic called DarkBrain which is read aloud by "adult film star Tabitha Stevens." -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 16:50, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:: If people don't like it, I can yank it. I didn't think its THO was that objectionable, apparently, when I okayed it. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 17:27, 22 February 2011 (EST)

== help ==

I cant find the latest talk please help([[User:Manmcmanman|Manmcmanman]] 15:44, 21 February 2011 (EST))
:What do you mean by the latest talk? -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 15:54, 21 February 2011 (EST)

== Revenge of the Fallen Online Games ==

So, I figured I might as well finish up the online game write-ups for Revenge of the Fallen online games, in case they go offline once Dark of the Moon comes out. But, hot damn, do I ever suck. Which means I'm not very likely to get pics of later levels in some of these games. I'll be trying to add in whatever I can to these sections, but some help would be much appreciated! --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 14:57, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:I can have a go at getting some screencaps tonight if no one else does. Which games in particular? I noticed some of them are already gone a couple of weeks ago, as Hasbro has redirected most of the monkeybar site they were on to the Hub site, which doesn't have them. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 17:58, 22 February 2011 (EST)
::Well, personally I'm having difficulty getting pics of every character's sprite from Battle for the Matrix. I'm currently working on The RPMs Devastator game. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 18:41, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:::I got caps of everyone except the Fallen, haven't uploaded them yet though. I couldn't get the [[flying drone]]s to transform either. They just seem to fly around wildly in robot mode. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:56, 23 February 2011 (EST)
::::Dang! The Fallen is the only one I can't get to either! And yeah, the flying drones are near-impossible to get a screencap of. I got a couple mid-transformation, but that's it. If any of your pics are better than mine, feel free to replace them. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 13:55, 23 February 2011 (EST)
:::::I went and got pics from Flight of the Bumblebee and Allspark Highway. Unfortunately I can't get pics of Ratchet from the later since robovision isn't up anymore! Darn! I'll upload them later. --[[User:Ascendron|Ascendron]] 14:45, 23 February 2011 (EST)
::::::I grabbed a screenshot of The Fallen finally. Man, that game is a memory hog. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 03:38, 25 February 2011 (EST)

== Countdown? ==

Sorry if this isn't the right place to put this, but a while back ago, there was a countdown to ROTF on the Main Page. Perhaps a countdown to DOTM would now be appropriate as it's so close?

Also, I'd appreciate it if someone could tell me how to program/insert/design/<insert verb here> a countdown on a wiki page (it's for another wiki). What template or whatever does that use? I'd be very grateful if someone could tell me.

Again, terribly sorry if this is the wrong place to say this...
 - [[User:Queso|¡Usa El Queso!]] 4:02 PM, 22 February 2011 A.D.
:Dark of the Moon countdown based on Derik's ROTF code: {{#expr: ({{ #time: U |July 1, 2011}} - {{ #time: U }})/86400 round 0}} days until [[Dark of the Moon (film)|TF: Dark of the Moon]]! --[[User:Abates|abates]] 19:05, 22 February 2011 (EST)

==When to omit "Transformers" from an article title==
So I got a hankering to remove the "Transformers" from [[Transformers: War for Cybertron]] and [[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] and all of their related pages, since unlike [[Transformers Animated (franchise)|Transformers Animated]], there's just no good reason to break policy for them. There are [[Revenge of the Fallen (Xbox 360/PS3/PC)|other video games that we drop the "TF" from]], and if "Prime" is too common a term, then what about "[[Energon (franchise)|Energon]]" or "[[Cybertron (franchise)|Cybertron]]"?

But then I decided to check out [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:Search?ns0=1&search=Transformers&searchx=Search&limit=500 which pages use "Transformers" in their titles,] and holyyyyyyyy crap. I copy-pasted here all the ones I found that I thought could lose the "Transformers" without negating their meaning, destroying a phrase, or otherwise severely damaging the title. (I added an "(etc.)" to each one that represents a series of identically-worded pages):

[[Transformers: War for Cybertron]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Animated (franchise)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Universe (Marvel comic)]] 
[[1-2-3 Transformers]] 
[[Transformers: Mystery of Convoy]] 
[[Hasbro Transformers Collectors' Club (magazine)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Legends]] 
[[Transformers: Beast Wars Transmetals (N64)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers: The Headmasters (video game)]] 
[[The Transformers: Battle to Save the Earth]] 
[[Transformers Armada: The Energon Within]] 
[[The Transformers Collection]] 
[[Transformers Quest]] 
[[Transformers Key Recovery: The Game]] 
[[Transformers Power Up: The Game]] 
[[Transformers Cybertron: Primus Unleashed]] 
[[Transformers PD Type]] 
[[Transformers: The Animated Movie]] 
[[Transformers Generations]] 
[[Transformers: Rise of the Chevy Autobots]] 
[[Transformers Annual 1990]] (etc.) 
[[The Transformers Sticker Book (1986)]] 
[[Beast Wars: Transformers (video game)]] 
[[Transformers: The Junior Novel]] 
[[Look and Find Transformers]] 
[[Transformers Coloring and Activity Book and Crayons]] 
[[Transformers: The Ultimate Guide]] 
[[Transformers: Learn to Count Activity Tablet]] 
[[Transformers The Reusable Sticker Book]] 
[[Transformers: The Movie Storybook]] 
[[Transformers: The Movie Guide]] 
[[Transformers Prime Time]] 
[[Transformers Mix & Match]] 
[[Transformers Comic issue 1]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers The Game (console)]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Autobots/Decepticons]] 
[[Transformers History of Music 1984-1990]] 
[[Transformers: Mosaic]] 
[[Transformers Name Generator]] 
[[Transformers Battle Universe]] 
[[The Transformers: Binaltech & TF Collection Complete Guide]] 
[[The Transformers Comic Magazine]] 
[[Transformers Pop-Up Book]] 
[[Transformers Visualworks]] 
[[Transformers Tooth Tunes]] 
[[Transformers Tapestry]] 
[[Transformers Song Universe]] 
[[Transformers G1: Awakening]] 
[[Transformers Armada Annual 2004]] 
[[Transformers: Beginnings]] 
[[Transformers the Movie water]] 
[[Transformers: The Score]] 
[[Transformers: The Thirteen]] 
[[Transformers: War Within Omnibus]] 
[[Transformers: The Ride]] 
[[Beast Wars Transformers Mutating Card Game]] 
[[Beast Wars Transformers Jigsaw Puzzle]] 
[[Transformers: Kōtetsu no Yūki]] 
[[The Transformers Continuum: The Definitive Chronology]] 
[[The Transformers: Bumblebee]] 
[[Transformers Adventures]] (etc.) 
[[Top Trumps: Transformers]] 
[[Transformers Armada: Race for the Mini-Con Robots]] 
[[Transformers Armada: The Battle Begins]] 
[[Transformers Armada: Secret of the Star Saber]] 
[[Transformers Armada: The Autobots Strike Back]] 
[[Transformers Galaxy Force: Sound Pack 1]] 
[[Transformers Galaxy Force: Sound Pack 2]] 
[[Transformers Theme Song Collection]] 
[[The Transformers: Drift]] 
[[Transformers Revenge of the Fallen Annual 2010]] 
[[Transformers CyberToy]] 
[[Transformers Hall of Fame]] 
[[The Transformers: Ironhide]] 
[[Transformers Evo.]] 
[[The Transformers Legends of the Microns: Sound of Evolution Vol. 1]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Music Matrix]] 
[[Transformers Ultimate Guide]] 
[[Transformers Ultimate Guide: Revenge]] 
[[Transformers: Battle for the Matrix]] 
[[Transformers: Coloring and Activity Book and Stickers]] 
[[Transformers: Activity Book and Gel Pen]] 
[[Transformers: Sector 7]] 
[[Transformers: Cybertron Adventures]] 
[[Transformers Cards]] 
[[Transformers RPMs: Devastator's Demise]] 
[[Cadbury's Transformers Card Game]] 
[[Ridiculous Legend Transformers]] 
[[Famicom How-to Manga: Transformers: Mystery of Convoy]] 
[[Transformers Caramel]] 
[[Transformers Comic-Magazin]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Extra Comic-Sonderheft]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers Super-Auswahlband]] (etc.) 
[[Transformers: Energon Valentine's cards]] 
[[The Transformers: Infestation issue 1]] 
[[The Transformers: Infestation issue 2]]

For many of them, the choice to keep or drop the "TF" seems intuitive, and many others are in a grey area... but I'll be damned if I can put into words any kind of coherent rationale. I'm seriously thinking that we've outgrown the "drop extraneous 'TF's" rule. Back when we only had a few hundred pages, it made a certain kind of sense: Why bother writing out stuff like "Transformers: Generation 2" when just "Generation 2" is equally meaningful to everyone here? Besides, isn't every page about Transformers by default? But in the past five years, both the wiki and the subject matter have exploded, and with both so many fine-grain, obscure topics being covered and so much not-strictly-TF content we've added, I don't think the policy serves us anymore. It doesn't make things simple; it makes things arbitrary and unpredictable.

So unless someone can sum up our policy in a way that makes a lick of sense, I propose: '''If a topic has an official title, then that should be used in full as the title of the relevant articles.''' Period. So [[Transformers: War for Cybertron]] and [[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] would stay right where they are, and yes, [[Generation 2 (franchise)]] would become "Transformers: Generation 2 (franchise)", [[Revenge of the Fallen (franchise)]] would become "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (franchise)", etc. I don't think we'd need to make that change happen instantly, but we could slowly propagate it as people feel inclined to. I also think we can keep the parenthetical abbreviations and in-sentence references as short as they currently are; this is only about the titles.

Thoughts?

- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 18:43, 22 February 2011 (EST)
:What are these "Transformers"? -[[Special:Contributions/75.185.113.106|75.185.113.106]] 18:58, 22 February 2011 (EST)

::I've always been for having the full name as article titles. (Maybe also drop the "(franchise)" disambigs, because durr, but that's other topic.) Not only do we keep the full name of the subject, it aids us in disambiguation (it's easier to have smaller sets of "Transformers: Cybertron" and "Cybertron" than a large set of just "Cybertron"). [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 19:22, 22 February 2011 (EST)

:::I don't have an opinion on adding or removing "Transformers:" from articles (other than that adding it would perhaps make articles and reading unnecessarily longer - right now, I hate having to type out "Transformers Animated" before "The AllSpark Almanac"), but I do oppose removing (franchise). If there's one thing I hate, it's when there's one 'most important' page that goes undisamb'ed (like Spark) and you'll have to go through a lot of trouble to ensure it all is meant to link there. When I cleaned up the Lithone links for planet and species, nearly every single one link directed the wrong way. Same for D-HQ, AllSpark vs Allspark, Junkion, Black Friday, etc. So, keep (franchise). [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 01:49, 23 February 2011 (EST)

:::::I too think "Transformers: " should be kept as well as " (franchise)". --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:46, 23 February 2011 (EST)

::::I don't mind losing Transformers when it the prefix in a title that's the form of Transformers: <subtitle>, as in that case the subtitle itself is more the actual official name and "Transformers" is just tacked on as an extra identifier.

::::But in some of those things, Transformers is, well, a vital part of the thing's actual name. I mean, for instance, the Club's full official name ''is'' "Hasbro Transformers Collectors' Club", so removing "Transformers" from it would be incorrect. --[[Special:Contributions/67.252.49.31|67.252.49.31]] 03:00, 23 February 2011 (EST)

:::::I don't think that distinction is clear enough to be workable anymore. Looking at that list, tons of them I have no idea which side of the divide they'd fall on. For instance, "[[Transformers Legends]]" is the proper title of the book; that's how it would be listed in any store or library, but for ''our'' purposes the "TF" is as extraneous as the one that we omit from [[Energon (comic)]] or [[Dinobots Strike Back]]. The "for our purposes" thing is so often so questionable... like, what would that dictate for [[Transformers: The Ultimate Guide]]? It's definitely a subtitle situation like you described, but there are lots of non-TF "Ultimate Guide"s published by the same company... but we would never cover them, so for our purposes is the "TF" still redundant?
:::::I agree with Geewunling that it would be annoying to have to type out longer titles (though readability should be unchanged, since I think we could still truncate in-sentence references). But right NOW it's annoying that our lack of a coherent policy is making everything increasingly unpredictable. We're seeing a lot of creep in the form of stuff like [[Transformers: Prime (franchise)]] and for some reason video games. So I don't even know what should be "corrected" anymore or how to decide the matter when creating a new article.
:::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 13:58, 23 February 2011 (EST)

::::::The annoyance of editors doesn't really enter into my consideration; the wiki is ultimately for the readers, not our convenience. If we have to do some more work for the best presentation, so be it. —Interrobang, not logged in

:I'm OK with moving articles to put Transformers into the title so long as we don't delete the redirects. If we move "Revenge of the Fallen (film)" to "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (film)", there are going to be a whole bunch of sites linking to the old URL, and I don't wanna have a repeat of the "(Shattered Glass)" thing where all the redirects get deleted and a whole lot of other sites are pointing to useless error pages. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 22:25, 23 February 2011 (EST)

=="(WFC)" vs. "(Prime)"==
There are currently [[Talk:Transformers: War for Cybertron (franchise)#"(WFC)" instead of "(Prime)" for characters that originated in this franchise?|two]] [[Talk:Optimus Prime (Prime)#Move|discussions]] going about whether articles on subjects that originated in ''War for Cybertron''-branded fiction (the [[War for Cybertron games|games]], [[Exodus: The Official History of the War for Cybertron|novel]], and [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (comic)|comic]]) should be titled "(WFC)" rather than "(Prime)". It was suggested that this should be brought up in the Community Portal, so here it is.

For the record, looking at [[War for Cybertron games#Featured Characters|this list]], right now we're using "(Prime)" for all named characters, even those currently exclusive to WfC, and "(WFC)" for all character ''types'' from the games. I'm not sure why that is, but that's the state of things.

- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 17:46, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:I completely agree with Jackpot. It is stupid we have an article called [[Ultra Magnus (Prime)]] stating "Ultra Magnus is an Autobot Wrecker from the WFC portion of the Aligned family continuity". I blame myself for not doing this a lot earlier, treating the WFC navbox as like a subsection of Prime when the novel was so clearly a tie-in to those games. [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 18:48, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::WFC is a tie-in game. As I pointed out, how many Mini-Cons from the PS2 Transformers game use the disambiguator "(Transformers)"? And even then, what of novel-original characters? Do they get "(Exodus)"? And heck, didn't Exodus come out ''before'' WFC? Shouldn't the characters thusly use "(Exodus)" over "(WFC)" or "(Prime)"? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 18:57, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::: The book and game came out on the same day, as I recall. So... yeah. I'm completely against this. We used "Prime" because that was the name we WERE using for the continuity family; frankly, I find this wishy-washy "aligned continuity family" thing pretty lame. The core of the damn family is the Prime cartoon. It is THE central feature, and will be THE major fictional outlet and -almost assuredly- what future non-show fictions will adhere more closely to. I don't see the point in all this subdividing and adding more parantheticals. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 19:19, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::I find it ''extremely'' hard to believe that if Hasbro's "decade" plan goes through, ''Prime'' is the last franchise we're going to see spring from it. Even Aaron Archer thinks "Prime" is a bad name for the overall deal. Given what a fractured start it's already off to, I think separating out the "family" foundation is the only sensible thing to do. So that's why [[Aligned continuity family]] exists.
::::As for the "(WFC)" notion, I'm not as personally attached to that, even though I do think it's the correct thing to do. Mostly I think that WfC needs to be acknowledged as an entity unto itself, not just a subset of ''Prime''. Strictly from a branding point of view, it ISN'T a subset; nothing has been both WfC- and Prime-branded. It's not just the title of a video game; it's in the titles of [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (comic)|a comic]] and [[Exodus: The Official History of the War for Cybertron|a novel]], plus they've made [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (franchise)#Toys|toys from it]] that definitely don't fit the ''Prime'' brand. (True, the toys aren't labeled "WfC", but that's par for the course with ''Generations'' anyway. At the very least, it's a grey area.) Beyond branding, it just has a unique aesthetic and sensibility that's very different from ''Prime''.
::::Based on all that, the best place WfC fits in our schema is as a "franchise", to my judgement. "''Prime'' tie-in" doesn't cut it.
::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:55, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:::WFC is not ''just'' a tie-in game. It has [http://www.hasbro.com/transformers/en_US/play/details.cfm?guid=7fcfb1b5-19b9-f369-10be-e91a2108d9ab online bios] and [http://www.hasbro.com/transformers/en_US/play/details.cfm?guid=7fd5ecd9-19b9-f369-1041-a7635be83172 online timeline]. Hasbro made it its own thing. Franchise-like. Before any Prime show started we learned from the timeline that [[Megatron (Prime)|D-16]] was an Energon mine laborer and rose to prominence in secret gladiatorial combat and took the name "Megatron". So [[Megatron (Prime)]] had a whole history before the show even existed. The non-show characters with the (Prime) disambiguation also shows it doesn't quite fit. I'd go for WFC. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 19:35, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::AGAIN, Exodus came out the SAME DAY. So why does WFC get prominence? --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 19:56, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::::Because that's the phrase that's used in the names of [[War for Cybertron games|all]] [[Exodus: The Official History of the War for Cybertron|the]] [[Transformers: War for Cybertron (comic)|media]]. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 20:02, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::::I don't see how the subline "The official history of the war for Cybertron" is the exact same as "War For Cybertron: The Vidya Game". --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 20:24, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::I agree. Aside from three (ambiguous) words on the book's front, there's not much that says it's part of the WFC "franchise". Same for Generations. If they wanted to, they could have made figures of every War for Cybertron character and released it in a toyline explicitly called "Transformers: War for Cybertron". But they didn't; they just released five toys based on WFC designs and released them under Generations, so Generations is a WFC toy line as much as it is a G1 one (actually, probably more of G1 considering how very few WFC toys there were). The video games are only different because of hardware limitations, so having multiple games with the same title does not a franchise make. Having a website with bios and everything is a moot point, because almost every video game has that. The comic, I'll give you that one, but I don't think it's a franchise if it's a game and a tie-in comic with a limited release. --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 20:30, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::::::For what it's worth, when you [http://www.hasbro.com/transformers/en_US/discover/movie-news/Transformers-War-for-Cybertron.cfm click on "War For Cybertron"] it brings up all the Generations toys. I also think the WFC timeline ties in Exodus to WFC since the events in the comic and timeline are basically from the book. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 20:48, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::::::::It also brings up PCC Icepick (item 12 of 12, on page 2). --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 20:52, 28 February 2011 (EST)

::::::::The WfC-branded timeline and comic both cover events in ''Exodus''. Hell, the comic was written by the same dude. I don't understand the logic that says that the "War for Cybertron" in the novel's title doesn't mean the same thing. If there were a novel called "Deuteronomy: The Official History of the Beast Wars" set during the events of the cartoon, I wouldn't be trying to say it was part of the ''Beast Machines'' franchise.
::::::::Let me put in a slightly different light: Because franchises are branding-based, not continuity-based, I'm not comfortable with the ''Prime'' franchise being stretched to include all this stuff that doesn't have the ''Prime'' label on it. Yes, it's clearly all RELATED, story-wise, but that's what [[Aligned continuity family|continuity pages]] are for. This feels like taking ''Machine Wars'' (which is the opposite kind of sparse: a toyline with virtually no fiction) and rolling it into G2. Sure, they're in the same family, and there are connections between the two, but they're not marketed with the same label, so we don't do it. Before ''Prime'' existed, there were these other forms of media sharing a unique title (that even got the TF-logo lockup treatment!) and covering common ground. Then ''Prime'' showed up, and so far the two labels have not been seen on the same product. To me, that means two franchises.
::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 21:20, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:::::::::But... there is no overarching label on the products we have poked into the WFC "Franchise". "Transformers: War for Cybertron" has its own logo which is also on the tie-in comic, and Exodus has its own logo. They're still prequels to TF:Prime. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 21:33, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::::::::I guess I just see the "War for Cybertron" in the title of ''Exodus'' as having more meaning than you do. Yeah, Hasbro could've been more blatant if they'd wanted to, but it's still clearly telling the reader it's part of the same deal as the WfC games and comic, without making any reference to ''Prime'' (or vice-versa). I can imagine a situation where the ''Prime'' branding might retroactively subsume WfC, like how the "Wreckers" comic was given the ''Universe'' brand (they say there's another game coming out, after all). But that hasn't happened yet, so in the meantime I say WfC doesn't belong under the ''Prime'' franchise.
::::::::::Anyway, at this point if we don't see eye-to-eye, we probably won't, so I'm going to shut up now.
::::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 22:39, 28 February 2011 (EST)

:What about the next thing after ''Prime'' that is in the Modern/Aligned continuity? We would have a new disambiguation, like, "Spike (Next Franchise)." and characters that have never been in Prime, like "Ultra Magnus (Prime)." Kind of confusing. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 21:57, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::No it isn't. The idea that WFC/Exodus are part of a big wad of continuity colloquially known as "Prime", and referred to as "Prime" because the "Prime" cartoon is THE core of the whole shebang, and will liekly BE said core for the near future, is not a hard one. It only gets confusing when you start letting obfuscating pedantry in, at which point you're only making more work for no payoff and making things harder for our readers. A trend which seems to keep coming up over and over again, I've noticed... --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 22:09, 28 February 2011 (EST)
:::I'm pretty sure I've had my share of "obfuscating pedantry" moments, but I completely agree with Siph on this one. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 22:18, 28 February 2011 (EST)
::::For the record, if people really think that using "(WFC)" would be confounding to readers, that's not a decision I'm very invested in. This discussion has ballooned into bigger issues that I ''do'' feel more strongly about, but the parenthetical itself is very take-it-or-leave-it for me. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 22:39, 28 February 2011 (EST)

I would at the least support migrating characters who have thus far ''only'' appeared in WFC to the appropriate parenthetical.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:55, 1 March 2011 (EST)
:And move them back if they appear in Prime? [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 11:03, 1 March 2011 (EST)
::Yes. I think that would make the most sense to people looking for the characters.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 11:24, 4 March 2011 (EST)
:::I am willing to make this compromise for the time being. [[User:Alientraveller|Alientraveller]] 14:27, 4 March 2011 (EST)

==War For Cybertron==
War for cybertron is a relativley new game, but it is a great one. I am kind of new on this website, but to me, it looks like the War For Cybertron title has gotten mixed up with Transformers: Prime, a completley diffrent universe. also, WFC is G1 Canon. All the WFC pages and articles should be labled on G1, MAJOR cleanup is needed. {{unsigned|Holymoses|06:30, March 3, 2011 (EST)}}
:You clearly ''are'' quite new, because we would advise you to read [[Aligned continuity family|this article]] before you start in on this notion. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 06:33, 3 March 2011 (EST)
:In Hasbro's own words: "The TRANSFORMERS brand team would like to confirm that Transformers War for Cybertron video game, Transformers Exodus novel, and the Transformers Prime television show are in the same aligned continuity. Hasbro is creating a single continuity to tell the bulk of our TRANSFORMERS stories going forward." Here's the [http://www.allspark.com/content/view/8189/20/ link] to the announcement --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 06:45, 3 March 2011 (EST)
::You aren't completely wrong. The game developers were heavily inspired by G1, and were pretty much making a G1 game as far as they knew. It's just that, like Khajidha said, Hasbro says War for Cybertron is part of the same continuity as Prime, so that's what the wiki goes with. - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 00:00, 4 March 2011 (EST)

Well that still seems weird, since "Prime" has a completley diffrent story, and "Exodus" doesnt connect the two sagas very well. even if its what Hasbro said, i think we should put all this into consideration, Aaron Archer himself said that War for Cybertron was a game set in the G1 Universe. I think its wrong of Hasbro to try and connect the two diffrent Continuities. {{unsigned|Holymoses|09:12, March 4, 2011 (EST)}}
:First of all, when did Aaron Archer say that? Second, Hasbro gets to define what is in each continuity for the simple reason that it is their intellectual property. It may not be to your liking, but it cannot be wrong as they are the ones who determine what is right. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:35, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::Yeah, gonna need a source on that Archer statement. Especially since he's been amongst the ones saying WFC/Exodus is part of the new continuity. Also, weren't a lot of elements in WFC, like Dark Energon, Hasbro mandates from a story bible they supplied the creators (hereby proving that Hasbro's intent was always for it to be part of the new continuity), or am I imagining things again? --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 10:08, 4 March 2011 (EST)
:::From what I read about that production bible, it is a result of guys at Hasbro sitting down and "[http://collider.com/roberto-orci-jeff-kline-interview-transformers-prime/75039/ coalescing all the mythologies] that they had institutionally for years. Actually putting it down to paper." It sounds like they were just collecting and not adding new stuff in. I wouldn't be surprised if Dark Energon were added ''after'' it was in the game. And what about timing? Orci said Hasbro put together the bible after the movies came out (in mid 2009). The video game came out in mid 2010 with a video game lead time of ??? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 11:27, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::::Unless Dark Energon is actually just the new name for Angolmois energy. The name may have been taken from the video game, but the concept could well have been in the production bible before WFC. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 11:37, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::::What a load of supposition and crap. I hereby dub it "crapposition". I can pretty much say that you are completely wrong. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 12:38, 4 March 2011 (EST)
:::::[http://www.joystiq.com/2010/05/05/interview-matt-tieger-of-high-moon-studios-on-transformers/ Matt Tieger said] that High Moon started working on WfC when they shipped their "Bourne" game, which according to the accompanying notes was mid-2008, between the first movie and RotF. [http://www.cheatcc.com/extra/interviewtransformerswarforcybertron2.html This interview] talks up the G1 inspiration and then says the WfC storyline is "a completely original story that we made up at High Moon. We worked closely with Hasbro..." The consistent impression I've gotten from several different interviews is that High Moon started from G1 and then made pitches to Hasbro, which Hasbro would provide feedback on, and eventually there was a game. The only people who I've seen actually talk about the 400-page story-bible are the ''Prime'' creators. And if Orci was being literal when he said the bible was put together "after the movie’s came out", then game development would've indeed started earlier. At the very least, it sounds pretty likely that there was some simultaneous creation.
:::::In the end, the chicken-and-egg question is basically moot because either way, WfC is part of the new deal. It doesn't matter who said the words "Dark Energon" first; it's part of the structure that binds all of the pieces, so that's that. But for nitpicking's sake, Starfield's suppositions aren't off-base from the evidence we have. Siph, if you have additional info that clarifies or contradicts any of that, please share.
:::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 19:44, 4 March 2011 (EST)
::::::I, similarly, have found it quite plausible when thinking on the subject to believe that High Moon could have created the idea of Dark Energon, and that Hasbro then said to themselves "We can use THAT!" and put it in the bible. It's certainly outside the realm of possibility, unless you know something we don't, Siph. - [[User:Chris McFeely|Chris McFeely]] 05:24, 5 March 2011 (EST)

:Because nothing whatsoever can change in the millions of years between the WFC era and the Prime cartoon era. And yeah, good luck sourcing that Aaron claim. --[[User:M Sipher|M Sipher]] 11:24, 4 March 2011 (EST)
I think that if they were in the game or in Exodus:The Offical History of the War for Cybertron, they should be labled (WFC),but if they poped into the Prime teley-show or comics, they should be labled (Prime).-[ [User:DinoDigger97|DinoDigger97]] 2:11 3 Apil 2011

== Captured-Prey ads ==

One of the things advertised there appears to be a fan-made Megatron min-figure. Seeing as how everybody was upset that the TFSource ad [[Transformers_Wiki_talk:Community_Portal/Archive47#TFsource_ad_buy|featured fansproject stuff]], surely, this isn't right either? [[User:Item42|Item42]] 05:33, 8 March 2011 (EST)
:Check the section back up this page titled [[#Project_Wonderful_ads|Project Wonderful ads]]. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 05:59, 8 March 2011 (EST)

== Revenge of the Fallen video game character articles - [X] Scout 1, [X] Scout 2 pages for the same design ==

With the upcoming DOTM games, I thought I should look at the ROTF game articles that were abandoned in 2009 and see if I could do anything for them. I believe it was Derik who made this decision, but I am now wondering if it is necessary to have say [[Aerialbot Scout 1]] and [[Aerialbot Scout 2]], [[Omnibot Scout 1]] and [[Omnibot Scout 2]] (and so on) considering "Scout 1" and "Scout 2" are just the two different colour schemes for these mass produced generic, nameless characters who only differ in terms of textures. Any completed articles on these will have different images, but exactly the same information. Isn't that redundant? Should we perhaps just stick both of each under Aeriabot Scout, Omnibot Scout, Stunticon Scout? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 07:14, 11 March 2011 (EST)
:According to the articles the two Aerialbot Scouts have different health, primary weapon and secondary weapon ratings. Is that enough for separation? I don't know, but it should be considered before making a decision. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:55, 11 March 2011 (EST)
::I don't even know where those stats came from - I don't believe the person who filled them in originally ever explained. Were they from a website, article or guide book? --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 11:42, 11 March 2011 (EST)

== Found some much needed images, but... ==

I found them on [http://transformersiv.mforos.com/1519135/8979801-transformers-g1-aventuras-y-nostalgias-que-nunca-moriran/ this site], and I don't speak the language (I think it's Spanish) to ask for their permission to use them. The images are covers of the [[Marvel Books]] titles [[Battle at Oil Valley]], [[Summertime Coloring Book]], and [[Super Activity Book]]. That's right we don't even have an article for that last one. They also have page scans of these and other Marvel Books titles. I don't feel right just taking them for our use here and was wondering if someone who spoke the lingo would contact them for us. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:21, 12 March 2011 (EST)
:Nevermind, Google Chrome finally remembered that it had translational abilities. The poster is offering them for download to all and sundry, so he/she can hardly care if we borrow them. I'll probably still insert a link to the main site out of courtesy. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 11:22, 12 March 2011 (EST)
::After looking at them, I realized that they were Steve Stonebreaker's scans. I have contacted him and received permission to use them here. I'll be adding more soon. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 09:55, 16 March 2011 (EDT)

== Hey, I've got a new user talk page template request... ==
[[Image:Rebirth1 Hardhead and Blurr.jpg|right|thumb|300px|TOO MANY QUOTES]]
Can we have one that reminds folks that every new thing in Transformers that even vaguely reminds you of an old thing in Transformers IS NOT A REFERENCE AND THAT IS NOT HOW REFERENCES WORK AND STOP PUTTING THEM IN THE "TRANSFORMERS REFERENCES" SECTION. Ahem. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 23:18, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
:You mean like [[Template:notareference|this]]? --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 23:22, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
::Hooray! --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 23:30, 13 March 2011 (EDT)
:::Brilliant. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 02:39, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::That's an oldie, but a goodie. Personally, I'm wondering if there's any template that can be set up for the people that just drown episode articles in quotes... --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 02:42, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::I think we'd first need a consensus on how many quotes are appropriate. [[User:JW|JW]] 07:41, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::It's a conversation that needs to be had, I think. You have to take length of the story into account - there are more quotes in a two hour movie than in a twenty five minute episode. I'd put the early cutoff at around five for episodes, though. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 08:00, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::I like the idera of a mximum of 5 per 30 minutes (or part thereof) for Episodes & movies, but what would be a good size for comics? I'd say around 3 per issue, but it breaks down with short issues and back up stories (i.e.e most of the Marvel UK exclusive stuff...) [[User:G1MarvelBlaster|G1MarvelBlaster]] 10:19, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::I'd set a "soft" limit higher for 30-minute episodes {{m-}} around 10 quotes {{m-}} and I'd allow more than that if the episode was particularly well-written or quotable. I don't think there's any need for a low, hard limit, as I don't think lots of quotes hurt the wiki until we get into "quoting the whole darn episode" territory. Heck, in fact, I might favor a policy of ''judging each quote for itself.'' I.e., if a quote is good/noteworthy/illustrative/funny/wadeva, it can be kept, even if there are two dozen other quotes already. Each must stand on its merits, but there would be no hard cap. [[User:JW|JW]] 11:31, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::Yeah, some episodes happen to have a lot of funny/significant/memorable lines, others don't. If we set a hard cap, we might be damning ourselves to a lot of pointless fights over which quotes deserve to be included under the arbitrary limit. I'm more in favor of making a list of criteria that we can point to when we weed lame quotes out.
:::::::::Oh, and I support making a template. ''Prime'' Soundwave is the best character I can think of to use, but Movie Bumblebee or G1 Wreck-Gar would also be appropriate. Or a shot of G1 Soundwave with a tape inside of him? Can't think of a good header, though...
:::::::::- [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 11:49, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::I mainly suggested it as a starting point because if it comes down to putting each quote in place based on "which one we like more" the talk pages are going to be absolutely horrible. HOW CAN YOU LEAVE OUT MY FAVORITE QUOTE IT IS SO FUNNY AND RELEVANT. The "5 per 30 minutes" is just a suggestion - obviously an episode that's really funny or poignant can get more. Comics issues we could maybe use pagecount as a starting point. But basically, combine the two ideas. A list of criteria is a good idea, but we also need to avoid having like, thirty quotes for a given story, twelve of which are totally shitty. If we get over five-six quotes, it's time to think about trimming, just because seriously, 90% of TF fiction isn't that goddamned quotable - or there are better places for the quotes. "I don't rock and roll - I burn!" belongs on Inferno's page, not on the episode it appeared in. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 11:51, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::Fair enough. Just so long as the number is sufficiently "soft" that we don't forget that our goal is high quality, not an arbitrarily low quantity. - [[User:Jackpot|Jackpot]] 12:17, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
:::::::::::::Exactly. Like I said, I think we can also judiciously use key ''character'' quotes on the ''characters''' pages. Some quotes are very episode/story specific, while others provide insight into a character's personality or mindset. I think that's a good way to winnow the chaff, you know? -hx at work not logged in gotta run
::::::::::::::The 5-6 quotes before we start trimming sounds good, especially if some more individual character based quotes can be moved to the character pages. The big problem I keep seeing with quotes is that too many people want to quote an entire scene. If it goes beyond 3 lines it's probably not what we mean by quote here. And even 3 lines is pushing it. These should really be a single line quip or a two line set up and pay off. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 14:22, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
::::::::::::::5 to 6 sounds like a good starting point to me as well. Khajidha makes a good point about the definition of quote. That, along with Hooks' point about using key character quotes on that character's article, should be pointed out on [[Help:Example episode article]], once it exists. --[[User:Tigerpaw28|Tigerpaw28]] 17:32, 14 March 2011 (EDT)
What about block quotes? The page for Transformers (2007) is full of them. I think there should be a limit on how long the quote can be.--[[User:Megatron Prime|Megatron Prime]] 16:48, 19 May 2011 (EDT)
== Maybe a silly question, can we? ==

Ok, exposing my ignorance here, but isthere a way to search the wiki by alt-mode? If I wanted to know every TF that turns into a Helicopter say? There's not a "helicopter" catagory, so howwould I find them all? Thanks for any help.--[[Special:Contributions/76.28.76.206|76.28.76.206]] 19:59, 19 March 2011 (EDT)
:[[Popular Earth vehicle alternate modes]] covers some characters. There's been a few vague proposals to create a new hierarchy of categories for altmodes, but it would be a lot of work, and it's generally shouted down. [[User:JW|JW]] 20:08, 19 March 2011 (EDT)
:I think the current best option if you want to do something like this is TFU.info's Identify section. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] 11:00, 30 March 2011 (EDT)

==Grimlock letter==
[[Image:Grimlock letter.jpg|thumb|right]]
I recently acquired this and thought it's exactly the sort of thing we should be covering. I had no idea it even existed until a friend sent it to me and on that thought, should we add letters from Soundwave, Ratchet(?), Dreadwind and Blaster to the Holy Grails? Was there a similar response from the US comic, and do Titan still send these letters out today from Starscream? Enquiring minds want to know. Incidentally, he said he got Tailgate as his free mini-toy. --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 15:31, 29 March 2011 (EDT)
:Good find. A letter from Grimlock is pretty awesome. That should go somewhere. The Letters Page page? - [[User:Starfield|Starfield]] 16:58, 29 March 2011 (EDT)
::I've added a link from there; I'll type it up verbatim if we think it's justified? --[[User:Emvee|Emvee]] 18:09, 29 March 2011 (EDT)

== Voice actors by series ==

We have a bunch of categories for voice actors by language, but I was wondering if we should have categories for voice actors by series? Would categories like "Beast Wars voice actors" and "Victory voice actors" be useful? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 04:27, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

:That could be useful. It'd be better than looking up cast lists and opening up every character page, at least. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 06:30, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

::Sound like a nice idea to me. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 10:01, 14 April 2011 (EDT)

== "Just Stop" Notice? ==

Do we think there's a role for the following proposed user notice template, for users like Eagc7?

{{messagebox|image_name=War_War_Stop_It.jpg|image_width=225px|width=90%|header=Just Stop|message_text=Please stop editing this wiki. While you haven't done anything ban-worthy (yet), you are not a productive contributor. (The reasons ''why'' are above this notice on your talk page.) So, please, '''just stop.'''}}

Opinions? [[User:JW|JW]] 14:39, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:If one is created, I love this image for it! --[[User:MistaTee|MistaTee]] 15:35, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::It seems a bit rude, but the image would be ''perfect'' if this is made. --[[User:NCZ|NCZ]] 15:45, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:::If this gets phrased differently, I'd support it. Right now, the text's too rude. [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 15:52, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::::I think it is meant to be rude and probably should be rude. This tag is designed to be placed on the talk pages of people who have seemingly ignored the multiple instances of other tags. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 15:57, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

I'm a little iffy on this proposal. I admit that Eagc7 has a very poor grasp of the English language, but I'm a little uncomfortable with telling a person to leave a site just because of that. If you look over his fiction edits (the ones you can read) the posts he has made are accurate, just...occasionally unreadable. -- [[User:SFH|SFH]] 16:02, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
:I'm with SFH. Eagc7's English seems to be all over the place, but there are times when he gets it more or less correctly and only needs minor typo fixes. --[[User:Detour|Detour]] 16:21, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
Whether a person's edits are bad enough (and bad enough all the time enough) to ask them to never post again seems like something that shouldn't be in the hands of, well, everybody. Putting a template up that says you're a bad speller or that you're not using Preview enough... that's pretty straight forward. But I dunno if I'm comfortable with giving us all a tool to shame each other off the wiki entirely. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:49, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:In addition, if someone's edits are so bad (and so consistently bad) that they're more of a nuisance than they are helpful, then that person should probably just be gotten rid of, instead of getting the Middle Finger Personified In A Template. As Detour said, yeah, Eagc7's English could use some work, but he does enough good here that I don't think he's completely poison or anything. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:51, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
I could maybe get behind the idea of a "Stop editing until you've read the complaints on your user page" template for the blissfully unaware people constantly making edits that are being undone as soon as they make them whilst ignoring comments on their user page telling them what they're doing wrong. But a template like THIS, and this sort of behavior in general, is how we end up with trolls that come by and vandalize the wiki on a daily basis for years and years. We could avoid that sort of future headache by just not being all-out douchebags to people even if they're stupid and/or their contributions are annoying. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 17:15, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:I suppose the only problem with making a "read your talk page" template is that they'll never read it. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 18:24, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::: I like this idea, too. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:01, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::Got me there. --[[User:DrSpengler|DrSpengler]] 18:36, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:This will not go well. If someone's a real pest here, ban them. If they're being a pest but not quite that bad yet, notify them on their talkpage with whichever templates are already needed, and then if they don't clean up, ban them. We shouldn't be creating--publicly--an underclass of users. If you're allowed to have an account here, you're allowed to post--otherwise we look scummy. --[[User:Thylacine 2000|Thylacine 2000]] 19:17, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

::This is basically every stereotype of this wiki and its userbase given textbox form. I love it. [[User:Hooper X|-hx]] 20:33, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

The consensus seems to be against it, and the arguments are all good ones. (Kind of a pity, since the image was so perfect, but...) I withdraw the suggestion. Thanks all for weighing in! [[User:JW|JW]] 20:25, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

:It is a good template despite the rudeness, but it is potentially necessary for extreme conditions as a last resort. --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 21:01, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

Is it possible that we could reuse that image for another template? Perhaps a Final Warning template, letting users know that if they don't cut their shit out, they're gonna get banned. -- [[User:Semysane|Semysane]] 21:42, 26 April 2011 (EDT)
: Clearly it should be used for a "stop edit/revert warring" template. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 22:32, 26 April 2011 (EDT)

== Our Blogger blog? ==

To me it appears that our blog doesn't have much use. Our twitter sends out links to occasional pages and our facebook is an easy place to congregate and talk about TFs and not take up our talk pages, but the blog hasn't been used in over half a year.

I'm thinking using it to keep track of current trends and such. We could highlight pages that are being worked on, point out users who have been creating/adding a lot to pages (i.e. Geewunling creating minor GI Joe pages, Chris McFeely going crazy with the Japanese food tie-ins). This way an editor or lurker who happens to miss a few days can easily catch up rather than having to sift through the new pages and new files (and even then if a page has just had an entirely new writeup from a stub, it wouldn't show up there).

Any thoughts on this? --[[User:Bluestreak7|Bluestreak7]] 14:21, 28 April 2011 (EDT)

:I think it would be a good way to draw attention to obscure and/or new stuff on the Wiki. --[[User:Abates|abates]] 07:46, 2 May 2011 (EDT)
::I think so, too, but there are questions left unanswered if we want to go ahead with this. Who would be given control over the posts? Should it be extra mod duties or instead given to some other veteran editors? If so, how many? Would we want weekly updates or something with less frequency? Overall, who is in the current position to grant other users the power to add posts. I can see this as a useful too, but like many things on this wiki, we need to come up with some sort of procedure before it comes to fruition. --[[User:Bluestreak7|Bluestreak7]] 11:33, 3 May 2011 (EDT)

==TFwiki in the past week==
Could someone tell me why the TFwiki has been down/inaccessible for most of the time in the past week? [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 02:04, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

:I would wager "massive spikes in traffic, as DotM stuff hits," which has happened before.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:20, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

::I thought traffic wouldn't be a likely cause since the third movie is still over a month away. Guess I was wrong. Thanks! [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 02:27, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

:::There's at least some clamor now that the toys are out there.--[[User:Rosicrucian|Rosicrucian]][[User Talk:Rosicrucian|Talk]] 02:46, 10 May 2011 (EDT)

::::Technical explanation or non-technical? Traffic HAS picked up a bit, the wiki hardware (such as it is) is slightly overtaxed, and we need to start doing some math on what we can separate into other servers, and how much it'll cost to do so.--[[User:McFly|McFly]] 16:15, 13 May 2011 (EDT)

:::::Cowboy time. We've moved the application server and cache to another box, and synced over the contents. If anything's missing, we can try to sync it over from the old webserver, but it wouldn't be off by more than a few minutes, so here's hoping that we're back in business!--[[User:McFly|McFly]] 15:43, 17 May 2011 (EDT)

::::::No wonder the connection becomes smooth again recently. Nice Works!! --'''[[User:TX55|TX55]]'''''[[User talk:TX55|TALK]]'' 22:45, 17 May 2011 (EDT)

:::::::Yeah, I'd noticed that the site was back to normal. Thanks for the hard work. --[[User:Khajidha|Khajidha]] 22:52, 17 May 2011 (EDT)

::::::Thanks for fixing our wiki! [[User:JW|JW]] 07:15, 18 May 2011 (EDT)

== Eagc7's movie comic section edits ==

Lately Eagc7 has been editing the somewhat neglected movie prequel comic sections in character articles, which is good. However, Eagc7 has been editing the somewhat neglected movie prequel comic sections in character articles, which is bad. I know he tries, but whenever he does this sort of thing, he just ends up creating work for somebody else to clean up, and frankly, it's easier to write stuff from scratch than it is to fix somebody's spelling & grammar, as well as trying to make the text fit the tone and style of the paragraphs surrounding it (which is important considering the Foundation comics take place during the other Movie prequel comics). I haven't read Foundation and Rising Storm, [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:Contributions/Eagc7 so I can't fix all of this myself], but that seems like a fair bit of work to fix at a time when the wiki was experiencing random downtime and BotCon is rapidly approaching (meaning a good chunk of our regular editors will not be able to edit much, and in any case would be updating stuff about/from BotCon). Like I said, I know he's trying, and he's getting much better than he used to be, but... maybe he should leave fiction edits to the professionals. --[[User:FFN|FFN]] 16:27, 18 May 2011 (EDT)
:Take it up with him via his Talk Page or the E-mail a User link. If there's really a stylistic problem, then we need a Style Guide for new users to reference.--[[User:McFly|McFly]] 11:04, 19 May 2011 (EDT)

==Page views==
Where have they gone? I believe that they have disappeared from down the pages since the move a few weeks ago. Can they be put back? [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 16:09, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
: I don't recall pageviews... What in specific are you talking about? --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 16:12, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
::I guess [http://tfwiki.net/wiki/Special:Popularpages popular pages]? [[User:Interrobang|—Interrobang]] 16:20, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
:::Yeah those, how often a page has been visited. I kinda liked keeping tabs on relative popularity in pages (like how Mayumi and Shinichi ''never'' lost their 2:1 view ratio). [[User:Geewunling|Geewunling]] 16:24, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
::::The broken popular pages has apparently been a thing lately, as I noticed Abates was removing and re-adding the link to [[MediaWiki:Recentchangestext]] earlier this month. Maybe he knows more about it? --[[User:Apoc|Apoc]] 18:41, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
:::::No more than anyone else. I noticed it was gone and removed it from the template, but then it came back when we did the move so I readded it. I guess it got removed again, possibly for performance reasons? --[[User:Abates|abates]] 18:58, 29 May 2011 (EDT)
::::::If I had to make a poorly-educated guess, the pageview thing sounds exactly like one of the many things I had to remove from Shortpacked.com to keep it from lagging so so badly. Lots of neat little things like page tracking and stuff like that used to be on there, but they were more trouble, resources-wise, than they were worth. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 19:20, 29 May 2011 (EDT)

== Why is Melissa from Kiss Players on the same Page as Marissa Faireborn from G1? ==

I know they are some how connected ,but i see the two as different as G1 Starscream is to Animated Starscream ,maybe the same history ,but a little different.--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Michael Alex Kawa]] 10:43, 30 May 2011 (EDT)
:They are related in the same way that Orion Pax is related to G1 Optimus Prime. --[[User:Andrusi|Andrusi]] 10:51, 30 May 2011 (EDT)
: Marissa = Marissa. Same continuity and everything. --[[User:ItsWalky|ItsWalky]] 11:02, 30 May 2011 (EDT)

--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] 18:21, 2 June 2011 (EDT)== I don't know if this was what you are looking for when you asked for Kiss Players radio play translations ,but i hope this helps . ==

I found this on Youtube cause I LOVE Melissa and noticed in that Holy Grail thingy that you guys needed Kiss Players radio play translations .I hope this helps ,even if it doesn't it is still pretty cool and CUTE .I did not make it so that is noted .Here is the link so you guys can go and look to see if it what is needed ,it is the only one i can find ,if it helps i will try to find more .[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6ZvUg2c649Y]

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2011-06-02T22:15:03Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* I don't know if this was what you are looking for when you asked for Kiss Players radio play translations ,but i hope this helps . */ new section

User:Michael Alex Kawa

2011-05-31T17:39:35Z

Michael Alex Kawa:

[[Image:Michael Alex Kawa.jpg]] Michael Alex Kawa is a Transformers collector ,that has been into Transformers since April 1985.He got his first TRANSFORMERS figure (Bumblebee)in August of the same year.Unlike some "FANS" he continued even after the first show got cancelled.Stayed through "The Masters" The Pretenders" "The Micromasters" and "The Action Masters" which he LOVES .When G2 brought back the return of the series in the USA ,he was so happy ,and has not stop collecting since .Still has every figure he has ever purchased or was given.Favorite Series is "Robots in Disguise"2001 ,and unlike others LOVES "The KissPlayers".Believes that Marissa Faireborn(G1) and Melissa (KissPlayers) are NOT connected ,but will let that one go .He HATES RUBSIGNS ,that one he will not let go .Besides Transformers his other loves are G.I.Joe ,Marvel Comics,D.C.Comics and especially Anime.Some Animes he loves are "Project A-Ko" ,"Pokemon" "Evangelion" "K-ON!" and "The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya".Has made fan videos (some with Transformers) that are on Youtube .He was born on 9-25-1974.

User:Michael Alex Kawa

2011-05-31T17:36:31Z

Michael Alex Kawa:

User:Michael Alex Kawa

2011-05-31T17:35:31Z

Michael Alex Kawa:

User:Michael Alex Kawa

2011-05-31T17:33:35Z

Michael Alex Kawa:

File:Michael Alex Kawa.jpg

2011-05-31T17:30:45Z

Michael Alex Kawa: This is how he shows his love for Transformers.

This is how he shows his love for Transformers.

User:Michael Alex Kawa

2011-05-31T17:04:07Z

Michael Alex Kawa:

Michael Alex Kawa is a Transformers collector ,that has been into Transformers since April 1985.He got his first TRANSFORMERS figure (Bumblebee)in August of the same year.Unlike some "FANS" he continued even after the first show got cancelled.Stayed through "The Masters" The Pretenders" "The Micromasters" and "The Action Masters" which he LOVES .When G2 brought back the return of the series in the USA ,he was so happy ,and has not stop collecting since .Still has every figure he has ever purchased or was given.Favorite Series is "Robots in Disguise"2001 ,and unlike others LOVES "The KissPlayers".Believes that Marissa Faireborn(G1) and Melissa (KissPlayers) are NOT connected ,but will let that one go .He HATES RUBSIGNS ,that one he will not let go .Besides Transformers his other loves are G.I.Joe ,Marvel Comics,D.C.Comics and especially Anime.Some Animes he loves are "Project A-Ko" ,"Pokemon" "Evangelion" "K-ON!" and "The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya".Has made fan videos (some with Transformers) that are on Youtube .He was born on 9-25-1974.

User:Michael Alex Kawa

2011-05-31T17:01:34Z

Michael Alex Kawa:

--[[User:Michael Alex Kawa|Melissa]] 13:01, 31 May 2011 (EDT)Michael Alex Kawa is a Transformers collector ,that has been into Transformers since April 1985.He got his first TRANSFORMERS figure (Bumblebee)in August of the same year.Unlike some "FANS" he continued even after the first show got cancelled.Stayed through "The Masters" The Pretenders" "The Micromasters" and "The Action Masters" which he LOVES .When G2 brought back the return of the series in the USA ,he was so happy ,and has not stop collecting since .Still has every figure he has ever purchased or was given.Favorite Series is "Robots in Disguise"2001 ,and unlike others LOVES "The KissPlayers".Believes that Marissa Faireborn(G1) and Melissa (KissPlayers) are NOT connected ,but will let that one go .He HATES RUBSIGNS ,that one he will not let go .Besides Transformers his other loves are G.I.Joe ,Marvel Comics,D.C.Comics and especially Anime.Some Animes he loves are "Project A-Ko" ,"Pokemon" "Evangelion" "K-ON!" and "The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya".Has made fan videos (some with Transformers) that are on Youtube .He was born on 9-25-1974.

User:Michael Alex Kawa

2011-05-31T16:53:37Z

Michael Alex Kawa: A profile of user Michael Alex Kawa

MediaWiki talk:Community Portal

2011-05-30T14:43:38Z

Michael Alex Kawa: /* Why is Melissa from Kiss Players on the same Page as Marissa Faireborn from G1? */ new section